For the Canon lovers and haters, there is a 5DII review here:

Discussion in 'Canon' started by Mark Thomas, Dec 21, 2008.

  1. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Mark Thomas, Dec 21, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. An interesting read, Mark, thanks for posting the link.

    David J Taylor, Dec 21, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Mark Thomas

    RichA Guest

    Save $1000 and get the 5D instead. For nighttime photography, indoor
    shots with specular highlights, the 5D II is pretty useless until they
    correct that black dot issue. The shot of Orion's sword pretty much
    makes it a wash for amateur astronomers!
    RichA, Dec 21, 2008
  4. Mark Thomas

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Rich is an anti-Canon bigot and has very little credibility.
    Ray Fischer, Dec 22, 2008
  5. Neither does the 5D..... hardly a surprise.
    The "spots issue" when I looked at the complaints and saw the horrible
    images taken, and learned that this spots "issue" is very limited, and
    from what I saw, to rotten photographers doing lighted trees at dusk or
    in the night, it pretty much became a tiny drawback. Hardly an issue.
    John McWilliams, Dec 22, 2008
  6. Mark Thomas

    RichA Guest

    So, how do you avoid lights in nighttime images? How do you avoid
    blowing directly imaged bulb filaments and record anything else?
    RichA, Dec 22, 2008
  7. Mark Thomas

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Gee, that's a pretty silly question.

    If it's the black spots you are trying to avoid, perhaps you could read
    the posts that show how to avoid it, or you could, possibly, note that
    the reviews indicate that it is *not* normally visible in anything but
    large prints and even then very rarely.
    Oh my God - I hadn't thought this through - I have thousands of bulb
    filament shots and they would all be useless....

    Has it not occurred to you, Rich, that because canon have acknowledged
    the issue and committed to a solution, that they just might .. er.. come
    up with a solution? Given the nature of the problem, it seems to me
    that a firmware fix would probably resolve 80-90% of all issues. If it
    does come down to a sensor/electronics recall/replacement, well so be
    it. They will probably survive. As problems go, I think other similar
    debacles (eg Leica) were *much* worse.
    Mark Thomas, Dec 22, 2008
  8. Mark Thomas

    RichA Guest

    "Might?" I have one. A recall, followed by sensor replacement.
    RichA, Dec 22, 2008
  9. Mark Thomas

    RichA Guest

    Which is good, since each and every specular highlight, light, etc.,
    is going to be grossly blown out, you can't avoid it and get anything
    else showing up in the image.
    RichA, Dec 23, 2008
  10. Well, you need to take a closer look at some of the stills from Vincent
    Laforet's demo of the camera on the Canon site itself. Never heard
    anyone call *him* a "rotten photographer", but there are plenty of back
    dots on some of his images - and worse purple fringing than any other
    camera demo since Fox Talbot! (another defect of the 5DII which appears
    to be getting swamped by the black dot publicity, but a serious defect
    Kennedy McEwen, Dec 23, 2008

  11. O.K., that puts a firmer point on this by a big margin. I did not do
    'research' beyond the flimsy discussion on dpreview, as I am not
    planning to get one in the near future, I believe Canon will fix it, and
    I don't do that much night shooting with bright lights in darkness.
    John McWilliams, Dec 23, 2008
  12. Mark Thomas

    Ray Fischer Guest

    You mean the "defects" that are small and are only visible in rare
    Then you don't know anything. Ah yes, you're apparently a student
    with little exposure to the real world.

    Here's a clue: Most major software is released with hundreds to
    thousands of known bugs. Gievn the number of people who steal
    software even at the current prices, no corporation is going to
    spend tens of millions to ensure that a product is 100% defect
    free at first release.
    Ray Fischer, Dec 24, 2008
  13. Mark Thomas

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Why replace the sensor? Because some ignorant anti-Canon bigot who
    doesn't know squat says so?
    Ray Fischer, Dec 24, 2008

    If you mean "shoplift" or something similar, then stealing is the
    correct term. If you talk about unauthorized copying, then no,
    that's not theft --- you are not depriving the rightful owner
    of the software of said software. It's illegal, but it's by
    definition not theft (nor piracy, nor murder, nor bigamy).
    What's that got to do with the 5D Mark II?

    Here's another clue for you:
    Bugs in software have nothing to do with illegal copying.
    It's simply a question of how much bugs and misfeatures the
    general public is willing to put up with and that's "tons of it".
    If you sold a car or kitchen appliance that was as buggy as, say,
    your typical Microsoft product, you'd be crucified by customer
    protection groups, tests and your clients. But with software,
    people feel a perverse gratitude if it works at all, in some
    way, after jumping through hoops. ("Hey, I got my car to run
    again, somehow, after only removing and reinstalling the whole
    engine twice! Maybe I'll manage to get the brakes working, too,
    by rewiring the direction lights! Groovy!")

    And another clue:
    There's no way to make any software product 100% defect free.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 24, 2008
  15. Don't feed the trolls, Ray.
    John McWilliams, Dec 24, 2008
  16. Mark Thomas

    Ray Fischer Guest

    That's self-serving rationalization. It's stealing. You're depriving
    people of MONEY for their skills and efforts.
    All digital cameras use software.
    Sure do. Eliminating bugs is expensive. Very expensive.
    When people steal software because they don't want to spend
    $200 then what do you think will happen when the software
    costs $2000?
    Ray Fischer, Dec 24, 2008
  17. Mark Thomas

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Says who? Some ignorant anti-Canon bigot who doesn't know squat?
    Ray Fischer, Dec 25, 2008
  18. Mark Thomas

    RichA Guest

    Denialist derangement. "I don't believe in the spots, therefore they
    don't exist."
    RichA, Dec 25, 2008
  19. Theft has a very specific definition. Illegal copying does not
    fall under that definition, no matter if it's morally as bad
    as stealing. End of story.
    You'd call slander and bad weather "stealing" if it deprives
    people of money for their skills and efforts. Please look up
    the specific definition of theft and stealing for your
    jurisdiction and/or ask a lawyer.
    So who, ah, 'steals' the 5D2's software?
    Hence: What's that got to do with the 5D Mark II?
    It's most expensive if done on the cheap: no proper testing,
    no fail early, no QA team, unnecessary complex software
    design, etc. etc. etc.

    For widely used software the most cost efficient and proper way to
    eliminate bugs is the open source model, though. It also reduces
    "stealing software". However some corporations tend to ignore
    license terms and thus use the software without a license, copy it
    illegally and so on. Even though it saves them not a single cent.
    Ponder on that.

    Too bad that most open souce software is so good and user
    friendly that selling support seems to have failed as a
    business method.
    You cannot steal software. Technically impossible, software
    is intangible. You can steal a physical representation of the
    software (i.e. a CD, for example) --- see shoplifting.
    You can also use software withoßut a license or copy it
    The usual thing, assuming the software actually works and fills a
    - the company that produces the software cries huge tears about
    all the students who couldn't pay $2000 if they sold themselves
    into slavery and use an illegal copy, calling every instance
    a loss of $2000 income.
    - those who buy the software get lots of trouble due to ...
    ah, run-protection of the software (shamefully called copy
    - The company puts most of their money into said run protection,
    and little into support and enhancements.
    - Due to absymal support and bug fixing the company becomes a
    failure, the buggy software becomes unsupported and noone will
    be able to use it in a couple of years due to the run protection.

    Now, what do you think would happen if they didn't take $200
    but $14.95?

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 25, 2008
  20. Every sensor is FLAWED, it just happens that Nikon's sensors
    are more FLAWED than Canon's.

    How much do you get to slander Nikon the way you do, Richie?

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 25, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.