Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Leaked possible Fuji mirrorless offering

Subject: Re: [OM] Leaked possible Fuji mirrorless offering
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2012 17:09:10 -0500
I don't recall it but probably did read that review when it was first 
posted almost 3 years ago.  It was probably what caused me to reject an 
upgrade to the Mk II.  Since the improvement is only about 1 stop I 
might guess that the Mk III will not likely show much more than a 1 stop 
improvement over the Mk II.  If that's the case I'll probably decide to 
ship some boxes to Florida rather than buying a new camera... or was 
that a new car?  :-)

Chuck Norcutt



On 1/7/2012 12:56 PM, Frank Wijsmuller wrote:
> This page shows a direct comparison between 5D and 5D mkII noise levels, at
> the bottom half of the page:<
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page21.asp>
>
> If I read the graphs correct, the 5D mkII is never two stops better then
> the 5D, I'd say mostly under 1 stop, in the 3200 region slightly over 1
> stop. Actually, I'm quite surprised that in the iso range both cameras
> share, the differences are not too big. The 5D mkII has a bigger range of
> ISO values though.
>
> Best, Frank.
>
>
> 2012/1/7 Chuck Norcutt<chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>> I don't really know when the newer cameras start looking good (which, of
>> course, is very subjective).  Although I called the 5D's ISO 3200 noisy
>> it's probably much better than the Minolta A1's ISO 400 or maybe even
>> 200.  As to quality I just take my cues from the way that Canon ISO
>> selection works.
>>
>> The 5D has a normal ISO range of 100-1600 selectable within 1/3 stop
>> increments.  It will also do 50 or 3200 but they are not labeled as
>> such.  They are labeled "L" and "H".  To be able to use them at all they
>> must be deliberately enabled by a custom function setting and there are
>> no 1/3 stop increments between 50 and 100 or 1600 and 3200.  This
>> deliberate custom function setting requirement says to me something
>> like: "We really don't want you to go there but, if you insist, we'll
>> allow it and you agree to accept the risk."
>>
>> I've never seen high ISO images from a 5D Mk II but the Mk II increased
>> the definition of "normal" ISO range by 2 stops from 100-1600 to
>> 100-6400.  It also has an expanded range that must be selected via
>> custom function.  It has an L = 50 setting but adds 2 high settings, H1
>> = 12,800 and H2 = 25,600.  I have assumed that the 5D Mk II's 6400 is as
>> good as the 5D's 1600 but do not know that for sure.  A 2 stop
>> improvement was not enough to make me jump but a 3 stop improvement
>> (that I believed) probably would.  For the few times I've been forced to
>> use 3200 it's usually OK but subject motion can be a problem.  I've
>> concluded that a 3 stop improvement would allow a fast enough shutter
>> speed to avoid the motion blur.  It would also help compensate for my
>> lack of IS lenses.
>>
>> There is another clue to noise levels in the Canon full auto modes.  The
>> 5D's full auto mode automatically selects ISO but limits the range to
>> 100-400.  The 5D Mk II's auto ISO range has been increased to 100-3200.
>>   Since only JPEGs are allowed in full auto mode I'm not sure that's an
>> improved sensor development or just better noise reduction firmware.
>>
>> The Nikon D3 matches the 5D Mk II's ISO ranges except that it starts at
>> ISO 200 rather than 100 and allows 1/3 stop increments over higher
>> ranges.  The Nikon's low range only goes down to ISO 100 rather than 50.
>>   That's a drawback for a flash user trying to do fill flash in bright sun.
>>
>> The D4 offers normal ISO range of 100-12,800 which is extendable from 50
>> – 204,800.  The 50 offering helps solve the fill flash problem for Nikon
>> users.  If the 5D Mk III also offers 12,800 in its normal range that may
>> be exactly the 3 stop improvement I'm looking for.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/7/2012 1:10 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>>> That's interesting, Chuck.  I had thought that the 5D was the stage
>>> at which high-ISO shots were much easier to use.  At what camera
>>> stage does Canon (or Nikon) start looking good with 3,200 or 6,400?
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> On 7 Jan 2012, at 03:06, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>>>
>>>> The 5D Mk II didn't offer enough to get me to change.  Maybe the Mk
>>>> III will but who knows when that's coming or what it will be.  What
>>>> will tempt me will be truly high ISO.  I'd probably jump at
>>>> something that gave me ISO 12,800 with quality equal to the 5D's
>>>> ISO 1600 (3 stops more).  The 5D does go to 3200 but gets pretty
>>>> noisy at that level.
>>>
>> --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>
>>
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz