On the Canon 70D Image Quality and other stuff

Canon EOS 70D

Canon EOS 70D

Being the first is overrated. What matters is being the best. Google wasn’t the first search engine, but it’s the best. Facebook wasn’t the first social networking website, but it’s the best. Nikon was the first to deliver autofocus in video mode. But Canon now has the best implementation as seen on the recently released EOS 70D, thanks to the new on-sensor dual pixel autofocus technology. Take that Nikon and Sony.

We had to wait a little for it, but with this kind of technology I’m all for Canon Inc. taking their time to come up with a good solution rather than a crappy first implementation. This is also why we haven’t yet seen a flip out LCD screen on the higher end models, and why there’s no electronic viewfinder in our DSLRs yet. Trust me on this, once we get our electronic viewfinders out, combined with fast on-sensor phase detection AF, it’ll revolutionize photography.

I wanted to elaborate a little on the recent podcast I did with Planet5D. I mentioned some stuff that I want to clarify a little more.

First is the 70D image quality. I still don’t understand what it is about the fucking megapixels that makes people go crazy. On bigger sensors it makes sense, but not on smaller sensors. At least not right now with the current state of our technology. Increasing the amount of pixels only degrades the image quality more in terms of noise especially at the higher ISO values. The images get to look too rough and grainy and I fucking hate that. Not to mention the fact that the colors look more washed out as well. Even on the 7D this is a problem. I am fucking tired of complaining about this to Japan. The sensor in the 70D could have been kept at around 12-16 megapixels and that would have been enough. The image quality would have been so much better.

Canon 70D Image Quality Sucks Donkey Dick

Canon 70D Image Quality Sucks Donkey Dick

Check out the above image at 100%. It’s a fucking travesty. Sample images are from Canon Inc.’s website. That landscape photo is shot at ISO 100 at f/11. Check out the noise in the sky. If I didn’t know better I would think that image is shot at ISO 400 or perhaps even ISO 800. But ISO 100??? Jesus fucking christ. My God, my God. And keep in mind that this is probably JPEG with noise reduction turned on. I really don’t want to see the RAW image. It’s probably a fucking nightmare. And at f/11, check out the fine detail in the forest and water. This is what all this extra resolution is for right?? RIGHT?????????? Instead of trees and leafs what we have is fucking green mush. I’m getting fucking tired of pointing out that increasing the megapixels while having to apply noise reduction to keep the noise levels low is FUCKING POINTLESS. All detail gets lost anyway!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DON’T YOU FUCKING MORONS IN JAPAN UNDERSTAND THIS????????

And look at the image with the parrot. That’s at ISO 400 but look at the noise and dithering going on in the image. Then there’s this image of butterflies, if I didn’t know better I’d swear it was taken with a crappy smart phone. Look at it at 100%, it has that rough texture feel to it that’s clearly digital and looks downright ugly. 

I swear to God, if I had a weak heart I would have died by now. One of these days my brain is going to start bleeding in my skull. I had complained about this shit when the 7D came out. Remember the melted hay post? Read it again. You would think that after 3 years Canon would have learned something about this.

Of course it’s not just Canon Inc. that’s to blame but also the fucking moron consumers who think more megapixels is always better. Fortunately we’ve seen recently that people are wisening the fuck up. Many complained about the piece of shit D800 having 37MP while most would have been satisfied with 16MP. I had warned back then that it makes no sense to compete on megapixels. Nokia now has a goddamn phone out that takes images at 41MP!!! The fierce market competition Nikon mentioned got a whole lot fiercer now. What do you think people are going to be choosing now? A bulky D800 that costs so much with a professional lens, or a Nokia Lumia 1020 that is small and easy to carry around and offers you SO MUCH more apart from the 41MP images?

Nokia Lumia 1020

Nokia Lumia 1020

Ya gotta love the camera grip accessory as well. Pure genius. For just a couple of bucks more, not only do you have a killer smart phone with a pretty decent 41MP camera, but you can also have a compact camera as well. The image quality is grainy at the pixel level to be sure, but for a phone it’s phenomenal quality and really more than most people would need. If you have this, why get a dedicated compact camera? Hell, why get a DSLR??

It’s clear that megapixels just won’t cut it anymore as far as Nikon, Sony and Canon are concerned. The smart phone industry is becoming a force to be reckoned with. And the only way you can compete is by offering better image quality — something that’s an advantage of the lager sensor in compact cameras and DSLRs that phones will never have.

Soon uncle Bob will be making 41 and higher megapixel images at the events you cover. You can’t impress clients by showing up with your puny 36MP D800 that captures grainy images and requires a dedicated heavy duty tripod to take sharp images. Nor will the grainy, mushy and digital looking 20MP images from the 70D be enough. The only way your images will surely be able to stand out is with the smooth looking images, even at very high ISO in low light situations, where uncle Bob’s images will start to look like crap. And with beautiful saturated colors free of digital noise and artifacts, where uncle Bob’s images will look dark and grainy as fuck and completely washed out.

>>>> If you can offer a compact camera or DSLR that can take 12MP images in low light shot at ISO 6400 that really look like ISO 400, or even better like ISO 100, then I think you have a chance at competing with smart phones. Otherwise fucking forget about it.

Also important in all of this is lightning fast and accurate autofocus, of course. But smart phones have a much better chance at competing here. They can improve their autofocus performance in various ways, but will never be able to compete with sensor size and thus image quality, as long as the megapixels are kept at reasonable levels. Look at what Fuji is doing with the X100s, the image quality is way ahead.

That’s why in all the years of blogging here I’ve kept hammering on image quality. Fuck the megapixels, give us exceptional image quality instead. Most pros are satisfied with 12-16MP. Look at the 1DX. It’s “just” 18MP, but the images are absolutely gorgeous. Even Kelby ditched Nikon and is now using the 1DX because it’s the fucking best camera on the planet right now. And remember, this is the same Kelby who was hugging a Nikon D4 last year like his firstborn baby.

It's never too late to see the light.

It’s never too late to see the light.

Here’s what Kelby had to say about the 1DX after using it for the first time:

First Impressions
This was my first time shooting with the 1Dx, and I gotta tell ya — it is a camera absolutely born to shoot sports. I shot at 2,000 ISO all night and you don’t even see any noise (I did no noise reduction). Michael says the Falcon’s crew routinely shoots at 5,000 ISO and you just don’t see any noise, but after the way they had raved about it, I was expecting insanely low amounts of noise, and that’s what I got.

Better than the low noise…
…the auto-focus system on the 1Dx. It’s AF is insane! It’s so fast, and so precise that I know I’m picking up shots I would have missed otherwise. That’s the part that really surprised me. I need more time with it to really get the little nuances of setting it up for my style of shooting, but of everything on this camera, that was what impressed me most.

Everything about the 1Dx feels fast. I was shooting at 12-frames per second and I know that’s only 2-frames faster per second than what I’m used to shooting, but it felt like it was 10 frames faster.

Of course, we knew that a long time ago. This really puts the bullcrap from DxOMark and the fuckwads at EISA into perspective, doesn’t it?

The 5D Mark III would have been so much better with the sensor from the 1DX inside it. I seriously hope Canon Inc. learns from all of this and starts to understand where their focus should be. Either they get it now, or they are going to see a massive decline in business as the smart phone industry becomes an even bigger threat.

The 70D is great with the on-sensor phase detection AF, and the 19-point AF system (thanks Canon Inc., seriously), but it’s a pitty that the image quality isn’t what it could have been, I’m very sorry to say. And not only the stills would have benefitted from this, but especially the movie mode (clean high ISO movies) where the new autofocus technology can really be put to good use. Let’s hope that on the next 7D we get a 16MP sensor instead with on-sensor phase detection AF, and no moiré and stupid crap like that. AND STOP INTENTIONALLY CRIPPLING THE PRODUCTS. There’s no reason why Canon Inc. couldn’t have made the video in the 70D free of moiré and aliasing like the 5D Mark III.

That’s why I liked Dave Dugdale’s rant in the video above starting at 2:50. More people should grow a pair of balls and start telling it like it is.

Another thing I mentioned in the recent podcast I did with Planet5D is the fact that we’re going to see more computational photography in the compact cameras and DSLRs in order to offer unique advantages to the smart phones, apart from image quality and speed. One of the things I’m surprised hasn’t been included so far is multiple exposure noise reduction — taking at least one or more additional shots very quickly after the real one, to be used for noise reduction. This has huge potential for capturing even cleaner low light high ISO shots. We’ve seen in-camera panoramic photography and in-camera HDR, but I think the multi-exposure noise reduction needs to get here fast. The same also goes for in-camera focus bracketing, which Canon Inc. had on some compact camera models in the past, for greater dept of field in macro shots.

Anyway, I’ve got Mitarai on hold on line 2 right now, gotta go.

