Mr Joe wrote:
With this new full frame camera, a whole new price point of photographers will be able to experience Canon's mediocre wide angle lens performance.
Canon WAs aren't too bad except on test charts IMHO.
Schlotkins wrote:
I still don't get the "invisible" focus points... I mean, I had a D30 and the lack of "red" confirmation killed me. However, I guess with a 96% coverage and 0.71x (ie about the same viewfinder size as the Eos 3), it's going to be a little easier to see what's going on.
Like I said, I'll pay $3k (when I'm done school) not to have to convert focal lengths for the wife and to be able to put back on the 85L on this bad boy for some sick backgrounds.
Chris
Check the images and discussion on the 20D focusing points in the sticky thread. Even the 20D has "invisible helper" (hapless choice of words during translation) focus points--those are the two additional vertically oriented AF arrays that come into play with f2.8 lenses.
rocketpop wrote:
What I don't like is that it has a crappy 9 AF points on a 3 or 4k camera. WTF?
Rocketpop, have you even used a 1 series with the 45 pt AF ?
Have you actually shot with this new camera so be able to know that the AF is "crappy" ?
How often do you actually need 45 points in your daily shooting ?
What is wrong if they have 9 points covering the center (which is what Im assuming the "invisible 6" points are, similar to the AF expand feature on the 1 series) and they are all cross sensative ?
On all my 1 series I only have them set to 11 points. 45 points is a hassle to select and I never shoot with auto AF point selection. Furthermore not all the 45 points are cross sensative. 90% of my and most other sports shooters AF point usage is always using the center point anyways.
I belive Nikon only has something like 11 AF points on their AF system for what its worth as well
The Big Bad wrote:
Rocketpop, have you even used a 1 series with the 45 pt AF ?
Have you actually shot with this new camera so be able to know that the AF is "crappy" ?
How often do you actually need 45 points in your daily shooting ?
What is wrong if they have 9 points covering the center (which is what Im assuming the "invisible 6" points are, similar to the AF expand feature on the 1 series) and they are all cross sensative ?
On all my 1 series I only have them set to 11 points. 45 points is a hassle to select and I never shoot with auto AF point selection. Furthermore not all the 45 points are cross sensative. 90% of my and most other sports shooters AF point usage is always using the center point anyways.
I belive Nikon only has something like 11 AF points on their AF system for what its worth as well
Even without a 1-series focusing system, I would still like to see some improvement in AF tracking over the 20D. Yes, it's only 3fps, but that is arguably useful for action, and it is a year newer and a lot more expensive. Interchangeable screens would be nice, too. I'm looking forward to getting back to FF shooting, whenever an inevitable new cam with that feature becomes available.
The Big Bad wrote:
Rocketpop, have you even used a 1 series with the 45 pt AF ?
Have you actually shot with this new camera so be able to know that the AF is "crappy" ?
How often do you actually need 45 points in your daily shooting ?
What is wrong if they have 9 points covering the center (which is what Im assuming the "invisible 6" points are, similar to the AF expand feature on the 1 series) and they are all cross sensative ?
On all my 1 series I only have them set to 11 points. 45 points is a hassle to select and I never shoot with auto AF point selection. Furthermore not all the 45 points are cross sensative. 90% of my and most other sports shooters AF point usage is always using the center point anyways.
I belive Nikon only has something like 11 AF points on their AF system for what its worth as well
I've never owned a 1 series. I've used/owned the EOS 3, which has the 45 point cloud.
When daily shooting consists of basketball, the 45 point cloud is quite nice for tracking your subject. On a camera that, if rumors are right, will cost 4k, it is a major dissapointment TO ME, that it doesn't have a higher AF point count. Again, TO ME.
I never said that the AF points were crappy, I said that the count was crappy. They can be wonderfully accurate, and the new "AF assist points" may be an answer to tracking. I don't know. I won't know until its out, and in fact, at 4k, I probably won't ever know because I'll never spend 4k on a camera.
However, judging by the specs, this camera isn't intended for sports or action photogs anyway. It has a low FPS, it has low AF point count, etc. Its a full frame without those features. Portrait photographers, landscape photographers, etc this seems like a great option for.
When I read about this, I was hoping for a rough equivalent to the EOS 3. I'm dissapointed. Shoot me.
This better be fake, becuase it's ahuge let down for the mythical tweener I've been waiting 3 years for. Price, AF performance and speed are all trailing edge. This is no good for action at all. Yes great for landscape, but then so is my 1D2.
Give me a 1D3 with 12.5MP, and 2.5" LCD, improved AF anyday and it will still be cheaper!
Mr Joe wrote:
With this new full frame camera, a whole new price point of photographers will be able to experience Canon's mediocre wide angle lens performance.
Then again, us Canon users can use Zeiss, Olympus, Leica, or even Nikon lenses, old and new.
Antony wrote:
Just wondering if the 1D Mark II N will be a full frame 12.8MP camera using the same chip but with better buffer etc enabling 8-9 fps.
No idea mate but a stab in the dark would suggest becasue they're adding an N to the name rather than calling it mkIII, it would mean a small update, not a new body.
So, am I right about this? After reading the specs, it looks similar to a full frame 3fps 20d, with new "af assist points", and no flash. Controls, build, etc. seems similar?
Alex53 wrote:
I have to say, as someone commented in the ojodigital.com forum where this news originated, its a little sad to see from the amount of interest that the toys are more important than the game to so many people
Keep it real man! We're all just having fun, that should always be part of the game.
The 5D being a single digit falls into the Pro category and missing important pro features: a weather sealed body + 45 AF points + more...
If it was a 50D, it would logically fall into the same category as the 20D with a similar body. That would have made more sense.
Canon still has current in the film lineup the EOS 3, which was never purported to be a full-blown pro model. That model succeeded the EOS 5, which was even less a pro camera. Only the 1 has been used for pro EOS cameras for the last fifteen years.
The 5D name, if accurate, evokes the EOS prosumer cameras, especially the 5. (I think it's safe to say that calling it the 3D would be pretty dumb.) IIRC the EOS 50 was an Elan camera here in the US and was targeted at consumers.
Maybe I missed this earlier in the thread, but isn't part of the point of this "tweener" camera to compete with the Nikon D2X? Based on the specs, it doesn't look like it.
If the mythical 5D was $3000 street price, I would buy one, and go back to a prime lens lineup: 21, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135.
--c
