View Single Post
  #61  
Old 08-03-2012, 08:34 PM
philiphart's Avatar
philiphart (Phil Hart)
Registered User

philiphart is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Octane View Post
Phil,

I've never been disappointed with /any/ of the Canon gear that I have bought or owned. I don't think this baby is going to disappoint, either.

I take my gear for what it is; a tool designed to do a job. Ilike having the latest and greatest, though. Will it make me abetter photographer? I doubt it. Will it allow me to make better photographs? Possibly. Will ISO-6400 or ISO-25,600 allow me to get shots that I previously would not have dreamed of taking, even if I end up converting them to black and white? You bet!

DPP now has a state of the art Digital Lens Optimizer module, too, by the way.

H
H.. i know for sure you know how to use your gear (and DPP)! and i know we'll both be *very* happy with our mkIIIs when we get them.

i'm just getting frustrated by an astrophotography community that knows a heck of a lot about sensor performance placing so much importance on what ISO settings the manufacturers (any of them) claim their cameras are capable of without any reference to what's going on under the hood to support their claims.

to improve the real performance of the sensor.. you've got to improve the signal or the noise. compared to the 10Ds and the STL11000s of ten years ago, sensors have come a long way. but there's so little left to gain now.. in the current crop of cameras most of the apparent gain is in clever noise smoothing algorithms. canon specifically only make the two stop claim about the JPGs for that reason.

for anybody interested in low light performance above all else.. look up 'shot noise' and buy your camera based on pixel size not ISO ratings..

Phil
Reply With Quote