34 thoughts on “On the Canon 70D Image Quality and other stuff

  1. ..just watching Seattle dismantle SF..WTF..is Canon basically losing it as you suggest?..I get that smartphones are capable of taking HQ images but isn’t it ultimately all about the glass?..an Arri Alexa uses the same size sensor found in the 60/7D and when paired with a 10k+ Angenieux Optimo lense delivers cinema quality video..slap a 5D body(with ML raw HDMI hack) on a Cooke cinema lense and you’re competing with Red for half the cost..you’re right..it seems to be a shell game being played with the sheeple..they have the capability to deliver far greater image quality right now but prefer to hold it back and instead offer new features (like killer AF) to move product to those that get caught up in the game..it sucks but that’s why I’m still shooting with my 60D..when the nextgen 7D drops in price (assuming it addresses the image issues with the 70D) maybe I’ll take a serious look at it ..

    • Yep the image quality can be a lot better. Check out the rant I mentioned by Dugdale above where he shows what’s possible with RAW recording. And certainly the moire and aliasing could have been removed if Canon Inc. wanted to.

      • Fake Chuck, do you think the boys at Magic Lantern will/can fix some of the short comings as you see it with the 70D?

        Thanks,

        John

      • The biggest shortcoming is the image quality, and I’m afraid that can’t be fixed. It’s a hardware issue; the photosites on the sensor are way too small because of the extra useless resolution.

  2. Agree on the parrot image and on the landscape sky, apparently not a lot has happened with respect to the noise department since the 40D I bought second hand. The butterfly image though, I don’t know what to say about it. The image itself isn’t very impressive, which actually points to the photographer and not to the camera… Can’t use that to judge the 70D at all.

    However, water droplets in the air close to the waterfalls in the landscape shot probably are partly to blame for the lower image quality at that point. I, however, agree pretty much about what you say otherwise – heck, I’d already be happy if even the 12 Mpix 5D was re-done with the 5DIII’s autofocus and noise performance, but I guess I could settle to a slightly larger 16 Mpix sensor as well.

    • Actually, I had went and looked at the image quality of my 20D, and was pretty surprised that I didn’t see what I would call a significant improvement on detail level with 70D sample images. From the sample images, the nightly cityscape looks better to my eye than the landscape taken daytime from the waterfalls.

      It is surprising how little improvement on the detail level is actually visible, but the waterfall image does benefit from unsharp mask. At this point it would be intersting to know whether the Canon sample images are JPEGs converted from RAWs without any post-processing?

      • Love your work Fake Chuck!

        Having been to Iguassu Falls I can say that the Canon sample image looks to be a pretty accurate representation of what my eyes saw. The humidity in the place is really really quite oppressive – possibly the most humid place I’ve ever been to. Everywhere one looks there are multitudes of mini rainbows and one is constantly covered in a sticky humidity derived sweat. Even using a polarizing filter I found it impossible to take a shot without the the humidity related diffraction.

        One would need to be there in a drought to avoid it, but then the waterfall wouldn’t be much of a waterfall.

        Cheers

    • I thought it was the water droplets too, but look at the scenery that’s closer. Grass and bushes are just blobs of green. Just like the melting hay we complained about 3 years ago. All detail gets lost. Cramming that many megapixels onto the sensor is detrimental to sharpness/detail because of the defraction limit. And in addition there’s also the noise reduction which makes it worse.

      • Defraction? Goddammit Fake Chuck, this is the first time I see a word written by yourself which is not purposely misspelled! :-) (Or is it?)

