The tradition I got going in my first Project 365 four years ago was to make a camera-related purchase every 100 days.
Alas, this Canon EOS 5D Mark III isn’t mine; it’s a review unit from Canon Singapore, mine for four days only.
"So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past."
Archives for posts with tag: canon
At The Moos’.
Now that iOS 5 is out in the wild, I shall let you in on a very neat new feature I discovered in iOS Beta 7 that has gone largely unmentioned:
iMovie for iOS, running on an iPad 2, now accepts video clips shot with a Canon EOS 5D Mark II. Yes, full HD editing.
I thought that being able to import and immediately view full HD clips while I’m still on the set was a big deal, but this is so much bigger, alone worth the price of an iPad 2 itself.
Photographers, videographers and production people wishing to use their iPads as a true notebook replacement on the set should have much to rejoice about a little-known new feature in iOS 5:
iOS 5 can now playback 1920×1080 H.264 QuickTime video files produced by Canon EOS DSLRs!
I don’t know about you, but this is huge for me. When I bought a 1st-generation iPad last November, I had hoped to use it in the field for viewing rushes, but it was simply not possible in iOS 4, limited by what I’m pretty certain is the hardware of the 1st-generation iPad.
Now that this is possible in iOS 5 running on the iPad 2, along with the ability to sort photos and videos into existing albums, I think I’m going to be a lot more comfortable leaving the MBP behind the next time I go out for a shoot. And especially now that I have the iPad 2 CF Card Camera Connection Kit from M.I.C Store to download images and videos off the CF cards from my Canon 5D Mark II.
There is a bug, though. When you import from an SD or CompactFlash card into the iPad 2, the ‘Camera’ page displays the correct thumbnail of each MOV file, but once imported, those MOV files will lose their thumbnails, although they will play just fine when you tap on them. It’s been fixed; see Update #3 below.
If you really want those thumbnails, the workaround is to copy all the MOVs to your computer and sync them back into the Photos app via iTunes.
I have tested H.264 footage from all EOS Movie capable DSLRs—Canon EOS 5D Mark II, EOS 7D, EOS 60D, EOS 600D—and I’m pleased to report that footage from all models played fine.
Update #1: Immediately after I’d published this post, I wondered if iMovie would see and accept these H.264 MOVs. Alas, it doesn’t.
Update #2: The next thing I wondered was if I could get the MOVs to playback on a TV via the Apple Digital AV Adapter. It worked beautifully. That’s one step closer to a lightweight and highly portable video island on the shooting set.
Update #3: The thumbnail issue has been fixed in iOS 5 Beta 3. :)
Since I have the privilege of owning both the Canon PowerShot S90 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5V, each a feature-rich and capable pocket-sized camera in its own right, I thought it’d be interesting to talk about how two cameras, similar in price, market positioning and class, cannot be more different because of the design philosophies that had gone into shaping them.
In a nutshell: the S90 makes me want to take good photographs, while the HX5V makes me want to capture everything I see.
The S90 is all business
At the time of its introduction, the Canon PowerShot S90 is the only camera the size of a pack of playing cards that shoots RAW and boasts a 1/1.7-inch image sensor untypical of most point-and-shoot cameras. These two attributes are what made the working photographer in me sit up and pay close attention when Canon announced the S90. The S90 promises—and largely lives up—to be the choice for photographers who want a compact camera with DSLR-like manual control and image quality. It is born to be a serious camera, designed to meet the needs of serious shooters.
The S90 is, indeed, all work and no play. Full manual control is where the S90 really shines; to use the S90 exclusively on auto mode is akin to buying a DSLR and shooting only on auto. And even though the S90 does have full auto and assisted scene modes, they are rudimentary ones that end up pleasing neither the pro nor the amateur — too insignificant for the former, and not fancy enough for the latter.
But sometimes even I don’t want to have to work so hard to get a shot. Do most pros don’t and won’t care for gimmicky, ‘consumer-ish’ features because they’re really of no substance, or is it because such features have yet to be implemented in a way that are actually useful?
The HX5V is all fun
It was a ‘consumer-ish’ feature of the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5V that got my attention: Intelligent Sweep Panorama.
