ShaneEngelking wrote:
Personally, I am hoping for a 1D Mark 4 with live view, HD video, working AF, full frame, 16+ mp, 10 fps. The 5D Mark 2 sounds great, but i really need a camera that can shoot sports too.
Make it 15MP and 1.3x crop and I'm sold. 16MP is too few for a FF for birding and wildlife a lot of the time. The 15MP 1.3x cropper would be a nice balance, still a lot of pixels for detail, yet better noise than a 1.6x cropper of the same pixel count. This combined with a 5D II would be all I need and I'll sell my 40D in a heartbeat, no more 1.6x croppers.
Lotusm50 wrote:
I guess that's all pretty subjective. 40" prints with my 5D (mirror lock-up etc.) are pretty lacking in detail, sharpness and resolution. I'm not looking at my prints at some cop-out "appropriate viewing distance" but as I would examine any print. And I doubt I'm doing something significantly different than you are. Maybe it's a matter of expectations. If you don't expect too much from a 40" 5D print, you'll be happy with what you get. Acceptable perhaps at a distance, or if you don't have other options, but I don't find 40" prints from a 5D to be adequate for my needs or what I expect out of a 40" print.
How about just printing higher quality 40" prints? On top of that, there are the other benefits of the new body already mentioned by others.
I'm one of those people when they see large prints I walk up real close and see what sort of detail is there. Sure I appreciate the print from further back, but if the print is soft and fuzzy up close, it's loses a lot of impact in my mind. 21MP is a lot better than 12.8MP once you get to A2+ prints IMO. For landscape, macro, close-up wildlife the 5D II will have superb IQ. I wouldn't make a 40" print from my 5D, but's that's just me.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I wouldn't make a 40" print from my 5D, but's that's just me.
I have a few 48" prints from mine. They are showing the weakness of the 12MP sensor,
but from the distance they look jaw-dropping. The picture must be perfect though.
The lens must be up to the task, my 16-35L II, as much as I love it, shows
some really weak angles in such a huge size print. That's why I'm getting Zeiss 21mm
as soon as I can Weird, but my 24-70L is much better...
If I can get an improvement of resolution, a good LCD, a better weather-sealing, that's all good.
I wish AF was improved as it should've been. But the world is not perfect.
I'm getting two 5D II's. Sorry, have to go, must watch Sarah
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I'm one of those people when they see large prints I walk up real close and see what sort of detail is there. Sure I appreciate the print from further back, but if the print is soft and fuzzy up close, it's loses a lot of impact in my mind. 21MP is a lot better than 12.8MP once you get to A2+ prints IMO. For landscape, macro, close-up wildlife the 5D II will have superb IQ. I wouldn't make a 40" print from my 5D, but's that's just me.
Right!. This is what most people do. They stand back to view the entire print, and then walk up real close to see points of interest. They then walk back to see the entire thing again.
On the wall of my lab, I would see people doing just that.
The same thing in galleries.
The only time the rules apply is when you are physically prevented from getting any closer.
Any photo that should have fine detail must have it, or it loses impact. If photographing a stucco wall, it must be real sharp. If it isn't, it doesn't look right.
Mel Gross wrote:
Right!. This is what most people do. They stand back to view the entire print, and then walk up real close to see points of interest. They then walk back to see the entire thing again.
On the wall of my lab, I would see people doing just that.
The same thing in galleries.
The only time the rules apply is when you are physically prevented from getting any closer.
Any photo that should have fine detail must have it, or it loses impact. If photographing a stucco wall, it must be real sharp. If it isn't, it doesn't look right.
However, I find non-photographer types tend not to walk up close and check the detail. I've looked at large prints and seen they really are soft from close, but my wife always views them from afar and never really notices the faults; she's looking at it for what it depicts and always has a laugh with my friends about being too critical.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
However, I find non-phorgrapher types tend not to walk up close and check the detail. I've looked at large prints and seen they really are soft from close, but my wife always views them from afar and never really notices the faults; she's looking at it for what it depicts and always has a laugh with my friends about being too critical.
Who cares?
The people who BUY prints look at them up close, and that's what matters.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I'm talking about exhibits where nothing is for sale. It seems the photographers are pixel peepers by nature and non-photographers aren't.
I would partly agree. I see people in galleries squinting at pictures.
People are becoming more accustomed to looking at large sharp images in their HD TV's now. Mine has a picture that, even though the resolution is much lower, of course, looks awful sharp because of the way video is shot. They want to see that, or better, in large prints.
Kamera wrote:
I want to apologize to all of you that had to read over my question that was truly not suitable for the forum. My laziness and inability to find the answer that I was looking was unacceptable and I’m glad that Mr. Mel Gross set me strait. I hope he will forgive me for being so inferior and uninformed. I will in the future keep my questions and thoughts to myself and not bother you on the forum.
Yes, you should be ashamed of yourself! Same goes for us fools who had the audacity to question whether the 5DII's IQ will truly be as good as the 5D's, or raise questions about the functionality of the video. What were we thinking?
We should all now commit mass seppuku. Prepare your knives, gentleman......
stiksandstones wrote:
I made an action shot, about 2 stories tall from a 5d....can you believe it!! it was in focus too!!
Signed,
a guy who actually uses his 5D.
To Brainiac and anyone else who might be interested in an ultra-small SB400-like flash unit, Amazon.com vendor Electronics Expo has dropped the price of the Sunpak RD2000 from $119 to just $70 + $7 shipping = $77! So glad I waited, as I saved $49. Just got my copy. It's real nifty.
Dark Slider wrote:
I clicked the link, took a quick look, and said to myself, "if it only bounced." Then I scrolled down in the ad, and saw it bounced.
Weird, but my 24-70L is much better...