[Q]: Pentax lenses on the Canon 5D?

Jonas B · Oct 27, 2006

Stig Vidar Hovland said:
-snip-
I am sure you have read a lot of this.
The conclusion seems to be that 5d demands quite a lot of the
lenses. You have to use the very best Canon L lenses to get top
results and this can be expensive.

Hi Stig,

Yes, I have done my homework. Changin' from Pentax and a complete setup of good lenses takes a lot. Remember I'm just playing with ideas for the moment. Sometimes it ends there, sometimes things has to be tried. I haven't came to a final decision. This thread is in a way showing the complexity when making a decision like this. For the moment I have decided to put the K10D on hold. That's all.

Stig Vidar Hovland said:
The most important advantage
with aps-c is that only the better part of the lenses is used.

That's true up to a point. Now that Pentax releases APS-C lenses only that advantage diminishes. Instead the drawbacks are accentuated as the pixel density and noise both are increased while the resolution still is marginally lower than the resolution of the 5D, or it's expected successor (which may the camera that finally make me make the jump). But you are allready aware of all this.

Stig Vidar Hovland said:
With
5d you have to start worry about corner softness again, I suppose

Nah. Only in the case of architecture related pictures. I would like to have a good lens for that. Luckily it doesn't need to be a fast and sophisticated lens.

There was some fuzz about corner softness when the 5D came. Since then there has been, as you say, some sort of consensus that you need the biggest, heaviest and most exclusive lenses to make it all work. This is true in a sense, but also exaggerated. Somebody mounted a 17-40/4L, turned the zoom ring to 17mm and yelled about soft corners. Lol. Come on... what is the 17-40 in our APS world? A rectilinear 10-27mm lens? How can you expect crystal clear corners from it? And when do you need it? We have recently touched the somewhat smeared extreme corners produced by the DA14. Noone made a big deal about it.

Stig Vidar Hovland said:
But I have to agree that 5d is a very nice camera, but I suspect
you are going to wait for K10D before you decide anything?

Not really. What format to choose isn't depending on a single camera model. The 5D is the first camera that makes it possible for an ordinary amateur to even think about going FF. And the K10D is the logical next step for anyone sticking to APS-C. That is specially true for us allready having Pentax lenses, but also for several other dSLR buffs tempted by the specifications.

I once choosed Pentax because of size and lenses. To me Pentax still has the most appealing line of lenses. But there are a lot of very good Canon lenses also and another advantage is that you actually can choose between more third party stuff. When it comes to size and weight I don't see any vital difference between the 5D and the K10D. Add the battery change (and for some users, the flash support) and other things and suddenly it is an open question.

Ah well, just pieces and bits from my mind. I can take the "soft" corners along with the noise free pictures and the bigger and brighter viewfinder. Or that's how I figure today. I have to think for some more time. And save up some more money first, as well...

bästa hälsningar,

Jonas

Stig Vidar Hovland · Oct 27, 2006

Jonas B said:
This is about
desire and old dreams.

I tried hard to understand why you wanted to switch from Pentax to Canon and I finally found the reason

As I see it, I need a camera which could match my printer. The high iso capability of 5d is nice to have, but the cost is to high. Resolution wise it is no point buying it compared to other cameras if A3 printing is what you do most of the time.

What is so desirable about a larger sensor?

Dazaau · Oct 27, 2006

Jinwoo Lee said:
Actual focus - bright view finder of 5D helps but unlike Pentax,
Canon does not give you the focus confirmation light.

Other than that it works fine

My Canons have focus confirmation when used in MF, surely the 5D is no different, you just have to have the shutter pressed half way

Jonas B · Oct 27, 2006

Stig Vidar Hovland said:
Jonas B said:

This is about
desire and old dreams.

Click to expand...

I tried hard to understand why you wanted to switch from Pentax to
Canon and I finally found the reason As I see it, I need a
camera which could match my printer. The high iso capability of 5d
is nice to have, but the cost is to high. Resolution wise it is no
point buying it compared to other cameras if A3 printing is what
you do most of the time.

What is so desirable about a larger sensor?

Tjena Stig,

You found it... well, I would have guessed you should be able to find the answer in my reply to your last post. But it often is that way for me; I try to write something and when finally finished I forgot the most importnat things.

I want to be able to crop and still print big and with low noise. I want a bigger and more bright viewfinder. I was, for a long time actually, hoping that Pentax should go FF. Now, after having seen the latest lens roadmap, I understand that will take a long time. While waiting I'm not that interested in buying lenses for the APS-C sensor.

All the pros and cons for and against FF and APS-C are well known. I can see good things with FF, I would benefit from it and as I don't use long tele lenses I don't have to worry about those heavy things. Each and every one of us make our choices. Right now I am sitting on the fence, keeping my investments in Pentax on hold while waiting for, maybe, a 6D.
What's so desireable with a small sensor?

hälsningar,

Jonas

Godfrey · Oct 27, 2006

Douglas Film said:
I have also been considering a 5D to use with my M42 lenses. I
like the nice bright viewfinder and having a full frame sensor.

So you're going to have a nice big, bright viewfinder to be filled with lenses that can only be used stopped-down? Seems kinda contrary to me.

G

Jinwoo Lee · Oct 27, 2006

The confirmation only works when EOS lens are used in Manual mode.

In order for the non EOS lens to be used with focus confirmation you have to install small circuit board on the adapter.

or you can buy this adapter

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/m42_eos_focusing_adapter.html

Dazaau said:
Dazaau said:

Actual focus - bright view finder of 5D helps but unlike Pentax,
Canon does not give you the focus confirmation light.

Other than that it works fine

Click to expand...

My Canons have focus confirmation when used in MF, surely the 5D is
no different, you just have to have the shutter pressed half way

--
http://www.pbase.com/jinwoo

xand · Oct 27, 2006

Jonas B said:
Jonas B said:

The most important advantage
with aps-c is that only the better part of the lenses is used.

Click to expand...

That's true up to a point. Now that Pentax releases APS-C lenses
only that advantage diminishes. Instead the drawbacks are
accentuated as the pixel density and noise both are increased while
the resolution still is marginally lower than the resolution of the
5D, or it's expected successor (which may the camera that finally
make me make the jump). But you are allready aware of all this.

While I think you're generally correct, I would be hesitant to say that the advantage diminishes. The fact that the lenses are advertised as APS-C only simply means that they cannot be used full frame - it does not mean that the "advantage" has been forsaken.

Indeed, I suspect that this would be even better - from what I understand, sometimes (for film) there were slight compromises made to the areas between the center and the edges so that the edges were sharper. In certain instances this might result in lessened quality when used with APS-C (as all the edge tech is pointless while the compromised portions are still used.)

When designing for APS-C, you just need to make sure that your center area is large enough, and that it's all sharp

Jonas B · Oct 27, 2006

xand said:
Jonas B said:

xand said:

The most important advantage
with aps-c is that only the better part of the lenses is used.

Click to expand...

That's true up to a point. Now that Pentax releases APS-C lenses
only that advantage diminishes. Instead the drawbacks are
accentuated as the pixel density and noise both are increased while
the resolution still is marginally lower than the resolution of the
5D, or it's expected successor (which may the camera that finally
make me make the jump). But you are allready aware of all this.

Click to expand...

While I think you're generally correct, I would be hesitant to say
that the advantage diminishes. The fact that the lenses are
advertised as APS-C only simply means that they cannot be used full
frame - it does not mean that the "advantage" has been forsaken.

Indeed, I suspect that this would be even better - from what I
understand, sometimes (for film) there were slight compromises made
to the areas between the center and the edges so that the edges
were sharper. In certain instances this might result in lessened
quality when used with APS-C (as all the edge tech is pointless
while the compromised portions are still used.)

When designing for APS-C, you just need to make sure that your
center area is large enough, and that it's all sharp

Hmm... Stig claimed that the greatest advantage with APS-C is that the "better part" of the (FF) lenses are used. Now we get a theory, or suspicion, that this isn't true, thus there is no advantage that diminishes.

Well, in resolution tests it clearly shows that the resolution is better in the center than at the edges. I think we can agree about that.

If I get you right you mean that the center part with the new DA lenses is more "uncompromised" than the corresponding part of the old FF lenses? Do you have any source for this or is it just you self suspecting this?

I have tried one DA lens only and I'm not sure it is representative as it is the DA18-55 kit lens. From what I can see it is sharper at the center than at the edges. I understand the DA40 is pretty much sharp all over the sensor but then it is also made to cover way more than the sensor. In fact it even covers a FF sensor. The DA14 looses resolotion in the corners but that is an extreme wide angle lens and can't be counted for really. The DA70... could it prove your theory? No. From what I see of brick wall tests it is sharper at the center than at the corners. And that's pictures taken with a 6MP sensor.

Well, theories, suspicions and premature conclusions aside, we know time will tell. Let's see how the coming DA primes (35 and 55mm) will perform. That will will be intersting. Let's also hope they are weather sealed and * (as in DA*) lenses!

And, as allready mentioned, resolution isn't all that counts for.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=20624065

regards,

Jonas

Godfrey · Oct 27, 2006

Jonas B said:
What's so desireable with a small sensor?

