Topic: Updated 5D (6D or 5D MKII?) (Read 20681 times)

macgyver · « **Reply #20 on:** January 30, 2008, 01:18:56 pm »

How to deal with a cropped sensor (a guide for full frame purists):

1. Don't panic.
2. Take a step backwards.
3. If Step 2 is not sufficient, choose a different lens.
4. Be happy with your photo.
5. Group therapy.

jjj · « **Reply #21 on:** January 30, 2008, 01:47:05 pm »

Quote

Only if you're too stupid to use a shorter lens...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170953\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As said above 'people skills. Not only that, it quite ironic as you're talking rubbish as you are foolishly assuming a shorter lens is to hand. I had a 20D before the 5D came out. I had a 16-35, F2.8 and guess what, it wasn't wide enough. By a long way. And there was no shorter lens as fast available. Stepping back isn't always an option either as perpective changes or there may not be room. A crop sensor camera is limiting in several ways compared to a FF sensor. Smart Alec remarks won't change that.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #22 on:** January 30, 2008, 02:08:49 pm »

We got it a while ago, jjj, you don't like Jonathan.

Lightbox · « **Reply #23 on:** January 30, 2008, 03:10:04 pm »

Quote

Not sure to follow you. Why don't you just use a lens 1.5 times shorter and stand at the same location.

50 f1.2 instead of 85 f1.2 for instance.

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170851\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, it still kinda doesn't make sense to me, that means to replace my 24mm f1.4 I would have to either purchase the 14mm f2.8, or resort to using lesser quality zoom lenses? I would also loose a lot of low light capability along with the ability to limit depth of field. I'm pretty set in my old school ways, I've only ever shot with prime lenses, that's the way I was taught, and I quickly saw the benefits, I've never had the time to research cropped sensors so was a bit shocked when using one in December.

.

DonWeston · « **Reply #24 on:** January 30, 2008, 03:59:18 pm »

Quote

Well, it still kinda doesn't make sense to me, that means to replace my 24mm f1.4 I would have to either purchase the 14mm f2.8, or resort to using lesser quality zoom lenses? I would also loose a lot of low light capability along with the ability to limit depth of field. I'm pretty set in my old school ways, I've only ever shot with prime lenses, that's the way I was taught, and I quickly saw the benefits, I've never had the time to research cropped sensors so was a bit shocked when using one in December.
.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Some things there are NO simple answers to. Bottomline - if you need a hammer, then a screwdriver will not do. IF there are no other choices then save your pennies for FF or buy the closest lens to do the job. Sigma for example makes both 20mm and 24mm 1.8 lenses. I use the 24mm on a D300 for close up high school BB shots. They are not perfect but let me get the shot. There are always compromises that may need to be made. You can complain that is your right, and we all need to blow off steam here occasionally, but bottomline complaining does not help you solve the lens issue. Also, if you are a professional photographer, then buy the tools you need to do the job, or don't take the job.

bing · « **Reply #25 on:** January 30, 2008, 04:41:19 pm »

Would be fun if canon came out with 5DS S = square format sensor. its possible to have 36x36 with the lenses we already have, no more turning the camera, large crop choice. think this would be around 31 MP based on 21 MP on a 36x24 sensor. Would be good to see the Pixel race slow down a bit and other features such as dynamic range become of greater importance. How about one shot sharp and second shot defocused then blended in camera for a nice soft image.... sure this can be done in PS but it would be fun. there must be lots of great features that could be added. Enough.

Misirlou · « **Reply #26 on:** January 30, 2008, 05:00:35 pm »

Quote

Would be fun if canon came out with 5DS S = square format sensor. its possible to have 36x36 with the lenses we already have, no more turning the camera, large crop choice. think this would be around 31 MP based on 21 MP on a 36x24 sensor. Would be good to see the Pixel race slow down a bit and other features such as dynamic range become of greater importance. How about one shot sharp and second shot defocused then blended in camera for a nice soft image.... sure this can be done in PS but it would be fun. there must be lots of great features that could be added. Enough.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171081\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I couldn't agree more. Why is the standard 35mm frame the option everyone returns to? I don't actually like its proportions very much. I much prefer square and 4X5 frames. Obviously, it would be ferociously expensive to produce a whole new line of digital SLRs that were not based on 35mm practice, but I'd gladly pay for a 24X24 DSLR that used the Canon lens mount. I'd even consider one without a Bayer pattern just for square format B&W.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #27 on:** January 30, 2008, 05:12:08 pm »

That'd be a funky viewfinder.

bing · « **Reply #28 on:** January 30, 2008, 05:20:35 pm »

Viewfinder, oh no... nice BIG Live view,on a swivel mount.. to use one of those naff phrases...lets think out of the box

Misirlou · « **Reply #29 on:** January 30, 2008, 06:47:10 pm »

Quote

That'd be a funky viewfinder.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171090\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just make them interchangeable. Kind of like a half size Hasselblad. You could have a huge live view screen on the back, and a simple waist-level finder, or pay extra for the prism of your choice. Nothing new really.

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #30 on:** January 30, 2008, 06:59:24 pm »

Quote

I would also loose a lot of low light capability along with the ability to limit depth of field.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The LL Spelling Police feel obligated to jump in here and cite you for your incorrect spelling of "lose".

