Canon 5D: First Impressions with a few pics

Discussion in 'Canon' started by deryck lant, Aug 30, 2005.

  1. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    deryck lant, Aug 30, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. "Brian Worley, product manager of D-SLR cameras at Canon Europa, said
    that it's a long way before all EOS models will have a full size sensor,
    but Canon's aim is to equip all models, except the cheapest, with a 35mm
    sensor in the future."

    That quote seems to confirm that the EF-S lens line is indeed just a
    stop gap. Looks like all those EF-S lens paranoias were justified.

    Unless, and this is a thought that has just occured to me, would it be
    possible to design a camera with a full frame sensor that accepts EF-S
    Derek Fountain, Aug 30, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. deryck  lant

    Mike Guest

    It is my understanding that EF-S optics do not cover full frame, but are
    limited to APS-C size sensors, or like.
    On full frame there would be dark corners...

    Another point about the stop-gap EF-S policy:
    seems to me that EF-S lenses are on the not expensive side. This is another
    proof they are intended to be a "stop gap".

    Mike, Aug 30, 2005
  4. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <43144acc$0$28046$>
    The APS size entry level product line will continue for the
    foreseeable future.

    deryck lant, Aug 30, 2005
  5. deryck  lant

    Kinon O'cann Guest

    Hardly. "In the future" could mean five years from now, and in that time,
    the EF-S lenses will provide excellent service. After that, they'll probably
    still work. And who knows? If there's a market for small, light, and
    inexpensive DSLRs, the 1.6 sensor may remain. I have two EF-S lenses, and
    feel no buyer's remorse whatsoever, even after I buy a 5D next January. The
    17-85, mounted on the 20D will still provide excellent service, and the 20D
    still has a few advantages over the 5D, like built-in flash and higher frame
    rates. Why worry? Just get the glass you need and shoot.
    Nope. The mirror would hit.
    Kinon O'cann, Aug 30, 2005
  6. deryck  lant

    MarkH Guest

    When selling your 1.6x camera so that you can purchase a FF camera you
    should bundle your EF-S lens/lenses with the camera, they will still be
    useful to someone using your old camera.

    If you old EF-S camera dies and you decide to replace it with a FF camera
    then sell your EF-S lenses on E-Bay to someone still using a 1.6x camera.

    Since 1.6x cameras will still be sold for a few years yet, there will be
    1.6x cameras in use for quite a while. Even 10 years from now there will
    be some 1.6x cameras still in use.

    From now on I think that the prudent buyer should be wary of buying EF-S
    lenses, especially if they would ever consider upgrading to a 5D.

    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at (last updated 16-August-05)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    MarkH, Aug 30, 2005
  7. deryck  lant

    Prometheus Guest

    You could always use a 5D with 400mm lens and crop the image to 62%. At
    least you can get a decent wide angle for a sensible price rather than
    having to purchase a ludicrously expensive ultra-wide just to obtain
    slightly wide.
    Prometheus, Aug 30, 2005
  8. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    "Canon's aim is to equip all models, except the cheapest, with a 35mm
    sensor in the future," certainly sounds like the EF-S system has some legs,
    since that would include the Rebel line and its successors. 20D type
    cameras will probably not exist in the future, reading between the lines,
    though, since that wouldn't qualify as "cheapest."
    Unlikely, but Canon has stated before, and this statement does nothing to
    contradict it, that they will have two tiers of cameras, a low tier with
    1.6x and a top tier with FF. The 1.3x of the 1D mkII would seem to be the
    only victim, here, and that doesn't take EF-S lenses.
    Skip M, Aug 30, 2005
  9. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    The statement by the Canon exec does say that FF will be used on "all but
    the cheapest" cameras, implying that the 1.6x sensor will continue on the
    Rebel line and it's successors, and, thus, the EF-S lenses.
    That has always been the case, and why several people, including us, haven't
    invested in EF-S glass, upgrading to a 1Ds mkII or it successor was always a
    possibility, eased by the introduction of the 5D.
    Skip M, Aug 31, 2005
  10. deryck  lant

    l e o Guest

    I have a better suggestion. Panasonic FZ5 is much smaller and has longer
    reach. Sorry, I don't see your argument as an advantage but instead just
    a fact of life. The larger pixel pitch on the 5D gives you advantage in
    sensitive which you usually need with such a long lens.
    l e o, Aug 31, 2005
  11. deryck  lant

    Bruce Graham Guest

    with sensor improvements I expect EF-S to be the amateur mainstream for
    as long as we have SLR's (future big improvements in EVF's might
    eventually kill the SLR?)
    has been true since day 1 except for wide-angle where the 10-22mm is the
    only Canon solution for x1.6 bodies.
    Bruce Graham, Aug 31, 2005
  12. deryck  lant

    MarkH Guest

    I think that you misunderstand how the cropping factor works.

