spec sheet huh... hmm I'm wary...

CLICK HERE! Canon

Marcus, i already posted that on the other thread. It's certainly not an official Canon site, and just as questionable as the other 'documents'

I hope it's all true

gunblue, is it even possible to trademark such a short "name" as 5D? It would seem slightly odd to me. Almost as if you'd start trademarking or patenting single letters or numbers (then again, given some ridiculous rulings on patents recently, it'd hardly be surprising)

Anyway, if there's going to be a camera that looks like that one, ugh, well, it might be good, but it's a bit ugly Then again I'm not upgrading from the 20D any time soon, because I can't afford to - I'll rather spend on lenses that I still don't have, like the 135/2, a macro lens etc. And the 20D has what I need from a body, except more resolution would never hurt, nor would even better noise performance. The body upgrade cartwheel would just be too expensive and pointless for me at this point.

My 20D is good enough for a while, the only reason I see me upgrading is if it has a better viewfinder. The PDF says it has a 96% viewfinder, that doesn't seem like FF, the 20D has 97%. Or am I missing something?

So, they dropped the eye control and raised the price for $1000. Greedy Canon! No too bad though.

Hans Bertrams wrote:
My 20D is good enough for a while, the only reason I see me upgrading is if it has a better viewfinder. The PDF says it has a 96% viewfinder, that doesn't seem like FF, the 20D has 97%. Or am I missing something?

With the 20D, you see 97% of the 1.6x crop, giving a 1.65 crop viewfinder.
With the 5D (if it exists), you see 96% of the FF image, giving a 1.04 crop viewfinder.

So the 5D will still have a large viewfinder.

BTW Hans: long time, no see! How are you doing?

I don't see why people seem to have so many issues with the 20D viewfinder size. For manual focus bigger would be nice I guess, and I'm not saying bigger wouldn't be better... well, actually, with my glasses it seems I'm often having hard time actually seeing the whole viewfinder at once when using film cameras with a big viewfinder

But one thing is that I'd sure want the viewfinder to be 100% accurate, so in this sense it could indeed be better. At least on my unit, the final image will have quite a bit of stuff to the left and and top of the image not shown in the viewfinder. Of course this is an issue if I forget to take this into account when framing the shot - happens especially in hasty situations.

That said, I'll probably never sell my 20D. Even if I upgrade, and of course I eventually will unless something makes me stop taking photos (unlikely - even though I get very frustrated with it quite often - because I'm probably going to make a job of it), it'll still serve well as a second body and back-up. At least I'd imagine it would be better to use it for that than to sell it for what little I could get for it at that point in time (which isn't soon!).

lexvo wrote:
Hans Bertrams wrote:
My 20D is good enough for a while, the only reason I see me upgrading is if it has a better viewfinder. The PDF says it has a 96% viewfinder, that doesn't seem like FF, the 20D has 97%. Or am I missing something?

With the 20D, you see 97% of the 1.6x crop, giving a 1.65 crop viewfinder.
With the 5D (if it exists), you see 96% of the FF image, giving a 1.04 crop viewfinder.

So the 5D will still have a large viewfinder.

BTW Hans: long time, no see! How are you doing?


Hi Lex,

All is fine, and with you? We should come together again soon for a dutch photo meeting.

Thanks for explaining, this gives me a reason to upgrade.
So little time, so much to buy.

Here's a pre production picture of the rumored Canon 2D.

Top Secret

Awesome! It looks like the laundry washer I have in my basement!


Yaryman wrote:
Here's a pre production picture of the rumored Canon 2D.

Top Secret

gunblue wrote:
I'm not sure if this is a PS work or pre-production shots. But just wondering on the model 5D. Konica-Minolta already owns the 5D name/trademark.

That's a very good point.

Perhaps a hint towards a huge hoax? I'll confront the canon sales agent when i'm at work next...

foto-z wrote:
Marcus, i already posted that on the other thread. It's certainly not an official Canon site, and just as questionable as the other 'documents'

I hope it's all true
Didn't you realize that I say geez? It's a hoax... at least this document is.

Hook, line and sinker. 8 pages of rumor mongering chaff to sort through...

At least I'll know where to go when I get some shares of the Brooklyn Bridge to sell...

I was wondering if this thread would ever end.........That said and now seeing another offer of the Brooklyn bridge........ I suggest anyone wishing to get on the bleeding edge of Canon's latest new technology just take that low milage 20D, pack it up, and ship to me so I can replace the ole D30...... .



Jim

You ain't getting my 20D it's still practically newborn. I'm waiting it out for a FF equivalent in price and features.