Please remember: "Lose lips loose ships", or something like that.

JohnKoerner · « **Reply #31 on:** January 30, 2008, 07:23:42 pm »

Quote

hear the voice of a "hardliner":

crop cameras are toys. technical features are just gimmicks, that don´t have anything to do with photography.

the 5D is a real camera. get yourself one.

and one more thing: size matters. at least in photography. aps-c is just 43 per cent of full-frame!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170678\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I appreciate your perspective, but I don't see how some of these cameras are mere "toys" seeing as many have taken quite wonderful pictures. Also, how do these cameras have "nothing" to do with photography?

I can certainly see your point and perspective as to the cropping effect limiting your purposes by rendering your favored wide-angle lenses less useful, but since I am mostly interested in nature photography (butterfly/insect macro work as well as bird photography), for my purposes such bodies would actually render my lenses even more useful.

Therefore, while such non-FF bodies as the 40D might make your wide-angle lenses not quite so wide, the flipside to that is the fact these bodies thereby would make macro and telephoto lenses even more intense and useful.

Like anything else, it is all a matter of perspective.

Jack

dwdallam · « **Reply #32 on:** January 30, 2008, 09:54:11 pm »

Quote

"people skills"
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170986\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

LOL. You have to take Jon's comments with some salt. Rephrase them is what I do, something like:

"Only if you're too stupid to use a different lens."

Becomes automatically in my ears:

"What's the problem with using a different lens?"

Now isn't that sweet.

DonWeston · « **Reply #33 on:** January 31, 2008, 10:10:18 am »

Not meaning to insult anyone but it is just perspective, with film I shot MF and LF, thinking 35mm was just not enough real estate for fine prints, but I would not go as far as saying 35mm was a toy....different needs = different tools...

I have always found Mr Wienke a little brusk and try to stay out of his line of fire. He is a wealth of knowledge and has offered mostly good advice. He seems to have a very high opinion of himself, his own business, just an observation, but his manner can be off putting, and for many his good parts get lost in the noise. If you visit his blog you will find out that there have been some health issues recently, not an excuse, but maybe a reason why he does not suffer ignorance or foolishness so well. ...hope I have not been out of line with talking about a poster, but trying to give some background and balance, and NO we are not friends.. and the info is on the web, placed there by him....on his blog...fwiw

lastly what I was told and what I told my kids when they were young is "use your words, don't let them use you" not always easy but usually works...

jjj · « **Reply #34 on:** January 31, 2008, 02:15:28 pm »

Quote

We got it a while ago, jjj, you don't like Jonathan.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171031\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't like anyone who is so rude and patronising. Dosen't help the fact he was talking rubbish whilst trying to be superior.
And like the above post says, he is very knowlegable on some issues, but lets himself down by being so off putting and in this instance innacurate as well.

jjj · « **Reply #35 on:** January 31, 2008, 02:17:43 pm »

Quote

LOL. You have to take Jon's comments with some salt. Rephrase them is what I do, something like:

"Only if you're too stupid to use a different lens."

Becomes automatically in my ears:

"What's the problem with using a different lens?"

Now isn't that sweet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171143\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So would you also interpret a real world bully's punches as a soothing massage?

DonWeston · « **Reply #36 on:** January 31, 2008, 03:04:26 pm »

Quote

So would you also interpret a real world bully's punches as a soothing massage?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171292\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Really we need to get back to discussing gear not people and photography in general, if you have personal complaints write the moderators or owners of the site. Now I want to know how many Mp there the new 7D will have...any good latest rumors..?

dwdallam · « **Reply #37 on:** January 31, 2008, 08:52:25 pm »

Quote

So would you also interpret a real world bully's punches as a soothing massage?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171292\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Actually, you have a very invalid analogy simply because words are very different than physical violence.

I will say that calling people "stupid" is never a way to conduct conversations, ever, and without excuse.

panoak · « **Reply #38 on:** January 31, 2008, 10:25:08 pm »

All of that preamble gives me the Perfect inroad for this: If the 5D isn't weather sealed anyway, and APS does not offend, then why not save a big bag o' dough, and put a separate XSi body on every single one of your lenses? Many news services have already done this with the XTi. Cringe to your hearts' content, but this makes infinitely more sense than changing lenses on a known dust magnet...... The bottom line is IQ, and you can't show me any advantage the 5D has over the XSi.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #39 on:** January 31, 2008, 10:36:37 pm »

Quote

All of that preamble gives me the Perfect inroad for this: If the 5D isn't weather sealed anyway, and APS does not offend, then why not save a big bag o' dough, and put a separate XSi body on every single one of your lenses? Many news services have already done this with the XTi. Cringe to your hearts' content, but this makes infinitely more sense than changing lenses on a known dust magnet...... The bottom line is IQ, and you can't show me any advantage the 5D has over the XSi.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171406\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Go for that Dennis Hopper look from Apocalypse Now.

Author Topic: Updated 5D (6D or 5D MKII?) (Read 20681 times)

DarkPenguin

DarkPenguin

JohnKoerner

DarkPenguin