You know, I don't know how much of it is in our heads, but I do know this: When I browse through my LR catalog the shots from the 1Ds2 just stand out compared to those from 50d/40d/20d/10d -- there's a certain quality to them, much like how my medium format film prints had a different "feel" than the 35mm ones.
Whether it's sensor design, sensor size, processing.. I have no idea.
Now let's get back on topic and tell me if I should get a 1D3 or not and if it would be good enough to replace the 1Ds2 for "general purpose" and the 50D for wildlife shooting.
pingflood wrote:
You know, I don't know how much of it is in our heads, but I do know this: When I browse through my LR catalog the shots from the 1Ds2 just stand out compared to those from 50d/40d/20d/10d -- there's a certain quality to them, much like how my medium format film prints had a different "feel" than the 35mm ones.
hmmm ... Well, cool ... there must be something to it then, since you've used both types of cameras. Sorry for the distraction.
I've read some people say that high-end models show an almost 3-D effect and I only see that when the lens used is a bright lens, which can make the subject pop, irrespective of the camera used. Pros, of course, use pro cameras for good reason - faster AF, bigger sensor, lower noise levels, faster write/read, more features, etc. But, this oft-mentioned 3-D effect .. I'm just curious as to why many people think the camera is the reason for that so-called "3-d effect". Is it the larger sensor and the associated differences in DOF? I'm just curious .. not trying to malign any pro or pro camera - just curious. ...Show more →
Larger senseor allows for less DOF (more subject isolation).
But I completely agree with you; much of it is in people's heads. 1.6X crop cams are quite capable.
Subject is well lit off a darker background, subject 'appears' brought forward in the scene, better separation from the BG thus displaying the 3-D effect It works in processing with most any camera body IMO. However there is a certain quality to the DOF that changes with a smaller crop or FF camera, this is more like the spaciousness 'felt' in the files IMO
Discernible differences IMO of bodies will be in noise or features related to needs, I haven't seen an un-sharp body C'mon, lets give credit to the talent of the user, I have seen many MKIII images that are very poor, I know it's not the camera and I have seen many 20D users display images superior to the pro-bodies, hence it's not always the body!
Karl Witt wrote:
3-D effect.............key word effect
Subject is well lit off a darker background, subject 'appears' brought forward in the scene, better separation from the BG thus displaying the 3-D effect It works in processing with most any camera body IMO. ....
Agreed.
Sorry to Hijack this thread, but here are a couple of examples showing good subject isolation with both 1.6X crop and FF.
I think you should definitely keep the 1Ds2 as it will be hard to beat without getting a 1Ds3. Do not underestimate the importance of that killer AF.
The 50D... well, You could go 7D or 5D2 of you want, depending on what you will use it for... if you do a lot of wildlife then a 7D might be in order... or perhaps a 1D3, as the used market prices will be dropping when the 1D4 hits the shelves...
Karl Witt wrote:
3-D effect.............key word effect
Subject is well lit off a darker background, subject 'appears' brought forward in the scene, better separation from the BG thus displaying the 3-D effect It works in processing with most any camera body IMO. However there is a certain quality to the DOF that changes with a smaller crop or FF camera, this is more like the spaciousness 'felt' in the files IMO
Discernible differences IMO of bodies will be in noise or features related to needs, I haven't seen an un-sharp body C'mon, lets give credit to the talent of the user, I have seen many MKIII images that are very poor, I know it's not the camera and I have seen many 20D users display images superior to the pro-bodies, hence it's not always the body!
Rich, you sure you don't really want the new MKIV
Take care, just my .02..................
Karl ...Show more →
Not Cost Effective........... YET.......
pingflood wrote:
PS: this is the kind of shot I just never get out of the 50D or any other crop camera I've used -- hard to put my finger on it but it just looks "better".
Certainly the 1DMKIV should be in the running, although pricey now pre release (not on store shelves that is) if you're not moving till spring there's time, for reviews, bugs (never gonna happen!! ) and a price drop ta-boot.
The up side also is the MKIII's should drop in price a fair bit once the IV's hit the shelves, so it's win/win either way -
You could keep the MKII as the backup.... 2 more cents in the pot..
