BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Questions

Photography Question 
Karma Wilson
BetterPhoto Member Since: 6/27/2004
 

The BRAND NEW canon 5D


Well, the rumors are true! The 5D was released today.

Almost thirteen MPs, full frame sensor, small and compact, and $3200 (which means street price probably $2800).

No weather sealing though. :-(

Still, this with a wide angle and the 20D with a zoom and no more changing lenses. Of course before that would ever happen I need to actually make MONEY with photography. LOL

Karma


To love this question, log in above
8/22/2005 7:38:04 AM

 
Justin G.
BetterPhoto Member Since: 7/13/2004
  http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Digital-SLR-Camera-Reviews.aspx

justin


To love this comment, log in above
8/22/2005 7:53:45 AM

 
anonymous 
BetterPhoto Member Since: 2/7/2005
  It is $5,499 in Australia! Ouch..... why are things always more expensive here! I need to move to the US!


To love this comment, log in above
8/22/2005 6:40:54 PM

 
Sharon  Day
BetterPhoto Member Since: 6/27/2004
  Wow, imagine the file sizes :o)


To love this comment, log in above
8/22/2005 7:38:26 PM

 
Justin G.
BetterPhoto Member Since: 7/13/2004
  Imagine this.

I had just basically gotten it over my wife that I was going to spend $1200 on a camera body alone (the 20D)! She's finally starting to grasp the idea that bigger ($$$) can be better. So imagine her after finally accepting my $1200 budget proposal (lol) up'd to $3300 last night!! haha she smacked me in the back of my head!.

lol.

.justin.


To love this comment, log in above
8/23/2005 3:23:38 AM

 
Craig m. Zacarelli
BetterPhoto Member Since: 2/3/2005
  have any of you seen the cons of the 5D yet? I think DP review has them.. image quality isnt as good as it should be and something to do with big shutter lag and slow startup times.. has me thinking that perhaps canon is slacking off... or just resting on thier laurles a bit.
craig-


To love this comment, log in above
8/23/2005 10:23:43 AM

 
Karma Wilson
BetterPhoto Member Since: 6/27/2004
  ACtually since the camera isn't released there are no real field tests on it. The thing has an amazing buffer rate that should blow the 20D out of the water. It does have lower fps but with that buffer rate it will be hard to notice. As for image quality it has all the tools needed to produce fantastic images. The samples showed that the landscape was dissapointing on the edges--too soft. But the 17-40 has issues on FF sensors, so that may account.

Karma


To love this comment, log in above
8/23/2005 7:48:39 PM

 
Kerry L. Walker   "It is $5,499 in Australia! Ouch..... why are things always more expensive here! I need to move to the US!"

Probably has more to do with the conversion rate than any real difference in cost.


To love this comment, log in above
8/23/2005 8:00:32 PM

 

BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/28/2003
  At 3 FPS, no thanks. I don't need MP's. I need FPS. But FF is tempting.


To love this comment, log in above
8/23/2005 10:28:13 PM

 
anonymous 
BetterPhoto Member Since: 2/7/2005
  conversion rate has a little to do with it, but the US in general is cheaper than Oz.

Example: My husband bought me a pair of Adidas when he was in the US in June. They cost him $50. That converted to $65 Oz. But if we were to buy them here in Oz, the same pair is $150!!!!!

Also we pay $1.30 per LITRE for petrol (if I can remember what my husband said....) somethink like 74c a gallon in the US which equals about 4 litres I think!

We get so ripped off with everything!


To love this comment, log in above
8/23/2005 10:50:33 PM

 
Craig m. Zacarelli
BetterPhoto Member Since: 2/3/2005
  74 cents??? I wish!! That was back in the mid 70's now its about $2.50 give or take a few cents. im thinking of getting a horse and buggy....lol
-zacker-


To love this comment, log in above
8/24/2005 9:16:13 AM

 
Wayne L   What does anyone know about this?
Because the 20D uses a smaller sensor
22.5 X 15.0 and has 8.2 MP compaired to the 5D with a 36x24 sensor and 12.7 MP if you crop your photos much at all you will still get a better quality pic with the 20D because of cramming the 8.2MP on a smaller sensor.
Does this make any sense??


To love this comment, log in above
10/8/2005 7:25:41 PM

 
Christopher A. Vedros
BetterPhoto Member Since: 3/14/2005
  No, Wayne, it doesn't.

In general, a larger sensor will give you a higher quality picture than a smaller sensor.

Also, in general, the more information (megapixels) you record from a scene, the higher your picture quality will be.

The 5D has both a larger sensor and a higher resolution than the 20D, so there is no reason to think that it would give you a lower image quality than the 20D.

When you crop an image, you throw away some of the original pixels. If you start with more pixels from the 5D, your final image will still have more pixels than if you took the same image with the 20D and cropped it the same.

I think what you're confused about is the idea that the 20D has a higher pixel density (about 155 pixels per mm on the sensor) compared to the 5D (about 122 pixels per mm on the sensor). This doesn't mean that if you crop an image on the 20D, you'll end up with more resolution than if you cropped the image on the 5D. It doesn't work that way.


To love this comment, log in above
10/8/2005 10:10:55 PM

 
Wayne L   Thanks Chris, I read that someplace on the net. I didn't do any math on it and didn't take it too serious. But thought it worth asking about.


To love this comment, log in above
10/9/2005 7:18:27 AM

 
Log in to respond or ask your own question.