Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > CANON EOS 1D MARK IV REVIEW - Amateur Photographer

Reply
Thread Tools

CANON EOS 1D MARK IV REVIEW - Amateur Photographer

 
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-10-2010
The reviewer seems to like it.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/3yto9db
or:
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...fset=&offset=0
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2010
On Aug 10, 5:11*pm, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> The reviewer seems to like it. *
>
> http://preview.tinyurl.com/3yto9db
> or:http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...anon_EOS_1D_Ma....


The reviewer is silly. He contends you'd have to compare the Canon
and Nikon D3s to see if there was a difference, there "could" be a
point in favour of the Nikon in terms of high ISO noise control. Dear
Namby Pamby reviewer, the Nikon will wipe the floor with the Canon in
that respect. But it is nice it appears Canon fixed their AF problems.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2010
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:52:31 -0700 (PDT), Rich <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
>On Aug 10, 5:11*pm, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> The reviewer seems to like it. *
>>
>> http://preview.tinyurl.com/3yto9db
>> or:http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...anon_EOS_1D_Ma...

>
>The reviewer is silly. He contends you'd have to compare the Canon
>and Nikon D3s to see if there was a difference, there "could" be a
>point in favour of the Nikon in terms of high ISO noise control. Dear
>Namby Pamby reviewer, the Nikon will wipe the floor with the Canon in
>that respect.



It's the usual British understatement that you should expect from a
review in Amateur Photographer. I thought it was actually quite
damning.


>But it is nice it appears Canon fixed their AF problems.



It is nice that Canon appears to have fixed its AF problems. I fear
it is *only the appearance* that has been fixed.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Will T
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2010
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:38:16 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:52:31 -0700 (PDT), Rich <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:
>>On Aug 10, 5:11*pm, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> The reviewer seems to like it. *
>>>
>>> http://preview.tinyurl.com/3yto9db
>>> or:http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...anon_EOS_1D_Ma...

>>
>>The reviewer is silly. He contends you'd have to compare the Canon
>>and Nikon D3s to see if there was a difference, there "could" be a
>>point in favour of the Nikon in terms of high ISO noise control. Dear
>>Namby Pamby reviewer, the Nikon will wipe the floor with the Canon in
>>that respect.

>
>
>It's the usual British understatement that you should expect from a
>review in Amateur Photographer. I thought it was actually quite
>damning.
>
>
>>But it is nice it appears Canon fixed their AF problems.

>
>
>It is nice that Canon appears to have fixed its AF problems. I fear
>it is *only the appearance* that has been fixed.


I don't see how any continuous AF system can be called "fixed" when it
wouldn't be able to be used with any longer lenses that don't have wide
enough apertures. And can't be used at all with most lenses when using a 2x
tele-converter for wildlife and sports photography, the very subjects when
it would be most needed. A fairly senseless system. Looks good in print
though, doesn't it. Mostly useless in the real world.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ofnuts
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2010
On 11/08/2010 10:32, Will T wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:38:16 +0100, Bruce<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:52:31 -0700 (PDT), Rich<(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>> On Aug 10, 5:11 pm, Bruce<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>> The reviewer seems to like it.
>>>>
>>>> http://preview.tinyurl.com/3yto9db
>>>> or:http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...anon_EOS_1D_Ma...
>>>
>>> The reviewer is silly. He contends you'd have to compare the Canon
>>> and Nikon D3s to see if there was a difference, there "could" be a
>>> point in favour of the Nikon in terms of high ISO noise control. Dear
>>> Namby Pamby reviewer, the Nikon will wipe the floor with the Canon in
>>> that respect.

>>
>>
>> It's the usual British understatement that you should expect from a
>> review in Amateur Photographer. I thought it was actually quite
>> damning.
>>
>>
>>> But it is nice it appears Canon fixed their AF problems.

>>
>>
>> It is nice that Canon appears to have fixed its AF problems. I fear
>> it is *only the appearance* that has been fixed.

>
> I don't see how any continuous AF system can be called "fixed" when it
> wouldn't be able to be used with any longer lenses that don't have wide
> enough apertures. And can't be used at all with most lenses when using a 2x
> tele-converter for wildlife and sports photography, the very subjects when
> it would be most needed. A fairly senseless system. Looks good in print
> though, doesn't it. Mostly useless in the real world.


So, that would be exactly like contrast AF in wildlife and sports.
Except the 1D AFs at f/8, so you can use it with the fairly common 300mm
f/4 and a 2x TC (with the 1.3 crop factor: 300x2x1.3=780mm). And on less
expensive bodies you can still use the same lens with a 1.4x TC (672mm
equivalent lens, 1.6 crop factor). Or a 100-400mm f/5.6 lens (640mm
equivalent).

--
Bertrand
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bog amateur standard photographer Hime Digital Photography 4 08-09-2005 05:22 PM
Please help me! I'm an amateur photographer Pashalis Tsarouxas Digital Photography 7 02-22-2004 12:05 AM



Advertisments