I'm not meaning to be confrontational here, but I hear people claim all the time that the 5D produces superior images to say the 30D.
I would like to see two images at the same FL with both cameras that shows the 5D's image to be superior to an image from a 20D/30D.
DPreview has similar images that might help
I think if I owned a 30D and wanted to truly upgrade to FF I would wait for the 5D mkII. Not that a 30D owner wouldn't appreciate the 5D as an IQ upgrade, but I would expect significant buyers remorse when the 5D mkII comes out.
Edited by dcmiller on Aug 30, 2007 at 09:47 AM GMT
The problem is, it is just logical that all the new features, starting with the XTi, then the MKIII and lately the 40D, larger screens, sensor cleaning, 14 bit, weather resistance, are surely being worked on for the 5D. Buying a 5D now, only to find out in Feb that the new on is coming out, would have to be a punch in the stomach.
AGeoJO wrote:
There are 2-3 threads exactly about that issue. The mods merged them into one; here it is: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/566007. I am sure before too long, this one will be merged into that as well . Happy reading!
Thanks a lot, I looked for before but probably blind
It's always been about timing, not absolute value. The XTi is a much better camera than the $30,000 Canon digital of ten years ago. So we have our choices now, the choice of what's announced, and the choice of waiting for what we think will be in the future.
I find the things I buy and us a lot were always a good value. The things I buy and don't use much were always too expensive.
I'm not meaning to be confrontational here, but I hear people claim all the time that the 5D produces superior images to say the 30D.
I would like to see two images at the same FL with both cameras that shows the 5D's image to be superior to an image from a 20D/30D.
So it is meaningless that photographers pretty much unanimously agree that their 5D files are superior to their 20D/30D files? This is a known quantity already, and has been for quite some time. The 5D easily wins regarding IQ. In fact, it is more comparable to a 1DsMkII than to a 20D/30D. This is a fact, not an opinion. But still, you need proof? Web-sized JPEGs won't tell you the whole story, so I suggest renting a 5D and having a look for yourself.
The 40D noise performance is improved from the 30D/20D, as it has a tad better high ISO performance but higher resolution. Here's how it stacks up:
40D:
double the frame rate
better edge performance with most lenses
sensor cleaning (it is not "fluff" despite the above wishful thinking from a 5D user)
5D:
~12% higher resolution
perhaps better high ISO performance, although certainly now much less than a stop (notice the resolution advantage helps here)
bigger, brighter viewfinder may make it better for MF (have not seen results on new focusing screens for the 40D)
AF accuracy between the two cameras is unknown, and will probably vary depending on the application anyway.
michael49 wrote:
I'm not meaning to be confrontational here, but I hear people claim all the time that the 5D produces superior images to say the 30D.
I would like to see two images at the same FL with both cameras that shows the 5D's image to be superior to an image from a 20D/30D.
A few comments.
The 5D can produce better image quality than the 40D (unless some miracle is revealed when the camera is available for actual testing) because it has a) greater MP dimensions, b) larger photosites.
That said, the question remains whether the "betterness" is a) noticable, b) significant, c) worth the cost.
(Selecting one camera over another because it is "better" is kind of like buying one car instead of another because it is faster. Let's say one can go 120 mph and the other can go 125 mph. I suppose that 125 mph is "better" than 120 mph, but what if you never drive faster than 70 mph...)
A crop sensor 10 MP DSLR can produce outstanding image quality. With good technique (oh yeah, and inspiration...) you can get photographs that will reproduce at quite large print sizes. (I sold 16 x 24 inch prints of photos made on a 350D.) If you aren't going to print this large or if you will mostly distribute electronically, frankly there is little to be gained from FF. (And, yes, I'm a full frame camera user: 5D plus L lenses.) You'd probably see more difference in your photography by taking the money you saved by getting the 40D and investing in good lenses, tripod, filters, etc.
By the way, it also remains to be seen how much difference the extra two bits makes in actual images.
So, yes, the 5D is "better" than the 40D (OK, not if you need a fast burst rate...) on the basis of image quality. However, the 40D - or even the excellent 400D - could be a "better camera" for a particular user.
I completely agree, Dan. The 40D will, indeed, be a better camera for many, many users. Just look at those features and price!
Does it narrow the gap between the xxD series and the 5D? Yes, and rightly so. It is what the 30D should have been.
Does it make the 5D irrelevant, in any way? No, I certainly don't think many 5D owners will be selling off their camera and buying a 40D.
As a 5D user, you know just how beautiful those 5D files are. There is much more of a difference than 5 MPH And you also know it isn't just about the files (IQ). It is also about FF, big VF, small DOF, getting the true focal length out of lenses, etc.
cogitech wrote:
Does it make the 5D irrelevant, in any way? No, I certainly don't think many 5D owners will be selling off their camera and buying a 40D.