Smaller, lighter, faster lenses for a given field of view with more DoF, netting shorter exposure times for sharper results and easier carrying about. Less likelihood of moire and image darkening at corners with current lenses designed for 35mm.

Certainly there's a place for the larger sensor cameras too, just like there was always a place for medium format film cameras vs 35mm film cameras. If you're willing to carry the additional weight and size of a larger format camera, well, that's your choice.

The EOS 5D is about the same size as my old 10D, which is about 20% larger than the K10D and about 30% larger than an *ist DS. Canon lenses are almost all significantly larger and heavier than the Pentax lenses I am currently using, focal length for focal length. They end up being about as much bulk and weight to carry in the field as my Hasselblad 500C/M kit was ... fine if I want a medium format camera work, a little much for the work I usually prefer to do.

Again, it's a choice. I don't believe that Pentax will produce a 24x36mm DSLR in the next few years and possible never will. They are doing a larger format sensor for the 645D line, which I think is a more sensible way to go larger format in digital rather than stuffing a digital sensor into a body and mount that is poorly suited to it.

Godfrey

Douglas Film · Oct 27, 2006

It would be nice to have the bright viewfinder to focus with while the camera is on the tripod. Then I could stop the lens down for the exsposure. Just like I do on the Ds.
Douglas Film

Jinwoo Lee · Oct 27, 2006

Godfrey said:
Jonas B said:

What's so desireable with a small sensor?

Click to expand...

Smaller, lighter, faster lenses for a given field of view with more
DoF, netting shorter exposure times for sharper results and easier
carrying about. Less likelihood of moire and image darkening at
corners with current lenses designed for 35mm.

Certainly there's a place for the larger sensor cameras too, just
like there was always a place for medium format film cameras vs
35mm film cameras. If you're willing to carry the additional weight
and size of a larger format camera, well, that's your choice.

The EOS 5D is about the same size as my old 10D, which is about 20%
larger than the K10D and about 30% larger than an *ist DS. Canon
lenses are almost all significantly larger and heavier than the
Pentax lenses I am currently using, focal length for focal length.
They end up being about as much bulk and weight to carry in the
field as my Hasselblad 500C/M kit was ... fine if I want a medium
format camera work, a little much for the work I usually prefer to
do.

Certainly, the 5D size and weight can be disadvantage if you are a pure hobbist. I found that it can be beneficial in my case. About the time I've got my 5D, I started to sell my pictures (mostly portraits). Once I've got 5D (maily to meet demend for big prints 20X30) with battery grip I've noticed following.

Clients stop saying - I saw your camera in Costco, That is a nice little camera, I had a Pentax when I was in high school.

Clients start saying - Wow, that is hugh, it must very expensive. You must selling lot of pictures. Can you do weddings?.

I ended up selling enough prints to pay for 5D and bought 30D as back up (but plan to switch to another 5D as true back up) and started to do weddings now and then. (I am still keeping my day time job)

I do not think my picture taking skill have improved since I got my 5D but I surely got some good advertisement out of its size. I am still puzzled that people actually paying for my work but it is nice that it pays for my equiments

Comming around a full circle, my 5D became work camera so I am looking into a nice small camera for personal use. Perhaps K10D with Pancake?

Godfrey said:
Again, it's a choice. I don't believe that Pentax will produce a
24x36mm DSLR in the next few years and possible never will. They
are doing a larger format sensor for the 645D line, which I think
is a more sensible way to go larger format in digital rather than
stuffing a digital sensor into a body and mount that is poorly
suited to it.

Godfrey

--
http://www.pbase.com/jinwoo

mpixel · Oct 27, 2006

Jonas,

If you are thinking of getting a 5D instead of a K10D please don't destroy your Pentax lenses simply to turn them into MF lenses on a 5D that you will probably only use rarely. It is better to sell them than to butcher them.

The Canon lenses to look at would be the 50mm f/1.4 the 100mm f/2, the 50mm f/1.2L and the 135mm f/2L. You could also look at the 100mm f/2.8 macro.

If you shoot A LOT with the 31mm Limited it may be worth getting the 50mm f/1.2L however remember that the 50mm f/1.4 is a very good lens and it is faster than the Pentax lens and so it will have the advantage of being stopped down a little more to achieve a similar aperture as the 31.

The 135 f/2L is outstanding.

Wide? How wide do you want to go?

If you like to shoot at 21mm or 22mm on APS-C you should consider the 35mm f/1.4L or the 35mm f/2. The 35mm f/2 is a good lens however it doesn't have USM (but of course it has in lens motors). Because of the lack of USM the sound it makes while focussing may come as a shock to a Canon user but to a Pentax user is should sound pretty normal.

