well i cna always focus manually. or just leave off the extender. that gives me 400mm instead of 200x1.6=320. so still longer than my 200.
thanks for pointing that out to me. its meant to be a very sharp lens.
Stu Warner wrote:
I have heard the following things about full frame cameras, but have never actually used one myself yet: FF gives better ISO performance, greater freedom to crop after the capture is made, more control over depth of field, later diffraction limitation, enables you to shoot with fast wide lenses, and has a bigger and brighter viewfinder to aid composition and mannual focus.
not al of that is entirely true.
diffraction limit has nothing at all do to with with APS-C vs. FF itself.
diffraction is diffraction and it doesn't care what sensor is there.
higher pixel density will mean that you might not get the full advanatge of more pixels at higher f-stops and you can out in more MP at a lower density than on a smaller sensor so you are less quick to run into the situation where you don't fully gain from more MP at higher f-stops.
anyway you never do worse in any case, its jsut in some scenarios of pixel density you don't fully gain from teh higher pixel density.
greater freedom to crop is not necessarily true either, although in say the particular case of a 20D vs. a 5dMkII case it very much is true.
as for the viewfinder, if you are framing for shots then you see more resolution per shot through the VF and the brightness and size look nice, if you are shooting for reach, since the FF VF are .71-.76x or so mag and the APS-C are usually like .95 or so mag you actually see the animal or whatever LESS well with a FF viewfinder, but if you are framing a landscape equivalently or a person, etc. then yeah.
jaypod wrote:
will be getting a battery grip as well.
The other option is i get a Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM at a later date. under a grand for me and coupled with the 1.4 tc i have will be plenty of reach for me even on full frame. then i get the reach and the quality.
Quality is no 1 for me. the reach can be added later. well thats the way i am looking at it.
FWIW shooting wildlife with a FF camera and cropping to the size you want sounds great in theory but it isn't as simple as that. First you have to be able to focus on the subject.
I have found that shooting with a 1DsMKII my biggest problem was locking focus on a smaller subject in the viewfinder rather than whether I could crop it enough to use. This is using a 600 with a 1.4x TC most of the time. That is why I always have a 1.6x crop camera for those situations where the subject was just too small in the viewfunder for a reliable focus lock with a FF camera.
In those situations where you can fill the frame with your subject or have to crop sparingly then the FF alternative is well worth it. Personally I wouldn't be without both a 1.6x and FF camera.
jaypod wrote:
... 21mp to 15mp i can crop by 1.6 and get close to the res of the 50d anyway wiith much less noise ...
You can indeed. However, be aware that the crop factor will be only about 1.2x, as opposed to 1.6x with a 50d. In other words, if you crop to 15MP, your 70-200 will have the view angle range of an 85-240, more or less.
jaypod wrote:
are you sure about that, it says that auto focus will work on pro bodies only. is the 5d2 a pro body?
The 1-Series bodies will autofocus with lenses that have maximum apertures as small as f/8. The consumer bodies only autofocus lenses that have maximum apertures down to f/5.6.
The Canon brand teleconverters dutifully report the resultant combinatioin maximum aperture to the camera--and because they report a combination maximum aperture of smaller than f/5.6, the consumer cameras switch off autofocusing.
However, there are 3rd party teleconverters that do not report their existance to the camera--they merely pass through the maximum aperture reported by the lens. In those cases, the camera will still attempt to autofocus with the teleconverter. How accurate and speedy autofocusing is under those conditions would be something you'd have to judge for yourself.
I would expect the "cost" would be in speed rather than accuracy. You would probably have to give it a bit of help by a rough manual focus, letting the camera trim the focusing automatically.
One should also know that FF is a lot more demanding on lenses - so you need good glass i.e. macro and L-series lenses. Consumer grade lenses won't do quite so well on FF bodies.
Twenty-one megapixels is still less resolution than we got with thin-emulsion black and white films, and we never "maxed" out lens resolution in those days. The worry about lens resolution being "maxed out" by sensors is far over-hyped on these forums.
When we used a high-resolving thin-emulsion BW film with any lens, guess what: It always still resulted in a sharper image than the same lens used with a lower resolving film.
diffraction limit has nothing at all do to with with APS-C vs. FF itself. diffraction is diffraction and it doesn't care what sensor is there.
But how significantly diffraction affects the final image depends very much on the degree of enlargement to the final display size--which is why 4x5 film users can stop down to f/45 or f/64 and with only a 4x enlargement to 16x20 still get sharper results than any 24x36mm image enlarged to the same 16x20.
anyone from US orders the 5D MII from Canada? I just have a look on Henry Camera's site and we can preorder at $2799 Canadian dollar, equivalent to $2350 USD.
CMOS wrote:
The 5D is a rebel class body? Seriously? At least compare the 5D body to the 50D body.
sorry for the confusion, by body i didn't mean the physical housing, that has nothing to do with the ability to AF at f/8 and actual performance and that was what was under discussion,
the physical body is definitely much better than a Rebel.
but the non-sensor innards are overal closer to a rebel than to anything else in the canon line and not a match for an xxD body (aside, perhaps and hopefully for AF) nevermind a pro 1 series body.
look at the frame rate, look at the shutter lag, look at the mirror blackout time, look at the buffer, even the flash sync. The 1 series totally destroys the 5D in all those specs as do the xxD's (well certainly at least since the 20D) and in many cases the specs are closer to the rebel body performance (even if a little bit better) than to the xxD nevermind the 1 series.
but yeah the physical body housing is way better than the rebels
and yeah the sensor is way better too
and for the 5dmkii the video is infinitely better than the rebels and the LCD is better
the AF is also better than the rebels, how it fares against a 50D we'll see, from what I have heard I doubt it compares to a 1 series.
but all the shutter, mirror, buffer, etc. are far from pro level and getting back to the main question, no it's not a pro body and it does not do AF at f/8.
azurekenzo wrote:
anyone from US orders the 5D MII from Canada? I just have a look on Henry Camera's site and we can preorder at $2799 Canadian dollar, equivalent to $2350 USD.
$2367 for it would not be a bad price at all....
$3086 with 24-105L
i haven't followed it, but i get the feeling the CA dollar vs. US has been fluctuating rather strongly recently and i wonder what the case will be at the moment they have it ready for billing (i'm sure there is some CC conversion fee too, but I;d guess it wouldn't be too huge)
if it came out before the livesearch thing expires it would be $2499 from US authorized dealers, of course those ones popping up on ebay from such will likely sell out faasst.