  3. Unfortunately you are fighting two losing battles with Canon Chuck: MP and crippling.

    MP:
    Canon feels a need to up the megapixel war because Nikon/Sony has upped them in all of their cameras, and the mindless masses don’t know any better. They just know that 24 is a bigger number than 18, and bigger is always better right? Pros know the real deal so slapping 16mp in the 1dx will not deter the target buyers. Newbs looking at their first DSLR won’t know the difference or the benefit/drawback. Have you ever tried to explain how lower MP are better with regard to noise and high ISO to a new, clueless, potential buyer?? It’s like trying to explain to someone that the reason they have a blind spot when they drive is because they set their mirrors to see the side of their car and not the car on their side. They get the concept, but all of that logic goes out the window in practice, which is why I yell out to put your mirrors in the right place every time some mouth breather casually swerves into my lane because they can only check their blind spot by looking over their shoulder,which they don’t. I’m off topic…
    Nikonians used to scream that you don’t need more than 12-16MP, and still say so on their weak ass forums (those things are pretty sparsely occupied LOL) when asked what they would like to see in future cameras, and they are right! Chuck hits the nail on the head that Fuji GETS IT! Here’s the catch though: Fuji is lucky enough to have products that more advanced shooters gravitate to, and as a result, have a higher knowledge level when it comes to such things.
    Canon is fighting for new buyers and current buyers with Nikon and Sony, and a soccer mom/dad, who is only going to shoot in green box mode anyway, is looking at camera specs on paper…and 24mp is better than 18mp to them. By the time he/she gets advanced enough to want to upgrade and know better, they don’t have any control over how many mps are being crammed into the camera they choose, they are already in the system (Canon, Nikon,etc).
    So the megapixel war has reignited, and Canon got suckered into the game. The shit Canon wants to stick to their guns about is stupid crap that actually hurts them which is why CANON is the MAJOR reason Nikon will never go away and will always be around (although competition is good for the consumer). I’ll get to crippling, just bare with my ranting…
    Here is a review of the 1dx from a D800 shooter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IznKQgo5e0
    Take note of what he says about the images out of the only 18mp 1dx vs the monster 36mp D800 that he admits he loves.
    F’n Canon. Canon is a company that suffers from its own success. It is like Microsoft and W8. People say they hate it, bring back the start button, put the media player back in so we can play DVDs, and let us start IN desktop mode especially for non-touchscreen computers (among other complaints), and what does MS in its infinite arrogance do? What the infinitely arrogant do: deny, “compromise”, tell you to fuck yourself with cold butter if you don’t like it. (see Xbox One example, thank goodness for PStation being a real threat, it forced them to cave…because they REALLY wanted to pass out a stick of cold butter with every purchase). We’ll give you the start button back, but it won’t do what the start button did really, we’ll give you media player for a price, and tell people to just stop complaining! Seriously? “Stop complaining about it”??!? GDammit! Talk about sticking your finger up your own ass and saying that’s tasty pudding on the end. They wouldn’t get so much hate if the just LISTENED to the users! They mistake the fact that with iOS, Lenux, and MS as the options people have, they choose MS because they think it is that good. Wrong fucktards. You deserve all the hate you get, you earned it (and I’m a windows user!). Here’s an idea! Do what the people who you want to buy your product, WANT YOUR PRODUCT TO DO!?! How fucking hard is that? A monkey with an learning disability could figure it out!
    Blood pressure medication on board, now…

    Crippling:
    There is no camera maker who cripples their bodies more than Canon. Its almost pathological the amount they do it! If Canon were actually serious, they could destroy Nikon and turn it into a niche brand because the number of users would be so small, but maybe that’s what Canon is afraid of doing. By keeping Nikon clearly in their rear view mirror, they know exactly where they are and what they’re doing. But we all know, Canon is really only concerned with cannibalizing it’s own models. “If you don’t cannibalize your own sales, someone else will”, sound pretty smart huh??
    If you wanted to immediately eat into Nikon sales you would put dual card slots and 100% VF on ALL xD/xxD models. Put a headphone jack on ALL models or at least xxd/xd models and you grab another portion of the market from Nikon. Uncompressed HDMI out? Fuck man, now Nikon is squealing like a pig in the woods bent over a tree stump!
    But here is where being a victim of your own success happens. The 6d is crippled to all hell, like the ugly kid in a beauty pageant being told that they are just a beautiful as everyone else…but come on man, we all know it’s not true. This is a beauty pageant, you don’t win simply by participating! But the 6d sells. And has sold well. So Canon licks a little more of the chocolate finger pudding and says “yum”. Just because it sells well doesn’t mean it is what you should have put out; but they don’t want to cut into 5d3 sells!!
    I understand wanting to have different levels of products for consumers, but Canon is the Cathy Bates “Misery” character when it comes to that shit! I can see the 6d in the bed and Canon comes in with the sledgehammer and puts a block of wood between the AF, xsync, shutter life, VF coverage,….damn, that list got longer as I was writing it and made me go WTF before I even finished the metaphor! But you get the idea.

