With the 5D, many people talked about the 1.6x crop \"advantage\" for telephoto - because if you were \"focal-length challenged\" with a distant subject and took a 1.6x crop from a 5D image you got only 5MP which wasn\'t up to the 8.2MP you got with 20D or 30D cameras.
Now with the 5D II, if you crop 1.6x you get an 8.2 MP image which is equivalent tp a 20D/30D image (and remember the 20D was current when the 5D was introduced). The 5D Mk II, therefore, leaves you with some margin to compensate for being \"focal-length challenged\".
Of course the cropped image will still be far less resolution than an image from the 50D, but then that often won\'t matter much - especially given that with a lot of lenses, you won\'t get significantly more detal anyway.
With the 5D, many people talked about the 1.6x crop \"advantage\" for telephoto - because if you were \"focal-length challenged\" with a distant subject and took a 1.6x crop from a 5D image you got only 5MP which wasn;t up to hte 8.3MP you got with 20D or 30D cameras.
Now with the 5D II, if you crop 1.6x you get an 8.2 MP image which is equivalent tp a 20D/30D image (and remember the 20D was current when the 5D was introduced).
Sep 20, 2008 at 10:34 AM
Previous versions of Traveller99's message #6189329 « 21 megapixels too much? »
