Reading mode: Light Dark

Amazing how big it is

Go to last post
BamaPanda

BamaPanda

Senior Member
Messages
2,271
Reaction score
81
Location
alabama, US, US
..the Canon 5D
http://www.canon.de/eos5d/

Just happened upon this. It may be considered to be the best by many - but the size reminds me of some of the film cameras made by Pentax that were medium format.

Love the size of the Olys.
 
and a photographer was setting up to take pictures of the entrance. He had a Canon (EOS1ds?) with a zoom lens and the darn thing looked as big as a speed graphic or something. I couldn't believe how big and heavy the thing looked. More like a medium format camera? Heck, the gear this guy had looked more like an 8x10 view camera.
 
they look down at me, shooting with an Oly for a weekly paper, they are working for the daily papers. No way would I want to haul those clunkers. The last event I covered, the gal set up two slaves as well. Now that was fun, watching them fire with every audience member's flas as well as my own. Sheesh. Talk about overkill.
--
Theresa Kelly
http://theresak.smugmug.com/
Oly E-3OO + some other stuff

Constructive criticism always welcome!

 
I think the picture you are looking at has quite a bit of perspective effect adding to the "size".

This picture shows that it is really not much bigger than a 20D and I do not believe that camera to be very big.



In fact a quick side by side shows this:
Oly E-1
Weight 735g
Dimensions 141x104x81 mm

Canon 20D
Weight 770g
Dimensions 144x106x72 mm

Canon 5D
Weight 895g
Dimensions 152x113x75 mm

And I bet a lot of that weight is from the increased size of the pentaprism to provide the large viewfinder that goes along with the large sensor.
--
Tarek
http://focusonlife.net
 
Bigger than the E-1, but not a lot. The 5D is a very nice camera from what I've seen so far -- but I'll stick with my E-1. Now the 1Ds MKll is pretty good size and it takes a gorilla to hold one for any length of time -- but once again, it's a fine camera.

God Bless,
Greg
http://www.imagismphotos.com
http://www.pbase.com/daddyo
 
Doesn't seem that big to me either.

My Fuji S1 is pretty big, and it doesn't feel that big in my hand.
--
Travis - E-300
 
like the 5D, 200d and the pro series 1 and D2 never attracted me due to their sheer sizes; add a lens and the weight starts to inflate, and oh, forgot about the dust which brought me to Oly in the 1st place ...they 're nice cams in their own right but they're no longer for me, no thanks.... this past weekend I carried the E1 + 4 lenses + tripod to Yosemite and I thought that was heavy until I saw those C and N gear on others' neck and I said to myself Thanks Oly for their diminutive size and all; I also swapped lens at least a dozen times w/o incurring a single speck of dust...Again Thanks Oly and the E1!
Cheers,
 
Nah, actually fits my hand quite well, but real big in detail resolution.

From this downsized pic below, notice the small rope hanging from the right side. The second picture below is a 100% crop. You can see the turns in the rope. H-eck, you can even see a small thread coming from the bottom! Now that's resolution.



 
It is about the same size as a 10D, which is slightly larger than a 20D and a helluva lot smaller than a 1 series.

--
'There is no conversation more boring than the one where everybody agrees.'
 
You know, I was reading this and thinking that in five years we'll be saying stuff like, "You see that tree? Now do you see that rope dangling from the tree? Now do you see that row of ants climbing on that rope on the tree? Now do you see those hairs on the legs of the ants that are climbing on the rope on that tree???"

I don't think we're that far off really!
 
OzRay said:
I've held one and it's not really all that big.
Cheers
Ray
http://www.australianimage.com.auI
Click to expand...
First, I concur that it is a fine camera - but it sure looks big in that picture. may be a smaller guy holding it.

If that is the case - then Canon marketing would seem to (IMHO) want us to think LARGE - as in BIGGER is better.
 
In fact I was arguing with the owner whether it is as large as the battleship Nikons and Canons of the mid 70s.

Having shot with them at the time, I say yes. She says no. Any data obsessives want to settle it without me having to google?

As I've said here often before, size is the 4/3rds stength. If compactness doesn't matter to you, you are possibly using the wrong system.

This may change in a few years when even 4/3rds size out resolves the lens more or less silently.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://www.pbase.com/acam/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top