On location recces, I always make it a point to shoot a panoramic image for reference. With a DSLR or the S90, I’d have to take panning shots and gauge by eye to see if they would line up. With the HX5V, all I have to do is to hold down the shutter and sweep the camera in an arc. Thanks to the ability of the HX5V’s image sensor to shoot up to 10 frames per second, it rapidly takes a series of shots and automatically stitches them into one panoramic image. I was sold the first time I tried it; it was one of those “why the heck hasn’t anyone thought of this before” moments.
And it helped that the specs of the HX5V trump those of the S90 on a feature-to-feature comparison. It would seem that Sony’s singular aim was to cram as many features as possible into the HX5V, a feat considering how it is of similar size and weight to the S90. Built-in GPS for geotagging, 10x optical zoom, and especially 1080i HD video recording are the three key functions I wished the S90 had from the start.
The HX5V is the quintessential point-and-shoot camera, and I mean that in a good way. Sony has really upped the ante by making many aspects of the HX5V simple and fun to use. Every function is designed with convenience in mind, and is either highly automated or assisted enough such that you don’t have to think about how to get the shot. In that sense, the HX5V is the antithesis to the S90, full auto versus full manual.
Here’s what’s hot and what’s not in these two cameras, in no particular order of importance:
Image Quality
Let’s address the elephant in the room. Both cameras are equally guilty of overzealous in-camera noise reduction, a Scarlet Letter every small-sensor compact camera is cursed to carry. With JPEGs from either camera coming out soft, the only consolation is at least the Canon S90 shoots RAW. RAW files allow the kind of headroom for manipulations in post that JPEGs simply cannot provide; this alone gives the S90 the edge over the HX5V in image quality. And, believe me, it’s quite the edge.
Ironic, given that the sensor in the S90 (and the G11) is made by Sony.
Low Light Capability
Both Canon and Sony are proud of the low-light capabilities of their respective cameras. Call me a cynic, but nothing a point-and-shoot camera can capture in low light will pass muster when pitted against something from a DSLR, so I take such claims with a very big pinch of salt.
As I’d mentioned in my previous post, I wouldn’t blink shooting at ISO 1600 with my DSLR. With the S90, I am comfortable shooting at ISO 800, but I’ll be crossing my fingers very tightly at ISO 1600. With the HX5V, ISO 800 gets me a little nervous, and I won’t even consider ISO 1600. As for ISO 3200 (or higher: the S90 can push to ISO 12800 in auto mode!), forget it; I’d rather leave the two cameras in my bag and spend the time admiring the scene.
Focal Range
I am the kind of photographer who prefers to snipe than to get up close to subjects. And I prefer to zoom into a scene to get the framing right, instead of cropping later in post. The Canon S90 has an optical zoom range of 28mm-105mm, which is barely adequate for the kind of shots I like to snipe. The reach of the Sony HX5V, 25mm-250mm, has proven to be a much better match to my shooting style.
Wide Angle
To me, any focal length longer than 24mm is not considered wide angle. From day one, I had found the 28mm end of the S90 to be so limiting I took to adding a filter thread so that I can attach a wide angle lens—made, ironically, for Sony Handycams—that converts its 28mm to a nice, recce-friendly 19mm. With the Sony HX5V, I don’t have to fumble with a wide angle converter lens at all.
One big disappointment about the S90: shots taken at 28mm exhibit noticeable barrel distortion. But because the S90 automatically corrects this flaw during live view on its LCD screen, this is something you may not realize. Also, the S90 applies barrel distortion correction to only JPEG files, and not RAW files.
If you shoot RAW, you’d need to use the bundled software, Canon Digital Photo Professional, to correct the RAW files. The problem is, I shoot RAW, I like wide angle shots, but I use Adobe Lightroom; having to run those wide angle RAW files through DPP is an unnecessary extra step for me.
Maximum Aperture
Having the reach is nice, but how do the optics in each camera compare?
One of the selling points of the Canon S90 is its nice, bright f/2.0 lens, even though that is only at 28mm; at 105mm, it goes down to f/4.9. The Sony HX5V does f/3.5 at 25mm, going down to f/5.5 at 250mm. Yes, while the S90 has a two-stop advantage over the HX5V at the widest focal length, it is largely negated by the latter’s ability to shoot HDR. Besides, I’m not one to shoot a wide angle shot at f/2, preferring instead to shoot at a smaller aperture.
Manual Control
The lack of full manual control on the HX5V is where Sony really drops the ball. The only two aperture values you can set on the HX5V are either f/3.5 or f/8 (at 25mm; at 250mm, it becomes f/5.5 or f/13). There is no way to dial in any other f-stop other than f/3.5, f/5.5, f/8, and f/13.
Canon, knowing that serious photographers, whose hearts the S90 is after and who would howl at such a limitation, wisely chose to let you have full manual control on the S90. You can dial in any aperture value from f/2.0 to f/8. This is but one example of the extent the S90 gives control back to the photographer.
One more point to give to the S90 is the presence of a customizable Shortcut button, and, of course, its famed front Control Ring.
Handling
The S90 simply handles better. The front Control Ring, with its ability to control settings such as zoom, ISO, EV compensation, aperture or shutter speed, allows for quicker adjustments, since you can adjust two different settings simultaneously, just like how you would on a DSLR.
The combination of its front Control Ring and rear Control Dial elevates the S90 from the mass of compact cameras with four-way buttons that you have to press and press just to invoke certain settings. Take changing shutter speed for example: on the S90 it takes one turn, just as I would with the Quick Control Dial on an EOS body; on the HX5V, I have to first activate the four-way buttons, and then press in steps its stiff up and down buttons.
Speaking of the S90’s rear Control Dial: a lot of S90 users don’t like how it spins too freely, but I actually like it the way it is. The trick is to not hold the S90 the way you would usually grip a compact camera; instead, I hold the S90 with my thumb on the bottom and my middle finger on the shutter release, and I spin the Control Dial with my index finger instead.
But if it really bothers you that much, take a look at this S90 Control Dial Solution from Lensmate [pictured above]. And, while you’re there, do yourself a favor and add the Richard Franiec Custom S90 Grip [pictured on the left] to your order. The custom grip immediately remedies the fact that the S90 isn’t very well-designed for one-handed operation.
Menus
I have never liked the way Sony lays out the menus for its gadgets. The menu layout of the HX5V hasn’t unproven my bias otherwise. The menu of the S90 is simply better laid out, and contain more customizable settings. The one thing sorely lacking in the HX5V that the S90 can do is to set how long a shot in review can remain on-screen.
Parting Thoughts
Using the S90, I shoot the same way I do with my DSLRs, carefully and purposefully in full manual mode, because I know I can get the shots exactly the way I want them. Using the HX5V, I shoot in full auto all the time because its Intelligent Auto mode gets it right almost all the time, which makes me very trigger-happy and carefree with this camera.
The S90 is a tool, the HX5V a toy, and that is essentially the personalities of these two cameras: one serious, the other fun. Which doesn’t help me at all in deciding which one to let go, because they perfectly suit both the serious and the fun side of me. The S90 and the HX5V are really companion, and not competing, cameras.
I think I’ll end up keeping both.
Having taken to digital SLRs right from the start, it has never occurred to me that I’d ever want or need a point-and-shoot camera. While I have lusted after some outstanding compact cameras in the past, such as the Ricoh Caplio GX100 way back in 2007, the mere thought of the compromises in image quality I’d have to accept with such cameras put me off purchasing one for the longest time, until now.
Earlier this year, when I took a trip to Tokyo, I brought along my EOS 5D Mark II and my three musketeers of lenses: an EF 17-40mm f/4L, an EF 24-70mm f/2.8L and an EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS. These are my weapons of choice for travel photography, a focal range curated to be able for me to take just about any kind of subject.
On the second day, beset by a foul mood, I was hit by a revelation:
I am on vacation after all, right? Why am I carrying all this stuff?
I realized I wasn’t enjoying myself. And it really came down to my right shoulder pleading for mercy; I was lugging nearly three kilograms of gear. With each passing day, I was consciously bringing along lesser and lesser gear, till it was down to just the 5D Mark II and the 24-70mm.
Come to think of it, bringing along an DSLR and lenses on a vacation trip does take some fun of it, doesn’t it? You’re forever swapping lenses, making your girlfriend/boyfriend an unwilling camera assistant while you’re at it; you’re fretting about dust getting into the sensor; you’re constantly aware that you are conspicuous theft or mugging bait. Throw in the shopping bags you’re bound to pick up as the day progresses and it quickly gets tiring.