    If you compare an 8MPix camera with a 1.6x cropping factor with a FF camera
    with the same pixel pitch and noise characteristics then you will find that
    the FF camera can do exactly what the 1.6x camera can do, and more!

    From the FF camera you can use pictures uncropped with higher resolution or
    you can crop to 1.6x equivalent to give the effect of a longer lens (but
    with deeper DoF).

    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at (last updated 16-August-05)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    MarkH, Aug 31, 2005
  13. deryck  lant

    Stacey Guest

    Prometheus wrote:

    Just because a lens covers a sensor with a certain FOV doesn't mean it will
    produce something you'd want to print... Specs mean nothing, it's the END
    RESULT that matters.
    Stacey, Aug 31, 2005
  14. deryck  lant

    Prometheus Guest

    Exactly my point, a FF sensor gives you more option to crop the print to
    suit requirements; choosing a small sensor for its "telephoto effect" is
    misguided and restricts options.

    I do not always keep the sensor ratio but prefer to fit the print to the
    Prometheus, Aug 31, 2005
  15. deryck  lant

    Bill Funk Guest

    If your lens(es) cover what you want to cover, where's the restricted
    You can do that with a 1.6 sensor.
    Bill Funk, Aug 31, 2005
  16. deryck  lant

    Prometheus Guest

    If you had not cropped out the text I was responding to you would
    understand that I was showing that advocating a 1.6 sensor 'because it
    makes you telephotos longer' is nonsense, you can crop a FF to
    'multiply' the sensor (you could crop a 50mm on a FF to give the view
    that a 1000mm would give, I know it would not be good) but there is
    nothing you can do with 17mm on 1.6 to make it the width you paid for.
    Of course some people never want wide angle just as some never want
    telephoto, and some only want a macro (some may only ever use a
    microscope or telescope).
    Of course you can, I was just making the point that the sensor should
    not dictate the subject.

    You singly failed to understand the point, or perhaps you did which is
    why you quoted my comments out of context.
    Prometheus, Aug 31, 2005
  17. deryck  lant

    Stacey Guest

    You missed MY point. You said "At least you get a decent wide angle at a
    sensible price", that was what I was responding to. Just because a lens
    covers a wide FOV and the sensor, that doesn't mean it will produce good
    Stacey, Sep 1, 2005
  18. deryck  lant

    Stacey Guest

    I was refering to his coment about "decent wide angle" not cropping the
    Stacey, Sep 1, 2005
  19. Also good for MTF, since if you are using the same lenses, three pixels
    rendering a line pair in the 5D will be seeing a much higher contrast line
    pair to render than three pixels in the 20D. (Of course, this means that the
    low-pass filter is that much more critical, and they're using a new design
    LPF*. I hope it works...)

    The first image in the dpreview galleries of 5D samples looks better printed
    at 240 ppi than any DSLR image I've ever printed at that ppi. I was a bit
    worried that at 13x19 (220 ppi) I might be a bit unhappy for landscape work
    compared to the 250 ppi the 1Dsmk2 coughs up, but from that sample, it seems
    that the 5D will have no troubles whatsoever at 13x19.

    *: I had read that the LPF is actually a fairly significant cost in larger
    sensors, and in their white paper on the 5D, Canon hints that it was the new
    (and cheaper to fabricate) LPF that it's the new LPF that made it possible
    to produce the 5D economically.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 1, 2005
  20. deryck  lant

    RichA Guest

    Of course, a 1.6x or 2x sensor with smaller pixels than an equivalent
    1x sensor WILL resolve more detail in a given area when using the same
    focal length lens.

    "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood
    never gave us refunds for in the past"
    RichA, Sep 1, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.