    16mp, 100%VF, dual card slots, ISO 6400 that looks like ISO 400 (or at least 800), @7-8fps, headphone jack, dual pixel LVAF, xsync 1/320, in a 71D and it will remap the market road!!! It would walk into the prison showers and butt rape the 24mp D7100 and make a D7200 hold it’s towel until it was done! I guaran-fuckin-tee it!!! And that is all possible now! Show that it’s not about the number of MPs and stop crippling shit SOOO much and I guarantee a best seller, because the reviewers will cream their pants and panties over it and the less informed masses searching for reviews will read/watch those reviews. In the information age we live in, SO much research is done online by consumers it’s not even funny. THAT can be your greatest marketing asset to undo the “more mp=better” thinking of the uniformed!
    Now I’m all pissed off because I just read a forum post about good looking cameras and some people posted pictures of a few Nikon bodies. Ugghhhhh!! The D3s is NOT winning any beauty contests! Bless your heart, here’s your participation ribbon, now please exit stage left so we can continue.

  4. Canon is fighting for new buyers and current buyers with Nikon and Sony, and a soccer mom/dad, who is only going to shoot in green box mode anyway, is looking at camera specs on paper…and 24mp is better than 18mp to them. By the time he/she gets advanced enough to want to upgrade and know better, they don’t have any control over how many mps are being crammed into the camera they choose, they are already in the system (Canon, Nikon,etc).

    Yeah but now the soccer moms and dads who Canon Inc. is listening to are going to choose their smart phones instead. So who is gonna buy the high megapixel mushy shit producing compact cams and dslrs now???? To compete on megapixels is fucking stupid. I hope they start competing on image quality instead soon or they’ll surely become the Toyota factory Hakonsson was talking about.

  5. Canon usually makes good products, but I hate their marketing strategy since a product lasts around 3 to 4 or 5 years top to be in the market. For example the Canon 6D is a good product, that got dumbed-down to the max, 1 year later after the launch of the 5D Mark III, all of that so that Canon can keep the 5D Mark III at the top of the market. There is another marketing strategy to put the price down when a new product goes on the market, this strategy is more adopted by the computer makers, I haven’t seen it in the camera market yet; because the camera market is a different world. That said, we’ve seen some hacked firmware for Canon, which is good, and while I haven’t tore apart the 6D, I am wondering if the shutter lag could be pushed to 1/8000 (instead of 1/4000), and if there is a possibility to modify the AF points on the 6D. For $1500 in price different, if these tweaks can be accomplished, Canon would most likely make some very happy people and would change its marketing strategy in a heartbeat. I can only think positively that one day, we will be able to do that. People do it with programs and consoles and there are also possibilities with the f/w of the cameras.
    So in my opinion Canon as a turnaround of 1 or 2 years to make better technological products, which is good right now, but they don’t even acknowledge this opportunity to distance themselves to other competitors because there is no reaction from the consumer market and/or from their competitors. Although …. they are lagging in the mirrorless market yet (Panasonic and Fuji are kings in this market), and once the blury bug will be corrected (1 or 2 years most likely), I believe all the DSLR’s will be mirrorless.

  6. When will the G2x be available? What about the next 7D Mark II? and I thought Canon would develop a 45 MP camera for next year, or is it just gossips/propaganda? Since you work at Canon you should give us more insights please (and I know how bad it is to leak Canon’s confidential employee’s email but please do it with another fake name for all emails that you receive from Canon, that would be great).
    Also on another note, I know that Canon tries to improve its products all the time: on the 1st 70D cameras, their button sucked completely (sometimes you have to be careful about your third-party suppliers), and during a product’s phase, it’s perfectly understandable, that would be extremely grateful from you if you could give us some insights.
    Thank you in advance for sharing the world of “I develop things on the engineering level but our third-party screwed us”.
    Last post from me in the USA, i asked to be transferred back to France…

