Canon Sensors: If Canon sensors and products are so bad compared to Sony then why is this happening? https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/news/canon-filmed-oscar-nominees-2019/ I guess...

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

If Canon sensors and products are so bad compared to Sony then why is this happening?
https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/news/canon-filmed-oscar-nominees-2019/

I guess that the pixel peepers and DXO are more stupid than originally imagined.

Peterfiore Loc: Where DR goes south

Shush..........your making too much sense.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Peterfiore wrote:

Shush..........your making too much sense.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Architect1776 wrote:

If Canon sensors and products are so bad compared to Sony then why is this happening?
https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/news/canon-filmed-oscar-nominees-2019/

I guess that the pixel peepers and DXO are more stupid than originally imagined.

I believe it's more fanboy propaganda than any actual Q deficiency. I defy anyone to pick the Canon and Nikon images out of a decent sized stack made up of each. On the other hand life in the real world suggests that Canon shot the nominees because the low bidder (or brother-in-law,BF, lover or drinking buddy) uses Canon

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Rich1939 wrote:

I believe it's more fanboy propaganda than any actual Q deficiency. I defy anyone to pick the Canon and Nikon images out of a decent sized stack made up of each. On the other hand life in the real world suggests that Canon shot the nominees because the low bidder (or brother-in-law,BF, lover or drinking buddy) uses Canon

Sounds like sour grapes.

RV Loc: Chicago

For years I used to be somewhat of a pixel peeper and spec nerd. After many years of shooting, none of my conclusions ever served me in the field. It all goes back to the shooter. Better time spent taking a basic class at a community college in Art 101 on composing. This will increase your image 100 times more than the number of pixels, noise concerns, the weight of the camera, and on and on and on.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

RV wrote:

For years I used to be somewhat of a pixel peeper and spec nerd. After many years of shooting, none of my conclusions ever served me in the field. It all goes back to the shooter. Better time spent taking a basic class at a community college in Art 101 on composing. This will increase your image 100 times more than the number of pixels, noise concerns, the weight of the camera, and on and on and on.

RRS Loc: Not sure

Rich1939 wrote:

I believe it's more fanboy propaganda than any actual Q deficiency. I defy anyone to pick the Canon and Nikon images out of a decent sized stack made up of each. On the other hand life in the real world suggests that Canon shot the nominees because the low bidder (or brother-in-law,BF, lover or drinking buddy) uses Canon

Just for the heck of it, please tell us what brand you own or prefer, we all know that it is not Canon. I feel that it is not the camera but the person behind it. Just because one can buy the best camera gear whatever one thinks that is does not mean that they will be able to do it justice with it. I can go along with your first two sentences but your third line is "sour grapes" plain and simple.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Rich1939 wrote:

I believe it's more fanboy propaganda than any actual Q deficiency. I defy anyone to pick the Canon and Nikon images out of a decent sized stack made up of each. On the other hand life in the real world suggests that Canon shot the nominees because the low bidder (or brother-in-law,BF, lover or drinking buddy) uses Canon

I do not understand your last sentence.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Architect1776 wrote:

If Canon sensors and products are so bad compared to Sony then why is this happening?
https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/news/canon-filmed-oscar-nominees-2019/

I guess that the pixel peepers and DXO are more stupid than originally imagined.

The main point of this is that if Canon was so bad as DXO and pixel peepers claim it is these parties would be using better equipment. I never said it was BETTER than any other brand but not the garbage that is daily implied by those who can't take a decent photo to save their lives but say their equipment is so superior merely because DXO by some idiot algorithm that has NO real world application consistently declares Canon sensors to be "Garbage" and pixel peepers jump on the band wagon.
The equipment mentioned in the article is not cheap BTW.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Architect1776 wrote:

Sounds like sour grapes.

You guys must be kidding! Did my post really need a smiley on the last sentence? Or are y'all just a tad over sensitive? No comment on the first part?

scooter1 Loc: Yacolt, Wa.

Rich1939 wrote:

You guys must be kidding! Did my post really need a smiley on the last sentence? Or are y'all just a tad over sensitive? No comment on the first part?

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

RRS wrote:

Just for the heck of it, please tell us what brand you own or prefer, we all know that it is not Canon. I feel that it is not the camera but the person behind it. Just because one can buy the best camera gear whatever one thinks that is does not mean that they will be able to do it justice with it. I can go along with your first two sentences but your third line is "sour grapes" plain and simple.

Your point is exactly my point. The people chosen to shoot the nominees were not chosen because of the gear they use but because of the results they get. Results are what count, no matter the endeavor. My comment would have been the same if it had touted Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Sony or whatever, they all get the job done. IF the person behind the camera knows what they are doing.
For the record I use Nikon but the next time you read something from me saying it's a better camera than X, it will be the first time.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Rich1939 wrote:

Your point is exactly my point. The people chosen ... (show quote)

This post never said any brand was better than any other brand. Except those who blindly hate Canon products and hate the concept that pros actually use Canon.
The post, if you read it completely merely states that Canon equipment was exclusively used in these films by a diverse group of international professionals in spite of DXO condemning Canon sensors as being crap and pixel peepers doing the same.
Thus they must know something the pixel peepers are clueless about as well as that DXO is pure fantasy by losers who also skew tests to favor their chosen brand over Canon.
Never once did the ORIGINAL post ever say any where Canon was better than any other brand. Just thin skinned and insecure users of other equipment read this fantasy into the post.

RRS Loc: Not sure

Architect1776 wrote:

This post never said any brand was better than any... (show quote)

Say, I think Rich covered the bases pretty well on his last post, as to DXO, I think we all know how they work. Today there are so many great chooses out there, whatever works.