Jonas B said:
Lately I have been playing woth the thought of buying a Canon 5D
instead of going the K10D route. I figured that if the camera will
get bigger and heavier, then why not add a few grams and get a
sensor more than double the size compared to our APS-C sensors?
It's an expensive luxuary and I'm not done thinking about it. If I
stretch economics I might afford the 5D and the coming EF50/1.2L
lens. That would keep me busy for quite some time.

Then I'll also need something wider and something longer. Will my
Pentax lenses fit? I'm mainly thinking of the FA31 and the FA77. It
seems as there would be no problems with the smaller sensor, like
in the 20-30D and 300-400D. For the 5D I have read that one may
have to remove the aperture lever. Is there anyone here with any
experience or knowledge? I know we have a few "dual system" people
here (but I know it would be more natural to ask in the Canon lens
forum) and maybe somebody knows something about this?

thank you,

Jonas

--
GMT+1 (summertime)

Jinwoo Lee · Oct 27, 2006

mpixel said:
Jonas,

If you are thinking of getting a 5D instead of a K10D please don't
destroy your Pentax lenses simply to turn them into MF lenses on a
5D that you will probably only use rarely. It is better to sell
them than to butcher them.

The Canon lenses to look at would be the 50mm f/1.4 the 100mm f/2,
the 50mm f/1.2L and the 135mm f/2L. You could also look at the
100mm f/2.8 macro.

Also, EF85 f1.8 USM is worth of mentioning

mpixel said:
If you shoot A LOT with the 31mm Limited it may be worth getting
the 50mm f/1.2L however remember that the 50mm f/1.4 is a very good
lens and it is faster than the Pentax lens and so it will have the
advantage of being stopped down a little more to achieve a similar
aperture as the 31.

The 135 f/2L is outstanding.

Wide? How wide do you want to go?

If you like to shoot at 21mm or 22mm on APS-C you should consider
the 35mm f/1.4L or the 35mm f/2. The 35mm f/2 is a good lens
however it doesn't have USM (but of course it has in lens motors).
Because of the lack of USM the sound it makes while focussing may
come as a shock to a Canon user but to a Pentax user is should
sound pretty normal.

If you need USM you can go with EF28 f/1.8 USM

mpixel said:
Jonas B said:

Lately I have been playing woth the thought of buying a Canon 5D
instead of going the K10D route. I figured that if the camera will
get bigger and heavier, then why not add a few grams and get a
sensor more than double the size compared to our APS-C sensors?
It's an expensive luxuary and I'm not done thinking about it. If I
stretch economics I might afford the 5D and the coming EF50/1.2L
lens. That would keep me busy for quite some time.

Then I'll also need something wider and something longer. Will my
Pentax lenses fit? I'm mainly thinking of the FA31 and the FA77. It
seems as there would be no problems with the smaller sensor, like
in the 20-30D and 300-400D. For the 5D I have read that one may
have to remove the aperture lever. Is there anyone here with any
experience or knowledge? I know we have a few "dual system" people
here (but I know it would be more natural to ask in the Canon lens
forum) and maybe somebody knows something about this?

thank you,

Jonas

Click to expand...

--
GMT+1 (summertime)

--
http://www.pbase.com/jinwoo

Jonas B · Oct 27, 2006

Godfrey said:
I said:

What's so desireable with a small sensor?

Click to expand...

Smaller, lighter, faster lenses for a given field of view with more
DoF, netting shorter exposure times for sharper results and easier
carrying about. Less likelihood of moire and image darkening at
corners with current lenses designed for 35mm.

Hi Godfrey,

More DOF may or may not be desired, shorter exposure times are possible with fast lenses and noisefree high ISO values so I won't comment that, moire and dark corners are probably a major for pixelpeepers and nothing I care much about (it's all about wide angles and I don't see lot of moire in 5D pictures).

It feels a little weird trying to advocasing the 5D. I once choosed Pentax mainly for size and the lens series (which later showed up to be hard to buy, but that's another story). I can try though. You mention size and weight. For the panckes there is no contest - Canon don't have any and haven't showed any sign of making any either. For other lenses there is no significant difference. The FA50/1.4 and the EF50/1.4 for example are pretty much the same size with no significant difference.

You have the DA14, let's compare this lens made for the APS-C sensor with the Canon counterpart:

DA14/2.8, filter 77mm, weight 420 gram, length/diameter: 69/84mm
EF20/2.8, filter 72mm, weight 403 gram, length/diameter: 71/79mm

As we can see there is no advantage for the DA lens in the extreme wide angle area.

Godfrey said:
Certainly there's a place for the larger sensor cameras too, just
like there was always a place for medium format film cameras vs
35mm film cameras. If you're willing to carry the additional weight
and size of a larger format camera, well, that's your choice.

The EOS 5D is about the same size as my old 10D, which is about 20%
larger than the K10D and about 30% larger than an *ist DS. Canon
lenses are almost all significantly larger and heavier than the
Pentax lenses I am currently using, focal length for focal length.

One of the lenses is allready mentioned above. For the cameras I find this:

K10D: width: 141mm thickness: 70mm height: 101mm weight: 790 grams
5D: width: 152mm thickness: 75mm height: 113mm weight: 895 grams

It doesn't look like 20% larger to me. A total of 100 gram extra to carry which in turn gives the loaded owner a sensor double the size and a bigger and brighter viewfinder and also less noise. This also can be phrased as: To save 100 grams you are ready to sacrifice image quality (resolution, noise) and ergonomics (viewfinder). We all make choices, every day.

Godfrey said:
They end up being about as much bulk and weight to carry in the
field as my Hasselblad 500C/M kit was ... fine if I want a medium
format camera work, a little much for the work I usually prefer to
do.

This is a little exaggerated, isn't it? If I choose to go the Canon route my lens kit will be a 28/1.8 (you sold your one the other day?!), a 50mm and probably the EF100/2. The FOV by these lenses roughly answers to a FA20/2.0, a FA31/1.8 and maybe the FA77. Again, I don't find the differences too much. If we switch the FA20 and the FA77 to the slower pancakes there is a significant difference. But then again, changin fast lenses to slow ones has always saved bulk and weight.

Godfrey said:
Again, it's a choice. I don't believe that Pentax will produce a
24x36mm DSLR in the next few years and possible never will. They
are doing a larger format sensor for the 645D line, which I think
is a more sensible way to go larger format in digital rather than
stuffing a digital sensor into a body and mount that is poorly
suited to it.

In the end it is clear that the Canon bag will be heavier and larger. But not by much and certainly not 20%. Size is the reason I came up with the idea in the first place. Canon released the 5D a year ago: a small FF camera that it is possible to buy (or save up to) also for an amateur. Now Pentax releases the successor to the D/DS and it is significantly bigger and heavier than the DS (once the smallest dSLR ever). The K10D will be noisier than the DS but still without reaching the FF resolution (very close though). To me it is like seeing the two formats getting closer to eachother and now is the right time to decide what route to go. I'm on the fence and I think I'll sit here and watch what happens for a while.

I have earlier suggested a plain square 24x24 format at about 8 or 10MP. It isn't hard to understand noone made such a sensor but that I would really have liked. Now the big players have settled for APS-C and FF (mainly). So for the years to come these are the formats to choose from. Maybe Canon makes a camera with SR technology and a 1.2 crop sensor to go with it. Who knows.

All this just to explain the way I think,

Jonas

xand · Oct 27, 2006

Jonas B said:
Hmm... Stig claimed that the greatest advantage with APS-C is that
the "better part" of the (FF) lenses are used. Now we get a theory,
or suspicion, that this isn't true, thus there is no advantage that
diminishes.

I suggest that stig's claim is still accurate, and compatible with my claim.

I'm just saying that the mere fact that a lens is made for "aps-c" and cannot be used for full frame does not mean that the stig's claimed advantage diminishes.

Jonas B said:
Well, in resolution tests it clearly shows that the resolution is
better in the center than at the edges. I think we can agree about
that.

sure.

Jonas B said:
If I get you right you mean that the center part with the new DA
lenses is more "uncompromised" than the corresponding part of the
old FF lenses? Do you have any source for this or is it just you
self suspecting this?

Look at MTF charts. The best lenses, of course, are flat. Those lenses which are not so good, drop off as the line moves to the right - but notice - there are quite a few charts where the line dips, then comes up again. This is an example of the compromise i'm talking about.

See , for example, the canon 50 1.4:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-mtf.shtml

What this means (I think - and I might have read it somewhere but I don't remember) is that the lens designer compromised the "middle" of the lens a little, in exchange for edge sharpness.

Because that sort of edge sharpness is no longer necessary, they don't have to make that compromise any linger, and and so even aps-c lenses will retain the sharpness/contrast of the "center" of FF lenses.

Jonas B said:
the center than at the edges. I understand the DA40 is pretty much
sharp all over the sensor but then it is also made to cover way
more than the sensor. In fact it even covers a FF sensor.

That's exactly it.

Jonas B said:
Well, theories, suspicions and premature conclusions aside, we know
time will tell. Let's see how the coming DA primes (35 and 55mm)
will perform. That will will be intersting. Let's also hope they
are weather sealed and * (as in DA*) lenses!

yup!