  7. You talked about the autofocus technology on the 70D, okay cool, but this technology was first implemented with the EOS-M which is a mirrorless camera. While I like it a lot in video mode, i think the video is lagging behind on a technological point of view, and one of the main reasons would be to protect Canon’s camera niche market. The 1080p at 30 FPS is completely out of date. In a few months, we are going to see new cameras with 4K at 30 FPS or 1080P with 120 FPS with some dumb pro-consumers camera for around $200 (Go Pro 4 for example), it’s going to make the videos in the DSLR’s consumer market completely irrelevant. And not really far behind we got Sony that already offers 1080P in 60 FPS with their NEX-7 I believe. a bunch of my friends that are in the Indie market have been using canon’s DSLR (7D and 5D Mark II) when we were at the 1080P era, and they would like to do the same with their cameras with 4K resolution, yet Canon does not offer anything like that. We have the 5d Mark III, that could do it, but with only 10 FPS so it’s not good enough. i am not quite sure the video is a real seller for the DSL-R market right now. What I like in the video segment from Canon’s camera is the touch-screen capabilities and the AF with face detection, but the technological gap is far to be covered, because the likes of Canon and Sony will implement their technologies in the video cameras first that generates much more revenus (Canon EOS C500 4K for example). And it is perfectly understandable, yet the needs of the market evolves in some magic/mysterious ways: more people take pictures with their phone, it got so bad, that now sony is offering a lens for some phones. It’s probably dumb but there is a niche market for this need. Take a look at the computer market when they started the CDROM era: back then we had no idea what to do with a CDROM or even the sound cards, now the computer is part of a modern appliance in every room of our life. My point is pretty simple: the consumer’s market keeps evolving, and while some technologies are already available on a professional market, more people should benefit from it in a not so near distant future, yet Canon refuses to do it (they lag behind Sony for this matter when we talk in real raw numbers, quality is another topic of course).
    Honestly, I would not be surprised if the FF market of DSLR’s turn into a FF mirrorless market within a few months with or without Canon.
    Between 5D Mark III and the 6D, when we say 2 slot cards are better, have you heard that on the 5D Mark III the writing on the SD card is not as fast as on the 6D? It does not go as fast as 133X even on a 600X SD card, and a new firmware update won’t take care of this issue (it makes the SD card slot completely irrelevant for that matter).
    For the 1DX, it is the best of the best of cameras for sports, without an inch of a doubt, and i a am not a pixel peeper, yet i think they should have upgraded the MP. When you look at both pictures from a 5D Mark III and the 1DX, you can see a difference in favor of the 5D Mark III, and i mean it’s noticeable by the eye without magnifying the pixels (and it seems like Ken Rockwell would agree as well on his blog).
    Canon T5I vs T4I: i haven’t checked the video yet, I would assume that for the price the T4I is the winner.
    In the meantime i will keep shooting with my T2i and my EOS-M (only for still photography with the special adapter for my glasses).
    Haven’t bough the 5D Mark III yet :) I might get a 6D instead.

    Take care yall and good night.
    (sorry for the typos).

  8. Another feature i would love to see from Canon: taking pictures in 3D (and it’s possible) and taking panoramic pictures instead of stitching them all the time inside photoshop.
    A friend of mine, that does photography for a living, and used to brag about his nikonian cameras just switched to a 70D, and he never mentioned anything about it.
    Please let us know if you hear anything new from the G2X and the 7D Mark II, I have high hopes on the 7D mark II. The 7D is a really really good camera.

  9. Fake Chuck, you were indeed right about Sony being potentially dangerous. A fullframe mirrorless released, I do wonder what happens in the Canon and Nikon front next. Color me interested, though. Perhaps it is finally possible to take a camera to a vacation trip without sacrificing low light level performance!

  10. And Fuji is rumored to release a FF as well. I haven’t tested the Sony yet, but if they fixed the blurring on high speed that is known to all mirrorless cameras then they have an huge technical advantage over Canon. Mirrorless is attractive, they won’t be able yet to transfer it to DSLRs because they want to preserve their niche market with Canon, but now with Sony that seems to adopt the mirrorless FF on all their cameras, things might change in the next few months. Still they have lots of progress to do for mirrorless to be as good as DSLR; not sure how wide in years the technological gap is though.

  11. Pingback: Fujifilm is gonna tear us a new one | Fake Chuck Westfall

  12. Pingback: Rise of the Smartphones | Fake Chuck Westfall

  13. I also note the industry and journalistic community fixation with number of sensor pixels and immediate conclusion that more is better. I see where you coming from! Who gives a rat about that indeed!

    Another trend I’ve noticed – and I am a nooby to photography (but not to display, grey scale , gamma and colour temperature); is that all these cameras seem to be reviwed with whatever kit lens the reviewer gets with the body. I’m astonished that “reference ” lenses are not pulled out when checking these things out. Like I said , I’m a nooby but I would have thought using the same very high quality lenses when reviewing these cameras would provide the real story with the camera? That way you can make an informed decision about the body AND the kit lens. Am I missing something here?

    Thanks,

    John

  14. Pingback: Why Scott Kelby switched to Canon | Fake Chuck Westfall

  15. I’m trying to get started in photography and making videos. I was thinking about getting the 70D, but after reading this I’m unsure now. What would you suggest I get then? I’m probably going to be shooting model photos and doing youtube videos. I want good quality.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s