MSC wrote:
Wow, what does that baby cost...they seem to left the price off that page...I know, if you have to ask, you can't afford it.
Heh. You can get it for about $1700 now (without the redundant power supply). Then add a few drives - 8x1TB Seagate in my case, which at the time of purchase was the real whopper. In RAID-5 configuration, on my MacPro, I get about 90MB/s read and 75MB/s write, which for a RAID-5 unit is actually quite awesome. 250W power consumption (with dual power supply and all 8 drives running), and you better put it in your attic as boy that thing is loud. The single power supply version is said to be MUCH quieter (one big fan instead of four tiny ones).
stanj wrote:
Not unless the 5D2 (or whatever) has the same AF as my 1Ds3. Maybe I am alone in that thinking, but we are getting cameras that can shoot in increasingly darker situations, without improving the AF to match it. When I strap a 1.2 or 1.4 lens on my 40D it doesn't focus nearly as well as my 1Ds3, and I doubt the 50D (and by extension 5D2) would be any better.
Exactly. Canon still jealously withhold pro AF and real weather sealing for the 1-series. Until that (particularly the AF) changes, the gap between Canon's prosumer and pro bodies will continue to be significant. The 50D in no way demonstrates that Canon "finally started to think like Nikon does", which is unfortunate but acceptable considering that the XXD cameras are cheaper than the Nikon D300.
If the 40D->50D upgrade is any indication, the 5D replacement, whatever it's called and whatever its specs, will not pose any kind of threat to the 1DsIII except for customers who only wanted the 1DsIII for the resolution and not the AF, build, customizability, etc.
Monito wrote:
They did improve it. Now it is "all cross type". And there is micro-adjustment in the custom functions so you can tweak it for lenses.
Still not really comparable to the 1D3 series, I am quite confident to say. The "all new improved 40D" back at the time couldn't hold a candle to my 1Ds2 at the time, so I don't think this is any different.
stanj wrote:
Still not really comparable to the 1D3 series, I am quite confident to say. The "all new improved 40D" back at the time couldn't hold a candle to my 1Ds2 at the time, so I don't think this is any different.
Yeah, and guess what also isn't comparable to the 1D3 series? The price. You aren't going to get a 1D3 for $1300 ... and you aren't going to get a camera comparable to a 1D3 for $1300.
Edited by netminder0 on Aug 25, 2008 at 10:50 PM GMT
netminder0 wrote:
Yeah, and guess what also isn't comparable to the 1D3 series? The price. You aren't going to get a 1D3 for $1300 ... and you aren't going to get a camera comparable to a 1D3 for $1300.
In contrast to many others, I never had any issue with that. I don't expect the 50D to be a serious threat to the 1D3, nor do I expect the 5D2 to be a threat to the 1Ds3, except to those who only count pixels (not to mention LCD pixels )
Hopefully the image quality will be good at ISO 1600. Fingers crossed they haven't simply chased megapixels over image quality. Should be interesting for some, but for most I can't see anything that's much better over the 40D.
In other words, without a better AF or better image quality, the 40D'ers probably won't upgrade (except those needing 15MP).
netminder0 wrote:
Yeah, and guess what also isn't comparable to the 1D3 series? The price. You aren't going to get a 1D3 for $1300 ... and you aren't going to get a camera comparable to a 1D3 for $1300.
I think the point is that Nikon has pro AF in it's D300, which is ~$1600 at B&H now, while Canon cannot, or will not, trickle that down to it's consumer line as Nikon has.
stanj wrote:
Still not really comparable to the 1D3 series, I am quite confident to say. The "all new improved 40D" back at the time couldn't hold a candle to my 1Ds2 at the time, so I don't think this is any different.
As usual, people want 1D and 1Ds series performance for 40D prices.
Nobody has yet commented that now Canon has changed their 18 month release cycle of prosumer cameras. This has been true since 10D! I wonder whether the next xxxD camera will then be released already next February (instead of next August when it would have been due).
Oh boy, this is turning into yet ANOTHER whine about Canon thread...sooo old and really depressing...enjoy the moaning, carping and fussing. See you on one of the presentation boards if you ever actually take a photograph.
thedigitalbean wrote:
Yea but does the 500 have the resolution to handle it? Haven't tried the 500 yet but with my 600 + 1.4x TC, the Rebel XSi pretty much outresolves the lens.
In my experience, my 450D + 400f2.8L II + 2x + 2x reaches the resolution limit of the optics. That's 1600mm at f11 wide open, and I stopped it to f14!
Yes, it is somewhat soft, but there is still actual information. Postprocessing makes the image look good at 100% pixels. In my case, it is the Moon, so this finding may only apply at infinity focus. The hyperfocal distance for this combination is 18 kilometers (!), so most terrestrial subjects do not qualify as being at infinity.
BTW, the contrast-based live view focus still works for this combination!
rsg_1 wrote:
Not entirely. With Digic IV, faster processing, and newer AF algorithms, it *probably* is better. The question is how much more. Canon's competition is the Sony A700 and Nikon D300 and it has to be nearly as good.
seems like canon is not claiming any changes at all though
only possible one would be if any extra speed of the digic can go to the AF system (and for all we know it puts more to image processing) and then if that helps any
)
