5D - A One Camera Solution including Birding?

Hi everyone! Thank you very much for the enlightening exchange of information. I do learn a lot in these forums.

Hans,

Those are excellent pictures. The 500mm is way out of my league but its always nice to know what to aspire for. Your technique at capturing such images just blows me away.

Thanks again for sharing such valuable insight everyone!

Voltaire
--
VY
 
The bird will appear bigger in the viewfinder on the 20D because of
the crop, the size of the bird will remain the same. You will just
see more around it.
...
That is true for what you see in the viewfinder but not for the resulting picture. The 20D will give you more pixels on target because of the higher pixel density of its sensor, so in effect you get more detail using a 20D.
 
That's what I did. In that way you gain:
  • instant lens swap. Just keep two bodies at hand. When walking, I often have the 5D w/24-70 for regular work but always the 20D w/100-400L at hand in case a bird shows up. No more fidgeting with lenses: this keeps the dust out and you may just be quick enough to get the shot. Well, with birds, you never know and often you aren't, but you catch my drift...
  • every lens is actually two lenses: the 17-40 is also a 28-64 when used on the 20D -> gives you lots of combinations that may be useful. Do the math!
  • backup body for critical situations such as weddings, performances and other events....
For birding, the 20D is the winner because of frame rate and pixel density. For basically everything else, the 5D can not be beat. Open the box and enjoy the dynamic range, detail and low noise.

In any case, the batteries and CF cards are compatible, that also minimizes the fuss of having two bodies.

PS> neither the 20D or the 5D will produce acceptable JPEG images IMHO (way too soft and wrong spatial parameters for its sharpening algorithm). You need a 30D or later for that, or go back as far as the D60 (!). The solution is RAW.

Henk
--
Photography is all about looking.
 
Obviously, I'm wrong ;) ... forgot the ^2 factor... it's good to have it clarified (in my head).

I guess I should go on that new Jeff Foxworthy show... what's it called... are you smarter than a 5th grader?
In the example below the result of Hans Kruse is correct. The
resolution in question can be found by counting the number of 5D
pixels that fit into the 30D sensor size. The result can be
obtained in several ways:

1) 8.2 mp * (6.4 micron / 8.2 micron)^2 = 5.0 mp

2) 12.7 mp * (22.5 mm * 15.0 mm) / (35.8 mm * 23.9 mm) = 5.0 mp

3) 12.7 mp / 1.59^2 = 5.0 mp (same as below)
I'm surprised nobody seems to mention this...

5d = 12.8 mp

30d = 8 mp

12.8mp/1.6 = 8mp.
Because it is wrong! The calculation is 12.8mp/(1.6*1.6) = 5MP.
 
A 1.6x camera like the 20d/30d/400D does resolve more detail,
but at the expense of noise that often looks more objectionable.

For birding I often find I'm at ISO 800 +, to keep the shutter speed high, and on the 1.6x cameras the noise becomes somewhat blotchy at that point.

I considered having both, but consistently my 5D shots came out on top.

For a one cam solution I'd recommend the 5D.

The new Mark III might give it a run for its money, with all the features it offers!
 
I guess I should go on that new Jeff Foxworthy show... what's it
called... are you smarter than a 5th grader?
Don't punish yourself, everyone makes mistakes. No big deal.
 
I shoot birds a Bosque del Apahce with a 300mm F4L IS, & 400mm F5.6L

I find the cropped 5D images to be better then the XTI images (1.6 crop) even if the XTI has more reach.

--
Albuquerque NM --- Canon EOS 5D & XTI
 
It's in the text of the previous post before each series of pictures.
Canon 500mm f/4LIS, Sigma EX 300mm f/2.8 and Canon 300mm f/4L IS
Yes, thank you! The photo of a small bird on a branch with a black head and yellow rear shows 700mm. I wonder what lens that was.
 
I have a 20D, 5D, and 1DII and I find I rarely use the 5D when birding. The Pixel density in 5D and 1DII are identical. SO unless you are getting really close to birds that you aren't cropping off 1/3, then the AF and frame rate of the 1DII are much better and at current used rates can be had for less than the 5D.

If I am farther away, the pixel density of the 20D, and it's 1.6x crop are hard to beat. You get more pixels of bird and feather and will get more details than 5D or 1DII.

Now if you do landscapes or weddings or portraits or any other photography where you can easily move or change focal length to get a full frame of the object, animal, or person..then the 5D rules. 12 MP and all of them on target, is incredible.

If you can keep 20D as second body the 5D - 20D combo is great. This is what I travel with when chasing wolves or elusive birds and want to travel light and have great capability. No weather proofing, but great capability.
Bill
 
yup, the 17-40mm on a 5D works very very well. Nice colours and good centre sharpness. The corners are as sharp as the centre by about f8. 17mm full frame is very wide. So I doubt that you'll need to go wider.

There's a lot of guys on these forums moaning about wide angle lenses on full frame cameras, but the issue become more problematic as you go over 13mp. Hardly anyone that uses a wide lens will us it wide open. If you do expect a little vignetting and a little softness. Most of it is completly workable in Photoshop with a few custom actions.

Gareth
--
http://www.pbase.com/gazzajagman

'Science is what we dream of, technology is what we are stuck with' Douglas Adams
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top