Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Sports & Action Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 29, 2007, 1:20 PM   #1
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I've mentioned I'm happy with the new canon mk IIIs high ISO performance - you've seen some of my ISO 2000 shots. Here are some 3200 and 6400 shots from the real world - not a bottle or a sign. Definitely usable. If Nikon can deliver on it's 6400 ISO in the D300 there will definitely be a new benchmark for prosumer level high ISO performance. And while the newly announced Canon 40D is still only 3200 - if it's a BETTER 3200 that will also be a bonus.

ISO 3200:



yes, I know I cut off his hand and i t's crooked (MARK:G)



ISO 6400:




JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 29, 2007, 1:27 PM   #2
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

John, not only do you make me long for a MKIII you also spoil all of my fun pointing out minor things wrong with your work........ hmmmm :blah:

Very impressive, do you have 100% crops without noise reduction?

I'm loving the dof (or lack there of) with the 1.3 crop.... might have to put the 120-300 on my 5D for a laugh and see what that is like!

I know I asked before, but you have shot more since, how is the AF, are you finding the problems that others talked about at first?

I'm looking at this bad boy in the next 6 months if poss as I might have some new sports opportunities on the cards working with schools but we will have to wait and see. That would work along side the weddings which could make everything very viable..... here's hoping!!!
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 2:02 PM   #3
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Mark1616 wrote:
Quote:
I'm looking at this bad boy in the next 6 months if poss as I might have some new sports opportunities on the cards working with schools but we will have to wait and see. That would work along side the weddings which could make everything very viable..... here's hoping!!!
Mark - I need your income LOL!!!

First you buy into a whole new system, then you upgrade to a full sensor camera. Now you're considering buying another $4500 camera. Must be nice :blah:

Anyway - the focus seems good to me, better than my 20d for sure. But I never shot with the mkII-N so I can't say if it's better or worse. There are 2 rumors running now - one is that it's faulty AF sensors that canon is quietly replacing. The other is that there is a new firmware 1.1.1 being tested out overseas that if working will be released in September.

Now, I will say this - it SUCKS going back to the viewfinder in the 20d. After having a viewfinder with 100% coverage that's nice and bright the 20d is small, the focus points are tiny in comparison. Heck I'm even a convert now of the bigger LCD. The mkIII is just plain nicer to use. 20d still would do outstanding work for my day-to-day photos but it's like going back to a Toyota after driving a BMW. The toyota is a great car, it's just not a BMW.

As for 100% crops w/o noise reduction - you can see 100% crops WITH noise reduction by looking in the gallery (just get the URL out of the properties and replace the -L with a -O in the file name). But I don't have originals anymore - I know it's blasphemy but last year I took to just modifying the originals. I have enough files already - having 2 copies just wasn't necessary. Not enough risk to warrant me keeping originals.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 3:44 PM   #4
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Cool, I will take a look.

As for having too much money, I'm fortunate that I'm single (well fortunate in some respects), have no children and have a good day job :-), however currently don't have enough for the MKIII. If the plan comes together then I will be shooting a lot of sports and without looking potentially Nikon the MKIII is the camera for the job. It will also be a good backup camera to the 5D in weddings, it looks like quite a few wedding photogs have moved that way.

OK, took a look while writing this, eating my Chinese and watching CSI :G

They are definitely usable for 9x6 poss 10x8 which is ideal, how are they looking when printed, do they live up to expectations?

When did you start getting gigs with the paper sending you out btw, I forgot to ask but notice you've mentioned it a few times recently? Congrats!


Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 4:02 PM   #5
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I have to be honest - I haven't printed any 8x10s yet at 3200 or 6400. At 4x6 they look fine.

As for getting sent out - it's still freelance I just get paid for the article I write and whatever photos they publish. So not great money by any stretch - but it gets me access and it's a good excuse to do what I love.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 4:10 PM   #6
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

And getting to do what you love is what counts. I'm getting excited as everything is about to kick off again for me, the summer is always quite photo wise as I have holiday etc in the way so. I've just got the hockey schedule for this season and I'm going to ensure I'm covering the larger tournaments but with a focus on youth and children's games as I've realised it's the parents that buy photos of their little ones doing their thing.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"Oh, in normal light shooting football and soccer, what is your keep rate like with the MKIII compared to the 20D?
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 7:10 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
airbrushjohn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 747
Default

hi johng,

those are amazing shots!! that iso is incredible!! great work as usual, i did look at the picture on smugmug, that is just unbelieveable!
airbrushjohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2007, 9:28 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 214
Default

Hi John

amazing,incredible,jealous what more can i say


colinl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2007, 10:40 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 574
Default

Can the noise reduction be turned off for comparison? Do you find that you have to do some additional noise removal, also?
DRGSin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2007, 10:56 PM   #10
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

THe noise reduction is all PP. I already turned off in-camera noise reduction. Either the results are acceptable or they're not. My intent was not to demonstrate soleley what the camera produced - otherwise they would be RAW images. As mentioned in this or another recent thread - i overlay my originals now. sorry.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:14 PM.