Godfrey · Oct 27, 2006

Jinwoo Lee said:
Certainly, the 5D size and weight can be disadvantage if you are a
pure hobbist. I found that it can be beneficial in my case. About
the time I've got my 5D, I started to sell my pictures (mostly
portraits). Once I've got 5D (maily to meet demend for big prints
20X30) with battery grip I've noticed following.

LOL ... I'm selling work made with the *ist DS on a regular basis.

Jinwoo Lee said:
Clients stop saying - I saw your camera in Costco, That is a nice
little camera, I had a Pentax when I was in high school.

My clients only rarely see what camera I'm using. They don't care.

Jinwoo Lee said:
Clients start saying - Wow, that is hugh, it must very expensive.
You must selling lot of pictures. Can you do weddings?.

See above.

(IMO, only foolish clients equate the look of the camera with the quality of the photographs. I try not to deal with such people.)

Jinwoo Lee said:
I ended up selling enough prints to pay for 5D and bought 30D as
back up (but plan to switch to another 5D as true back up) and
started to do weddings now and then. (I am still keeping my day
time job)

I don't shoot weddings ... And this is my day job. ;-)

Jinwoo Lee said:
I do not think my picture taking skill have improved since I got my
5D but I surely got some good advertisement out of its size. I am
still puzzled that people actually paying for my work but it is
nice that it pays for my equiments

Comming around a full circle, my 5D became work camera so I am
looking into a nice small camera for personal use. Perhaps K10D
with Pancake?

I'm adding a K10D to my kit for its higher resolution and other advantageous features. It's bigger than the DS but still smaller than a 5D .. about on par with a 30D. So why would you buy a K10D if you're looking for a smaller camera?

I use a Fuji F30 when I want a small camera now. ;-)

Godfrey

Godfrey · Oct 27, 2006

Jonas B said:
More DOF may or may not be desired,

I find I need more DoF more often than less DoF. Of course, there are always those situations where the option of less DoF is useful... That's what fast lenses are all about.

Jonas B said:
.. shorter exposure times are
possible with fast lenses and noisefree high ISO values

My lenses are 14/2.8, 21/3.2, 35/2, 50/1.4, 77/1.8, 135/2.8 aside from the one zoom I use which is f/4. Canon lenses will not be much faster, no more than one stop. ISO 1600 is fast enough for me.

Jonas B said:
... moire and dark corners are probably a major for
pixelpeepers and nothing I care much about ...

You haven't used one yet, far as I know. I know several owners complaining that the imaging quality with their ferociously expensive 14mm, 16-35mm L, and 17-40mm L is not up expectations. I've seen a number of lens tests and pixel peeping from you ... ??

Jonas B said:
... You mention size and weight. ..

The two 50s are close, yes, but to get similar field of view and speed you get with a FA50/1.4 on the DS you need a Canon EF85/1.2L on the 5D, which is a mammoth beast and costs $2000.

Overall, Canon's lenses are good but shy of exceptional primes at short focal lengths. Their forte is primarily long lenses where they have state of the art glass. I say this from several years experience using Canon lenses.

Jonas B said:
You have the DA14, let's compare this lens made for the APS-C
sensor with the Canon counterpart:

The DA14/2.8 and EF20/2.8 are about the same in physical size and weight (I've had them both). The DA14 is a better performing lens, however, and by a good margin in my experience.

Jonas B said:
For the cameras I find this:

K10D: width: 141mm thickness: 70mm height: 101mm weight: 790 grams
5D: width: 152mm thickness: 75mm height: 113mm weight: 895 grams

You can quote specifications all you want, but put them in your hands at the same time and you'll understand what I mean. This picture is illustrative of the body size differences (10D and DS bodies, pardon the crude quality ...). The K10D and 5D are closer in size but the 5D is still the larger.
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/DSv10D-size.jpg

Jonas B said:
... We all make choices, every day.

Yes we do. If you want to carry the extra weight for what you perceive as advantages, go ahead! I never said not to. I did say that butchering a couple of perfectly good Pentax lenses is probably not a useful thing to do.

Jonas B said:
Jonas B said:

[parity of carrying hasselblad and canon]

Click to expand...

This is a little exaggerated, isn't it? ...

No, it isn't. I carried both systems quite a lot for several years and know excruciatingly well what they weigh and how much space they take up.

Jonas B said:
... If I choose to go the
Canon route my lens kit will be a 28/1.8 (you sold your one the
other day?!), a 50mm and probably the EF100/2. The FOV by these
lenses roughly answers to a FA20/2.0, a FA31/1.8 and maybe the
FA77.