I'll weigh in and agree with Dan's comments (well said). It really does come down to what you shoot and how you print. I've gone back and forth between the 5D and 20/30D more times than I care to admit. I'm always more satisfied with the 5D files when viewed at 100% on my computer. You can absolutely see a difference here. But anytime I print at normal print sizes up to 13X19, I can see little or no difference in output. As for ISO performance, I think it too is often overstated. When a 1 stop advantage is claimed, it should include the ISO value being measured. Obviously the 5D does not have a 1 stop advantage over the 20/30/40D at ISO 100 or 200 or even 400. Maybe at 3200. Here is what Phil Askey had to say about the 5D ISO
The EOS 5D's performance up to ISO 800 is very similar to that of the EOS-1Ds Mark II, however there's a distinct difference at ISO 1600 and 3200 where the EOS-1Ds Mark II appears to utilize less noise reduction and hence maintains more detail (at the expense of visible noise). This would appear to be an example of the difference in the ethos behind Canon's professional EOS-1D series cameras and the rest of the range. The overall noise performance from the EOS 5D is very good and by our measurements almost identical to the EOS 20D.
Again, I agree that the 5D files (at high ISO) are cleaner looking, I just don't see much difference in normal print sizes. If you print large, get the 5D. If you shoot wide angle, portraits, studio, product, landscape, weddings - 5D is a great choice. If you shoot sports, wildlife or anything where you are focal length limited, a 40D may work better.
You'll be very pleased with the 5D. I am sure the 40D will encorporate more bells and whistles superficially, but the 5D's full frame sensor is time tested, extremely low light capable, and just plain terrific at capturing special moment.
I guess that if I were you, my main considerations in choosing are:
1. The 40D is new, and like the 1DIII may have bugs to fix
2. 14 vs 12 bit is real for post-processing/editing and possibly for dynamic range, but the 5D already demonstrates great dynamic range
3. Full frame vs crop (matters based on how you shoot and what lenses you have already...if you have a large investment in EF-S, then the 40D is an obvious choice). In my opinion, if you don't have a large EF-S lens investment, the 5D has a HHUUUUUUGE advantage here.
4. Weather sealing: the 40D has the edge here
5. FPS: the 40D is faster, if you do a lot of sports shooting.
Personally, I'd chose the 5D. It's got the pro-style sensor! Great pixel pitch. Nearly 13 megapixels. Full Frame! It's known to take great shots. I am sure, however, that you will not be disappointed either way.
csd2020 wrote:
I'll weigh in and agree with Dan's comments (well said). It really does come down to what you shoot and how you print. I've gone back and forth between the 5D and 20/30D more times than I care to admit. I'm always more satisfied with the 5D files when viewed at 100% on my computer. You can absolutely see a difference here. But anytime I print at normal print sizes up to 13X19, I can see little or no difference in output. As for ISO performance, I think it too is often overstated. When a 1 stop advantage is claimed, it should include the ISO value being measured. Obviously the 5D does not have a 1 stop advantage over the 20/30/40D at ISO 100 or 200 or even 400. Maybe at 3200. Here is what Phil Askey had to say about the 5D ISO
Again, I agree that the 5D files (at high ISO) are cleaner looking, I just don't see much difference in normal print sizes. If you print large, get the 5D. If you shoot wide angle, portraits, studio, product, landscape, weddings - 5D is a great choice. If you shoot sports, wildlife or anything where you are focal length limited, a 40D may work better....Show more →
Yes. The per-pixel noise performance of the 5D is roughly equivalent to that of the 20D. The main advantage is in resolution here, where one can see that the fact that the 5D has more pixels is a true advantage.
That advantage is eaten up somewhat with the 40D. If the per-pixel noise of the 40D is significantly better than that of the 20D (which I wouldn't bet on at this point) the advantage is even less.
Noise aside, the 5D does have around 12% better resolution, with some given up in the corners and edge on many shots. Is this worth the extra money? To many, yes.
The reduced DOF of the 5D is counted by some as an advantage. The increased DOF of the XXD is counted by some as an advantage.
The fact that wide angle lenses are "truly wide" is counted by many as an advantage for the 5D. I suppose it is, if you prefer super wide angle... This seems to be an advantage mostly for landscape and architecture shooters. I think the Canon 10-22 works fine on the 30D.
At this point, I think the main advantage of the 5D over the 40D is resolution when stopped down. It will be a different matter when the 5D replacement comes out, I'm sure.
. Happy reading!
And you also know it isn't just about the files (IQ). It is also about FF, big VF, small DOF, getting the true focal length out of lenses, etc.