Meanwhile, back in Japan, the thought of getting a point-and-shoot camera grew more and more. Besides, I reckoned I could always use a point-and-shoot for scouting locations.
In deciding I wanted a pocket-sized camera, I ruled out the Olympus PEN E-P1, the Panasonic GF-1 and the GH-1, all of which I find too DSLR-like in form and handling for my liking; having any of those kits would still mean having to carry a camera body and a couple of lenses. The only contender was the Canon PowerShot G11, the notably larger and heavier cousin of which its image sensor and processor the S90 shares anyway.
So, on the second last day of the trip, after having already done enough research to know it would be the only current point-and-shoot camera I’d consider owning, I picked up a Canon PowerShot S90 from the Yodobashi store in Nishi-Shinjuku for S$580.
How do I like ‘em point-and-shoots?
I confess the first time I viewed an image from the S90 that was shot at ISO 1600, I cringed. I didn’t like it at all. Details were patchy and the blacks were muddy.
I know, I know. Yes, I have been spoilt silly by the kind of clean, high-ISO results I get from DSLRs—I wouldn’t blink shooting at ISO 1600 with my 5D Mark II—and, yes, expecting similar results from a compact camera is simply asking for the impossible. It’s a compromise I’m still taking a bit of time to get used to.
The upside is, you can’t beat the convenience. Into the back pocket it goes every time I’m about to step out of the house.
After using the S90 for four months, I came to realize the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5V has all the features I wish the S90 had. Sony had actually announced the HX5V five days after I bought the S90, but I hadn’t paid it any attention as I’ve never been interested in Sony’s compact cameras. But the feature set of the HX5V is so much more suited for location recce-ing I couldn’t resist picking one up two weeks ago. I’m still putting both cameras through the paces, with the intention of letting one go eventually. The problem is, it’s pretty damn hard to decide, as both cameras compliment each other and are equally good.
So much for not wanting a point-and-shoot…
For television commercial shoots, camera equipment is always hired from a rental house. But as a director who would often operate the camera myself, I have a Canon XL-1s Mini DV camcorder, purchased six years ago, that I use extensively for smaller-scale shoots.
A major wave of change swept through the broadcast industry sometime in the second half of those six years. By 2007, High Definition has all but supplanted Standard Definition for broadcast productions. Along with the migration to HD, tapeless acquisition was fast becoming the norm; footage recorded to solid-state memory media as video files ready for editing, eliminating the time-consuming process of digitizing tapes. More and more, I found myself choosing to rent a HD camcorder rather than using my own SD camcorder even for the smaller shoots.
The first sign that my equipment line-up was in dire need of an upgrade was in September 2007, when my workhorse XL-1s finally gasped its last breath halfway through a shoot in Shanghai. I was faced with the unpleasant prospect of investing S$10,000 or so for a HD camcorder, in particular a Sony PMW-EX1.
But making the move to HD meant more than just buying a HD camcorder; the massive amount of HD data meant that I would have to upgrade my entire postproduction workflow. One new workstation here, plenty of high-speed storage there, and I was looking at another S$15,000 easily, a figure I was neither willing nor capable of spending at that point in time.
I held out. In the meanwhile, my stills digital SLR cameras were, likewise, quickly falling into obsolescence. Solid as they were, my two cameras—a Canon EOS 5D and a Canon EOS-1D Mark II—had already been surpassed by newer cameras sporting next-generation features I found increasingly difficult to ignore; features such as 14-bit A/D conversion, larger, higher-resolution and more viewable 3.0″ LCD screens, and Live View had become ubiquitous.
But, again, I held out. So, for a good whole year, there I was, a director in search of a decent broadcast-quality HD video camera, and a photographer in search of a replacement for his two previous-generation digital SLR cameras.
Then the impossible happened. What really convinced me that I could no longer hold back was the one game-changing feature—the second sign—offered by one of those next-generation digital SLR cameras:
Video recording.
Such a development is a watershed moment for someone like myself who has been shooting both videos and stills all his professional life. The significance of a video-recording digital SLR is in the leap in artistic expression I can now have.
