FretNoMore
Veteran Member
I assume you mean "using a 10-22 lens on my 20D or 10D", as that lens doesn't work at all on a 5D.
- Anders @ http://www.andersostberg.com *
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Is 1.3 crop factor the ultimate for use with....
- Thread starter Jimmy Drew20683
- Start date
That isn't a necessary sacrifice of a larger sensor, it's a necessary sacrifice of a sensor with higher pixel count until technology catches up with the necessary throughput.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
FretNoMore
Veteran Member
DD22
Leading Member
The crop factor on my Mark II is perfect-- gives me a little more reach on my telephotos when I need it but still gives me good wide angle coverage with "regular" lenses like the 17-40 and 24-70. I think you're pushing it on the resolution for a new camera though-- I have no desire for that kind of pixel count and the noise and storage implications. I'd welcome an improvement to 12MP if the current shot rate could be maintained, which would likely require a new IP chip set. The digic II chip is getting a bit old at this point so that may be the next step.
I'm comparing the 5D to the 20D. The larger sensor is the main reason the cost is higher.
All other things being equal (sensor technology, pixel density, processing), yes.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
This cannot possibly be true. Let's see a 17mm f4 shot focused hyperfocally on a distant target with a lot of detail from the 5D.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
FretNoMore
Veteran Member
Well, I have to compare cameras that are available to me now, not what might be released in the future. There must be some limit on the computing power and data throughput, so there will always be a difference in speed within the same generation of cameras if they have different sensor sizes.
- Anders @ http://www.andersostberg.com *
What I originally said in context was right:
Nevertheless, many of us feel the 1DII and 1DsII will be replaced by a fast (8fps) full-frame body (22MP) in fall of 2006. That should eliminate any speed concerns. For now, the 1DII is the king of speed.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
In other words, I was talking about image-quality, not the rest of the body features.
Nevertheless, many of us feel the 1DII and 1DsII will be replaced by a fast (8fps) full-frame body (22MP) in fall of 2006. That should eliminate any speed concerns. For now, the 1DII is the king of speed.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
FretNoMore
Veteran Member
I would also be happy with a "12MP 1D2" and would rather see even more useful high ISO rather than more pixels, if that is a trade-off that makes technological sense. That would be great for wildlife, sports and low-light shooting like concerts.
- Anders @ http://www.andersostberg.com *
The 1DII has the same reach as the 5D, less reach than the 1DsII and much less reach than the 20D.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
cs_d
Forum Enthusiast
Actually, full frame gives you choices. On the 5D for example, the pixel pitch/density are equal to the 1DS MKII and therefore, one can crop the image (if desired) by 1.3 without loosing resolution (over the 1D). It's your choice, and you can make that choice after the shot, if desired. The reality is that the soft corner/vignetting issue is mainly a problem on wide angle lenses at larger apertures where the corners are outside the DOF anyway. If I want to maximize DOF, I must stop down. With a reasonably good quality lens, stopping down will sufficiently eliminate the vignetting and soft corners. I have many good images taken with a good wide angle lens. To get the equivalent angle of view with a crop sensor, I would have to get an even wider angle lens which leads to even more problems such as distortion and diffraction. I'll stick with full frame and crop if I care to.
Canon has already said it's 1.3x sensor line has ended, which is why the sensor wasn't touched when the 1D2N was put out.
Did everyone have problems with edges on their film SLRs?? If it's a problem for you, simple crop it in PP!!
Did everyone have problems with edges on their film SLRs?? If it's a problem for you, simple crop it in PP!!
Kung Pao Panda
Veteran Member
I thought the 10-22 is compatible with 20D/Drebel/XT. It works with the 10/D and 5D?
TIA
10D user
FretNoMore
Veteran Member
joebloe
Veteran Member
Cropping is a new thing?
"Projecting slides"?!?
In the past, no one ever went out to buy $5000 of camera kit just to create slides to project. Well, probably someone did, but that would be considered nutty by people who didn't have money to burn as well as professionals who knew it was just stupid.
And in the past, people never "mainly print[ed] full frame at 8x10." Printing full frame at 8x10 is something students do for practice, portrait photographers do for Mom and Dad, and everyone else does once in a blue moon if ever.
In the past, people did exactly the same things people do with cameras and images now - with a little more thought because it was a nuisance to develop hundreds of lousy exposures. It's just that when you hand someone a digital SLR, it apparently bestows a mistaken sense of competence and cluefulness that rarely happened in the good old days when someone used a plain old film SLR.
Apparently, millions of person-years of experience with the things you can do with a 24x36mm rectangle isn't something that Mr."What Is the Perfect Sensor Size for Me to Buy" is going to let stand in the way of an off-the-cuff remark.
-joseph
Canon.
"Projecting slides"?!?
In the past, no one ever went out to buy $5000 of camera kit just to create slides to project. Well, probably someone did, but that would be considered nutty by people who didn't have money to burn as well as professionals who knew it was just stupid.
And in the past, people never "mainly print[ed] full frame at 8x10." Printing full frame at 8x10 is something students do for practice, portrait photographers do for Mom and Dad, and everyone else does once in a blue moon if ever.
In the past, people did exactly the same things people do with cameras and images now - with a little more thought because it was a nuisance to develop hundreds of lousy exposures. It's just that when you hand someone a digital SLR, it apparently bestows a mistaken sense of competence and cluefulness that rarely happened in the good old days when someone used a plain old film SLR.
Apparently, millions of person-years of experience with the things you can do with a 24x36mm rectangle isn't something that Mr."What Is the Perfect Sensor Size for Me to Buy" is going to let stand in the way of an off-the-cuff remark.
-joseph
--
Canon.
FretNoMore
Veteran Member
Charming.
English isn't my first language so excuse me if I don't make sense occasionally.
"8x10" was a mistake, I meant "regular size prints" which are of course smaller. Too much in a hurry writing that to do the math from metric.
What I mean is that more non-pros, that don't have a good understanding of what size photos is "normal" for this format, do things with the equipment today with the help of digital post processing that they never did in the film days. Ten years ago I very seldom did anything other than order the standard pack of prints or use the slides as-is in my projector. Now a lot of people take for granted they can crop to their hearts content and still have good quality.
I don't think we have a difference of opinion, though I do take offence to your tone.
- Anders @ http://www.andersostberg.com *
cs_d
Forum Enthusiast
Yes, sorry about that.
Jimmy Drew20683
Senior Member
I have not seen that written any where.....is just makes too much sense to drop....are you sure?
Jimmy
Jimmy
DD22
Leading Member
I'm comparing, of course, to the full-frame film camera my Mark II replaced, which has the same "reach" as the full-frame 5D. I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing-- I'm referring only to crop factor.
Similar threads
- User review
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum