L. H. Smith wrote:
Actually the figure should be "1.28 times worse" (in the corners) for the 1DIII, and this would approximately equate to a rating of .78 on an MTF-chart.
(corrections welcome ;-)
.78 on the chart would only be 1.28 times worse if the the lens were PERFECT ("1" level on the chart) at the 16-17mm mark.
As soon as I posted this, I realized that I had neglected to say that this rating should really be determined by comparing the percentage drop of the lines on the graph between the 16-17mm mark(approximate"extreme corner" for the 1DIII), and the 21.6MM mark (extreme corner for FF).
If the line has dropped to less than 78% of it's level at the 16-17mm mark, when it reaches the 21.6mm mark(end of chart), the FF has lost some ground.
This is a bit tangly, ...so don't hesitate to check my figuring out. ;-)
AS THE PIXEL SIZE IS NOW THE SAME ON THE 3d AS THE 1dS2...7.2 MICRONS, WOULDNT THE IMAGE DETAIL BE THE SAME ON BOTH IF THE APPROPRIATE FOCAL LENGTH LENS WAS USED. I would appreciate some help in this. I would have thought that even though one is ff and one aps-h, if a lens of appropriate focal lengyh was used to frame the subject equally, then the detail would be the same.
No.
The image detail would be the same if the SAME lens was used on both (from a given position.
The image placed on the sensor would then be the same size, and so utilize the same number of pixels(resolution) in it's composition.
If a longer lens is used(from the same position) to put a same PROPORTION image (fill the frame?) on a larger sensor,...it is a LARGER IMAGE,...and so utilizes more pixels in it's composition,...thus is "resolved" in finer pieces. BETTER "resolution".
Remember, this is when the pixel-density on the different-size sensors is the same!
As to a same-but-full-size sensor vs. the 1DIII, ... the "better resolution" will likely come at a considerably diminished-return cost because canon makes quite a poinht of the fact that the 1DIII sensor size is the largest that can be made with a "single pass" chip manufacturing method(whatever that means,)...and is thus significantly less pricey.
Edited by L. H. Smith on Feb 25, 2007 at 09:21 AM GMT (Reason: mis-positioned previous edit)
eva1978 wrote:
perfect camera foe wedding photography? would it be the 5d or the new 1d mk3?
Well, since the 5D is available now, and the 1D Mark III has only been announced, it's impossible to say which would be better foe anything...unless you speculate based completely on the white paper, with no hands-on experience.
Personally, if you can't afford the 1Ds Mark II, I think the 5D is an excellent camera for weddings.
cant understand why the new 1d doesnt have the same 13MP as the 5d or do you think a new 1Ds is on the way?
The 5D is slow (3fps) compared to any 1D model (8fps-10fps)...and even the 1Ds was/is slow (4fps). Why would you think the full frame sensor from the 5D could be used in a 10fps sports camera? Sure, there's a new 1Ds on the way...will we see it at Photokina...who knows...perhaps next PMA...maybe. Can you wait that long to buy a camera? If so, wait...if not, buy what's available and shoot what you've got.
It's like PMA and Photokina turn people's brains to pudding.
amirm wrote:
[
So the camera for me has wider range but does not quite cover a full frame sensor range. Which is probably what Canon wants so that we all get stuck buying multiple bodies .
Another way to be "stuck" would be to have to pay the FF expensive-large-chip price to get the 1DIII features/speed when you don't need more resolution.
I.e.,...if you want everything, you have to pay for it.
This maybe way over simplified but seems like everyone wants to compare 2 or 3 different cameras that are meant really for 2 or 3 different markets. Not saying that they can't do all well, just maybe it is designed for a target. As I read these 5d vs d3 and and d3 vs Ds is like someone who owns a full size truck for work looking at the new hybrid commuter and trying to compare or see how it might change the model change for the truck. They are different for different wants and needs of people. If you own a 5D canon is not trying to pull you away with this, I don't think their intention is to make one mega camera to do everything.
Sorry for venting just tired of seeing silly comparisons and rationals trying to justify them.
Wickedfn4u wrote:
This maybe way over simplified but seems like everyone wants to compare 2 or 3 different cameras that are meant really for 2 or 3 different markets. Not saying that they can't do all well, just maybe it is designed for a target. As I read these 5d vs d3 and and d3 vs Ds is like someone who owns a full size truck for work looking at the new hybrid commuter and trying to compare or see how it might change the model change for the truck. They are different for different wants and needs of people. If you own a 5D canon is not trying to pull you away with this, I don't think their intention is to make one mega camera to do everything.
Sorry for venting just tired of seeing silly comparisons and rationals trying to justify them....Show more →
You might consider that not all who discuss here are in a position to be "pulled-away" from anything,...but rather are considering what to allow themselves to be "pulled toward". ;-)
Thus comparisons-before-purchase-decision are inevitable.
I have neither,...but have definitely been pulled "toward" the 1DIII. I find the "What are you giving up by passing on camera X, or gaining by choosing camera Y ?" conversation very helpful.
Clicking-on-by is a proven remedy for "tiredness". :-)
"It's like PMA and Photokina turn people's brains to pudding."
Amen.
The 5D and the new MK-III are different cameras for different purposes.
One is a photojournalist's camera and the other is more for general use.
Every camera will get replaced eventually,and nobody knows when, how long are you gonna wait? A camera is a tool, get the right one for the job you do.
If you're in the mood to buy a new one for wedding photography, my choice would be the 5D. Good luck.
For weddings I'd get the 5D and with the money you save buy a 24-70L as well. With that combo you've got 90% of your wedding shots covered and nothing to complain about quality-wise.
I'm happy with my 5D. Even if money was not a consideration, I'd buy the 5D over the MKIII: the 1D series is just too dad burn big 'n heavy for me. I can't imagine carrying that brick all day...
The only thing I want is the return of ECF. I hate pressing little buttons 'n spinning dials to select AF sensors.
Jeff wrote:
Now there's a huge assumption! I'm surprised at how little speculation there is about the potential demise of the Ds line. Based upon this announcement, I'm tending toward the possibility that the 1Ds Mk II was the last of its breed, and what comes next will be completely new. It just doesn't make sense that the 1D MkII N got a makeover and the 1Ds Mk II didn't. I'm guessing there's more to come, and it won't be in the form of a Ds...
Interesting perspective. Makes sense, too. Here is my take.
What would "1DsIII", if such thing is coming, be bringing us ?
Digic-III can give the Ds line 6 fps @ 16MP. But I rarely heard any complaints about 4fp. AF improvements are nice but no big deal. Live-View can be a good feature. We are not seeing the entitlement of 16MP files over 12MP files. So, I doubt if 22MP will bring more. To me, actually the biggest deal is the Dust-cleaning, seriously. Dust is the only complaints that I have with 1DsII.
Overall, I feel that 1DsIII with the feature parity with 1DIII would still be a very viable camera that can justify the current premium price. So, I would be that 1DsIII is coming
Pondria wrote:
Interesting perspective. Makes sense, too. Here is my take.
What would "1DsIII", if such thing is coming, be bringing us ?
Digic-III can give the Ds line 6 fps @ 16MP. But I rarely heard any complaints about 4fp. AF improvements are nice but no big deal. Live-View can be a good feature. We are not seeing the entitlement of 16MP files over 12MP files. So, I doubt if 22MP will bring more. To me, actually the biggest deal is the Dust-cleaning, seriously. Dust is the only complaints that I have with 1DsII.
Overall, I feel that 1DsIII with the feature parity with 1DIII would still be a very viable camera that can justify the current premium price. So, I would be that 1DsIII is coming ...Show more →
I agree that 1DsII doesn't need as much "fixing.' But let's have the smaller battery so that we can travel lighter. Along these lines, I take my 1DsII and 1DII together on trips. Seeing how I am getting the 1DIII, it will be a pain to carry both types of batteries/chargers.
And of course, the upgrade would get rid of the darn two button UI so that we can change things with gloves on a bit better and faster overall. And as you say, dust removal would be really handy, given how I use my 1DsII for landscapes, stopped down so the dust shows up more.
Pondria wrote:
Interesting perspective. Makes sense, too. Here is my take.
What would "1DsIII", if such thing is coming, be bringing us ?
Digic-III can give the Ds line 6 fps @ 16MP. But I rarely heard any complaints about 4fp. AF improvements are nice but no big deal. Live-View can be a good feature. We are not seeing the entitlement of 16MP files over 12MP files. So, I doubt if 22MP will bring more. To me, actually the biggest deal is the Dust-cleaning, seriously. Dust is the only complaints that I have with 1DsII.
Overall, I feel that 1DsIII with the feature parity with 1DIII would still be a very viable camera that can justify the current premium price. So, I would be that 1DsIII is coming ...Show more →
Are you 1Ds dudes very attracted to the idea of being able to easily compose for different aspect ratios on the LCD in live mode?
I thought that might be a biggie.
DaveMart wrote:
Are you 1Ds dudes very attracted to the idea of being able to easily compose for different aspect ratios on the LCD in live mode?
I thought that might be a biggie.
Can it (framing) be achieved with focusing screens with grids ?
With Live mode, I think the following things can be useful.
1. With my SONY P&S, it is very handy to see the scene with the simulated brightness even when the scene is dark.
2. I am wondering if this can be helpful for critical focus. With proper zoom-in, it may.
3. Commercial computer Kiosk with preset up ( like Passport photos )
> Digic-III can give the Ds line 6 fps @ 16MP. But I rarely heard any complaints about 4fp.
Well, I would have complained if I'd bought one; but I just stuck with the 1DMkII and quietly wished for 16 megapixels instead.
I had a 1DsII for a couple of months, which confirmed my suspicions that 4fps was too slow to shoot live dance performance when you can't see a rehearsal beforehand...the files were glorious, don't get me wrong, but the moments were lost between frames.
.