Yes, I sold the Canon 28 and 50 to my friend in London. Just shipped them a couple days ago.

The 28 vs 21mm are about right on FoV (a little narrower for the 21), the 50/1.4 equivalent is an FA35/2, and the 100/2 is close to equivalent for the DA70, not 77 (that would be about about an equivalent to 115mm FoV). But even if what you conjecture were correct, the three lenses you've mentioned take about half again as much room in a shoulder bag.

The Canon 28/1.8 is very good corner to corner on the smaller sensors but is a bit soft at the corners on 35mm film, particularly wide open ... will also be on the 5D. The FA20 is sharper wide open, even on film.

Jonas B said:
I have earlier suggested a plain square 24x24 format at about 8 or
10MP. It isn't hard to understand noone made such a sensor but that
I would really have liked.

Me too, although I think a 28x21mm sensor ultimately provides more useful area on average, since the majority of prints do tend to be rectangular. 2:3 proportion format is wasteful for many purposes; 3:4 proportion format has less average waste when considering crops to both 2:3 and 1:1, and of course the long-held standards of 8x10 and 11x14 prints are very close to the 3:4 proportion.

If you want a 5D, go forth and buy one ... I would be very curious if it really poses as much advantage to you as you think it does were you to use it as well as a K10D side by side for a year or so.

Godfrey

Jinwoo Lee · Oct 27, 2006

Godfrey said:
Jinwoo Lee said:

Certainly, the 5D size and weight can be disadvantage if you are a
pure hobbist. I found that it can be beneficial in my case. About
the time I've got my 5D, I started to sell my pictures (mostly
portraits). Once I've got 5D (maily to meet demend for big prints
20X30) with battery grip I've noticed following.

Click to expand...

LOL ... I'm selling work made with the *ist DS on a regular basis.

Godfrey said:

Clients stop saying - I saw your camera in Costco, That is a nice
little camera, I had a Pentax when I was in high school.

Click to expand...

My clients only rarely see what camera I'm using. They don't care.

Godfrey said:

Clients start saying - Wow, that is hugh, it must very expensive.
You must selling lot of pictures. Can you do weddings?.

Click to expand...

See above.

(IMO, only foolish clients equate the look of the camera with the
quality of the photographs. I try not to deal with such people.)

Godfrey said:

I ended up selling enough prints to pay for 5D and bought 30D as
back up (but plan to switch to another 5D as true back up) and
started to do weddings now and then. (I am still keeping my day
time job)

Click to expand...

I don't shoot weddings ... And this is my day job. ;-)

Godfrey said:

I do not think my picture taking skill have improved since I got my
5D but I surely got some good advertisement out of its size. I am
still puzzled that people actually paying for my work but it is
nice that it pays for my equiments

Comming around a full circle, my 5D became work camera so I am
looking into a nice small camera for personal use. Perhaps K10D
with Pancake?

Click to expand...

I'm adding a K10D to my kit for its higher resolution and other
advantageous features. It's bigger than the DS but still smaller
than a 5D .. about on par with a 30D. So why would you buy a K10D
if you're looking for a smaller camera?

It is just a thought -- ability to use Pancakes and those beautiful limited lenses -- Canon G7 is also on the list.

You'll love the higher resolution.

Godfrey said:
I use a Fuji F30 when I want a small camera now. ;-)

Godfrey

--
http://www.pbase.com/jinwoo

kristian2000 · Oct 27, 2006

Mind picking up a couple gallons of milk also?

http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11178312&search=canon%205d&Sp=S&Mo=2&cm_re=1-_-Top_Left_Nav-_-Top_search&Nr=P_CatalogName:BC&Ns=P_Price~1~~P_SignDesc1&N=0&whse=BC&Dx=mode+matchallpartial&Ntk=All&Dr=P_CatalogName:BC&Ne=4000000&D=canon%205d&Ntt=canon%205d&No=1&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&Nty=1&topnav=&s=1

Jinwoo Lee said:
Clients stop saying - I saw your camera in Costco, That is a nice
little camera, I had a Pentax when I was in high school.

Y

--

Kristian Farren
http://kf3.net

*isteve · Oct 27, 2006

And no, I still havnt decided finally. My lineup would be

17-40 F4 L
24-105 F4 L IS
70-200 F4 L IS
50 F1.4
135 F2 L

If I sell my Pentax gear, the cost would be about the same as buying the K10D and 2 of the new USM lenses, plus 2 540FGZs (or Metz equivalents).

One MAJOR problem however is that I would have no backup at all. I dont want to buy 2 5Ds (ouch) and the 30D has the crop factor and is due for imminent replacement. On the other hand, the backup and reassurance of being able to rent or replace equipment at short notice is comforting.