These digital SLR cameras, with their large image sensors the same size as that of 35mm film, produce the shallow depth-of-field look synonymous with 35mm motion picture film cameras. Since depth of field increases as focal length decreases, typical camcorders, with their much smaller sensors, simply cannot produce that elusive, shallow DOF look that videographers yearn and go out of their way to achieve (read this article for the physics).
Years ago, to achieve the same look, I had to use a P+S Technik Mini35 lens adapter. It was expensive to rent (S$900/day with accompanying Zeiss Super Speed lenses, or S$12,500 to purchase, camera and lenses not included), and it was bulky; it was actually bigger than the XL-1s camcorder it mounted onto.
Now, the same, if not better, filmic look can be had with a digital SLR camera a third of both the cost and weight of the P+S Technik Mini35. What’s more, since I already own a small collection of quality EF lenses I can use on such a digital SLR camera, I now need to maintain only one camera system, as versus one video camera system and one stills camera system.
Last week, after a series of unfortunate events unfolded on a couple of ongoing jobs—which I took to be the third and final sign from the heavens above it’s time to finally upgrade—I took the plunge and bought an EOS 5D Mark II.
I know, I know… I said I would never get a 5D Mark II because it has the same AF system of the 5D which I find disappointing. In fact, I felt none of the excitement on the day I bought the 5D Mark II that I had felt previously when buying other cameras.
Having used the camera for a week, I still have deep misgivings at just how much better the AF system in the 5D Mark II will perform, as Canon claims it would. Also, I remain unconvinced that the form factor of a digital SLR is at all suitable for video acquisition.
Accustomed to operating 2/3″ Digital Betacam and DVCPRO camcorders, all of which are of the traditional form factor of the broadcast video camera—articulatable viewfinder, zoom grip, top handle, left-handside controls—I find myself constantly trying to press my eye to the viewfinder on the 5D Mark II while the camera is rolling.
Still, I am very heartened by the 35mm look the 5D Mark II achieves. But is The Look worth the various ergonomical and operational shortcomings of this camera? I have a strong suspicion this is going to be a love-hate relationship.
Time will tell.
Update 28.10.09: Sold!
I am letting go of my Canon EOS 5D Digital SLR (purchased in November 2007), a BG-E4 Battery Grip, and two BP-511A batteries for S$2,100. Also included is everything else you would get in the box.
But wait! There’s more!
I’ll also throw in a Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM lens, a good and lightweight lens with a focal range perfect for walkabouts and travels when used with the full-frame 5D.
I purchased this lens second-hand in late 2006, and have outgrown it long ago. It still goes for approximately S$200-$300 on the second-hand market, so you’re essentially getting this lens for next to nothing.
Cosmetically, the condition of the lens is 9/10, and the camera’s 7/10. Its shutter count is, to the best of my memory, in the region of 40K; sorry, I haven’t had the time to send it in to Canon to verify.
Interested? Write me, tweet me @tetanus, or message me if you’re using the Ping! iPhone app (my Ping! ID is Tetanus).
There is a very informative article over at Rob Galbraith that details new features in the Canon EOS 7D. As I am currently using an EOS 5D, and left unhappy with its AF performance, I’m particularly interested in the new AF system in the 7D.
The improvements that are most notable, and how they would impact my style of shooting, are:
“The 7D contains 12 autofocus-related Custom Functions, including three that were previously found only in the EOS-1D Mark III and EOS-1Ds Mark III.”
— One of the advantages of the 1-series cameras is the sheer amount of Custom Functions to suit an individual’s particular style of shooting, so having more Custom Functions is always good, especially those inherited from the 1-series cameras. And, if I am to use the 7D as a backup camera, the presence of these Custom Functions makes for consistent operation.
“Orientation Linked AF Point: Switches on the use of one AF point when the camera is held horizontally, and another when the camera is held vertically.”
— This should be nice. In the EOS-1D Mark II, I can only register one AF point, of which I have to decide if it is for either orientation. If I switch to landscape after portrait, more often than not I’ll have to re-register another AF point more suited to that orientation.
“… mirror lockup remains buried in a Custom Function menu…”
— Sigh. Year after year…
“… the 7D can be configured to show only the active AF point, leaving the rest of the viewfinder area clutter-free.”
— Nice.
“… the 7D’s screen is easier to see in overcast and even sunny conditions.”
— Always good.
“Unlike the 63-zone meter in 1-series Canons, which utilizes zones of different sizes, the 7D’s metering sensor contains 63 equal size zones arranged in a 9 x 7 grid.”
— I wonder how this compares to the 1-series.
“When acting as wireless TTL controller, the built-in flash can be set to either fire or not fire at the moment of exposure… It works. We were able to reliably trigger one and two off-camera 430EX IIs.”
— I cannot be more pleased that Canon has finally decided to ditch the ST-E2 way of wireless flash trigger; the ST-E2, which requires line-of-sight to trigger other flash heads, would often fail when used in bright sunlight.
“A GPS device can now link over Bluetooth as well as USB. A compatible USB Bluetooth module, such as Canon Bluetooth Unit BU-30, must be inserted into the WFT-E5/E5A’s USB port for this to work.”
— GPS should already be a de facto feature in all cameras. Geotagging lets me find weather and sun-path information for my recce photographs with ease.
“The only open question is the AF system. All the options are there, and focus on static subjects was just about perfect with almost all lenses we tried. Continuous focus… is really the only area of the camera where a lot more testing is needed before we’d be comfortable talking about its suitability for peak action sports…”
— This sounds ominous. I hope this won’t be the whole 1D Mark III AF fiasco all over again.
19 cross-type AF points. 8fps. 24p video. Now this is the EOS 5D Mark II that never was*. I will definitely be testing this one out.
Oh, and taking a page from Nikon’s playbook, Canon finally decided to get rid of all that focusing screen nonsense and incorporated an electronic grid overlay into the viewfinder, as well as level & tilt indicators.
Update 4:34 PM
And another page from Nikon’s playbook, something Canon should have done long ago: the built-in flash of the 7D can command up to three flash heads wirelessly, eliminating the need for the it’s-really-infrared-but-we-insist-it-isn’t P.O.S. that is the ST-E2. This is great!
Update 3:58 PM
* Doh! I was under the impression the 7D is a full-frame body! But its sensor is, in fact, APS-C, meaning there’s a 1.6x field-of-view crop, so it’s not a full-frame sensor like what the 5D Mark II has. The upside of this, though, is that it’ll take EF-S lenses.
MSRP US$1,699 body only, or US$1,899 (estimated) with the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (28mm?! Why???). Available end September in the US, which means possibly only November in Singapore.
Read Canon USA’s press release here, visit its product page here or visit Canon Japan’s EOS 7D Microsite here.
The more I learn about the 7D, the more I am convinced Canon intends for the 7D and the 5D Mark x bodies to be the semi-professional equivalents of the 1D and the 1Ds Mark x in the professional class, in that the 7D is meant more for sports and action photography, with the 5D Mark x for studio and landscape photography.
Lately, on the last couple of shoots, I found myself increasingly frustrated by the AF system on my Canon EOS 5D and having to resort to MF (manual focusing). And it was while shooting a gig last night, when another issue with the camera surfaced, that I realized it might be time to seriously take a second look at my current equipment line-up.
For the shoot, I took my Canon EOS 5D and two lenses—an EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM and an EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. The lenses were fine, as always. It was the camera; The two biggest problems are the limitation of ISO and inadequate AF coverage.
Low-lighting means poor AF performance
When it comes to shooting gigs, I like to frame up a subject and wait. When the right moment occurs, I’d activate AF, let it lock, and then snipe a shot, sometimes in a burst if the moment is sustained.
But without enough light, AF goes out the window.
The first casualty of low lighting is AF (auto focus) performance. A camera relies on the contrast in a scene to determine a spot where it can latch its focus on. As I’d written before in another post, every camera has a minimum f-stop that ensures AF would perform well. But specs from manufacturers are theoretical, the product of best-case scenarios. It’s a completely different story in the real world, where shooting conditions are a million and one in variation.
There simply isn’t enough AF points in the 9-point AF system of the EOS 5D to get a focus in the right area, let alone track a subject well. And the poor lighting condition of last night’s gig was further compounded by the kind of clothes the performers wore. Solid white, solid black. To a camera, these are all patches of gray it cannot sufficiently distinguish for AF.
Insufficient ISO for fast-moving subjects
The maximum ISO the 5D can go up to is also lacking for my style of shooting; I abhor the harsh look that Speedlites give, so I prefer to shoot in available light whenever possible.
For gigs, I like to use f/4 or higher—particularly for two-shots—so that I can better depict the relationship and context between foreground and background subjects. That limits the shutter speed available to me. And it goes without saying that subjects have to be sharp. But musicians groove and move when they’re playing, so there’s a minimum shutter speed needed to stop the action. Depending on the luminance of the existing stage lighting, shutter speed can get as slow as 1/90 or 1/60.
One way to overcome this is to crank up the ISO to the highest: In the case of the 5D, that’s 3200. But, even with that, the average exposure was f/2.8 at 1/90, which was cutting it a little too tight for my liking.
When Plan B is as bad as Plan A
I would have much rather used my other camera, a Canon EOS-1D Mark II. It has a fantastic 45-point AF system and is capable of 8.5 frames per second. For what I was trying to accomplish last night, the EOS-1D Mark II would have been great.
But I don’t use the 1D Mark II for low-light shoots, for one reason: Sensor noise. Being such an old camera, using an early-generation DIGIC II image processor, it performs poorly at maximum ISO: resulting shots are extremely noisy and quite often unusable.
What are my options?
So the issue now is that I have two cameras, each with a significant performance issue that cannot be compensated for by using the other: Fast, accurate AF on one camera comes at the expense of noise, while clean images on the other comes at the expense of good AF coverage. I’d need a camera that does both well.
The first choice is obviously a 1-series body, namely the Canon EOS-1D Mark III or Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III. Believe me, it’s hard to settle for anything less once you’d used a 1-series body.
But Canon’s 1-series bodies, with their spate of known problems, face some very strong competition when compared feature-by-feature to similar offerings by Nikon and Sony. The levels that the latter two have been innovating at for their latest offerings make Canon’s recent moves evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Canon has been slumbering and stumbling, a fact that is painfully obvious to many who have adopted the Canon system. Furthermore, there is talk in the winds that the EOS-1D and 1Ds Mark IV are just around the corner.
Still, having said all that, I really enjoyed using an EOS-1Ds Mark III I rented for a shoot a few months ago.
There is the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, which by all accounts should be an obvious choice for me.
Sure, it’s a major upgrade. But there is just one problem. Canon obviously deems the 5-series as semi-professional; accordingly, it has chosen to retain the same 9-point AF system from its predecessor. This limits the 5-series bodies to architecture or nature photography, or any application that doesn’t require minute focusing. Say what you will about how the 9-point AF system has six additional invisible AF points to assist in tracking—an AF point that is invisible to me and of which I have no control of is worth nothing to me. Which leads me back to square one.
Then there are the Nikon D700 and Nikon D3. I’ve had my eye on these bodies for quite a while now. Both are very strong contenders—superior, even—for two reasons: 51-point AF and ISO up to a mind-boggling 25,600. Takes care of the two problems I am facing with my current cameras.
What about Sony, the proverbial 800-pound gorilla? Its α system is pretty complete, and the Sony α 900 looks to be a really formidable answer to what Nikon and Canon have to offer.
But I feel it is still too early to tell where the young Sony α system is headed for. While all signs indicate that Sony does seem to be serious about its foray into DSLRs, the fact that it has, in the past, displayed a ready willingness to kill product lines abruptly—think Sony CLIÉ—makes me just a little wary to invest in its α system.
If I eventually decide I’m crazy enough to forgo my entire line-up of Canon equipment, and rebuilt a new system from scratch, I’d most likely adopt Nikon’s.
Any one at Nikon wants to hook me up?
After taking a hard look at the across-the-board offerings from both Nikon and Canon, I can safely make three statements, that:
One: Canon is clearly losing its edge.
Two: The popular saying, that Nikon cameras are designed by photographers while Canon cameras are designed by engineers, is very true indeed.
Three: I am ready to jump ship.
About
34, male and very Cancerian. Often irascible, even if he is prescient to his emotions. Lives for the resonance of beautiful passages, cinematic magic and aural bliss. Dabbles in fiction writing, photography, sketching and daydreaming in his free time, even though he is paid to do just those in a professional capacity.
He is, in other words, quite a geek.
-
-
Recent Comments