I would not blame you either way.

Jonas B said:
Godfrey said:

I said:

What's so desireable with a small sensor?

Click to expand...

Smaller, lighter, faster lenses for a given field of view with more
DoF, netting shorter exposure times for sharper results and easier
carrying about. Less likelihood of moire and image darkening at
corners with current lenses designed for 35mm.

Click to expand...

Hi Godfrey,
More DOF may or may not be desired, shorter exposure times are
possible with fast lenses and noisefree high ISO values so I won't
comment that, moire and dark corners are probably a major for
pixelpeepers and nothing I care much about (it's all about wide
angles and I don't see lot of moire in 5D pictures).

It feels a little weird trying to advocasing the 5D. I once choosed
Pentax mainly for size and the lens series (which later showed up
to be hard to buy, but that's another story). I can try though. You
mention size and weight. For the panckes there is no contest -
Canon don't have any and haven't showed any sign of making any
either. For other lenses there is no significant difference. The
FA50/1.4 and the EF50/1.4 for example are pretty much the same size
with no significant difference.
You have the DA14, let's compare this lens made for the APS-C
sensor with the Canon counterpart:

DA14/2.8, filter 77mm, weight 420 gram, length/diameter: 69/84mm
EF20/2.8, filter 72mm, weight 403 gram, length/diameter: 71/79mm

As we can see there is no advantage for the DA lens in the extreme
wide angle area.

Jonas B said:

Certainly there's a place for the larger sensor cameras too, just
like there was always a place for medium format film cameras vs
35mm film cameras. If you're willing to carry the additional weight
and size of a larger format camera, well, that's your choice.

The EOS 5D is about the same size as my old 10D, which is about 20%
larger than the K10D and about 30% larger than an *ist DS. Canon
lenses are almost all significantly larger and heavier than the
Pentax lenses I am currently using, focal length for focal length.

Click to expand...

One of the lenses is allready mentioned above. For the cameras I
find this:

K10D: width: 141mm thickness: 70mm height: 101mm weight: 790 grams
5D: width: 152mm thickness: 75mm height: 113mm weight: 895 grams

It doesn't look like 20% larger to me. A total of 100 gram extra to
carry which in turn gives the loaded owner a sensor double the size
and a bigger and brighter viewfinder and also less noise. This also
can be phrased as: To save 100 grams you are ready to sacrifice
image quality (resolution, noise) and ergonomics (viewfinder). We
all make choices, every day.

Jonas B said:

They end up being about as much bulk and weight to carry in the
field as my Hasselblad 500C/M kit was ... fine if I want a medium
format camera work, a little much for the work I usually prefer to
do.

Click to expand...

This is a little exaggerated, isn't it? If I choose to go the
Canon route my lens kit will be a 28/1.8 (you sold your one the
other day?!), a 50mm and probably the EF100/2. The FOV by these
lenses roughly answers to a FA20/2.0, a FA31/1.8 and maybe the
FA77. Again, I don't find the differences too much. If we switch
the FA20 and the FA77 to the slower pancakes there is a significant
difference. But then again, changin fast lenses to slow ones has
always saved bulk and weight.

Jonas B said:

Again, it's a choice. I don't believe that Pentax will produce a
24x36mm DSLR in the next few years and possible never will. They
are doing a larger format sensor for the 645D line, which I think
is a more sensible way to go larger format in digital rather than
stuffing a digital sensor into a body and mount that is poorly
suited to it.

Click to expand...

In the end it is clear that the Canon bag will be heavier and
larger. But not by much and certainly not 20%. Size is the reason I
came up with the idea in the first place. Canon released the 5D a
year ago: a small FF camera that it is possible to buy (or save up
to) also for an amateur. Now Pentax releases the successor to the
D/DS and it is significantly bigger and heavier than the DS (once
the smallest dSLR ever). The K10D will be noisier than the DS but
still without reaching the FF resolution (very close though). To me
it is like seeing the two formats getting closer to eachother and
now is the right time to decide what route to go. I'm on the fence
and I think I'll sit here and watch what happens for a while.

I have earlier suggested a plain square 24x24 format at about 8 or
10MP. It isn't hard to understand noone made such a sensor but that
I would really have liked. Now the big players have settled for
APS-C and FF (mainly). So for the years to come these are the
formats to choose from. Maybe Canon makes a camera with SR
technology and a 1.2 crop sensor to go with it. Who knows.

All this just to explain the way I think,

Jonas

--
Steve
Measurebating makes you short sighted.
http://www.pbase.com/steve_jacob

[Q]: Pentax lenses on the Canon 5D?

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts