Marcus Watts wrote:
People hear that it has the same amount of af points and assume that technological advances won't come into play.
Of course the auto focus will be a big improvement on the first 5D which was fine anyway.
The negative comments are from those who either speculate on how good something will be or not then get emotionally heated over their speculation or those who just want to stomp their feet like a two year old and throw a tantrum because they really wanted a 1Ds3 in a 5D body.
This "wanting a 1Ds3 in a 5D" argument is getting a bit tiresome... At least for me. Because I own a 1Ds3 and I am not going to rid off it. Nor do I compare the 1Ds3 directly to a 5D2. I compare it to a 5D. And I had no fun using the 5D outer AF points. Especially not in low light. Of course the new 5D2 will have a tweaked version of the 5D AF, so it will probably be a bit better. But the fact remains that the 8 outer AF points are still single axis.
So, when not shooting things that are too demanding on the AF (like landscape/commercial/studio photography), the 5D2 will be a great value cam. But for a more dymanic approach to photography (reportage, PJ, events) I think the outer AF points will be less (read: not) usable. I say this based on my experiences with a 5D which shares the same AF hardware as the 5D2. OTOH, you have so many pixels that you can easily compensate for using only the center AF point (which no doubt will be excellent) by cropping (heavily).
In the end the 5D2 is just a tool. Suitable for a number of tasks, and not so suitable for others. It really depends on your shooting style and preferences if the 5D2 looks appealling or not. For me, since I am looking for a portable back-up cam (next to my 1Ds3), I would have liked a somewhat better AF. Not the 45 pro AF, because that would only bring the value of my 1Ds3 down . But an upgraded 40D/50D with the 6 assist points would have been nice. It would have made the 5D2 at least much more versatile (for my needs anyway) because my personal shooting style requires excellent outer AF point performance
BTW According to my CPS rep. the 5D2 doesn't have 9 AF cross points (FWIW)
After all this fighting and whining and hating Canon for making a newer better camera and giving us higher resolution, better noise reduction, weather sealing, better battery life and slightly faster frames per second I just want to know one thing:
Anyone know of any online retailers that let you pre-order? If so I'm plunking my money down TODAY
the text on the bottom left says 3 cameras will be unveiled.
I was initially thinking 1000D, 5DmII, and 50D. but then I realized that the 1000D was announced a bit earlier in the year, what do you guys reckon it'll be?
dmward wrote:
They described the AF as being 9 points of cross sensors with the center sensor having another cross at 45 degrees so it has 8 arms.
Very interesting. If this were the case, then the EOS 5D Mark II AF system would indeed be an upgrade over the original 5D. The 5D center point was only high precision in one axis. I think that had been the case for all high precision AF points in all EOS cameras, except the 40D/50D. In the 40D/50D, both axis are high precision with f2.8 lenses, and are oriented diagonally.
What you say seems consistent with what Rob Galbraith wrote about the EOS 5D Mark II:
Rob Galbraith wrote:
If an f/2.8 or faster lens is used, the centre AF point detects focus with triple the precision of slower lenses.
Perhaps I misunderstood. But the 40D/50D are the only cameras to feature a center AF point that's TRIPLE the precision with f2.8 lenses, correct? All previous incarnations were only double precision.
jrsforums wrote:
The article points to a Canon "employee", not a Canon engineer....which I suspect would be in Japan, not the UK (??, not clear, but assuming as it was UK Yahoo).
I doubt that many Canon UK employees...paricularly one who speak out to the press in this manner...would have the oportunity to have much direct contact with the Canon engineers.
I give this article the same credence as any guess which we all might have of Canon's engineering capabilities and/or marketing plan.
John
Thanks John for sharing this with us.
To Canon's Marketing Team:
I own about $35,000 worth of Canon equipment, including 1D-2, 1Ds-3, 600mm F4, 200mm F2.0 bla, bla, bla.
If my opinion worth anything to you, then please listen carefully. I WANT BETTER PIXELS NOT MORE PIXELS!! I want something that's lighter than my 1D's and something that CLEARLY outperforms the D700 and 5D-1. I held off buying a D700 only because I wanted to wait to see what you can deliver w/ 5D-2. Stop putting pressure on your engineers on the MP race and start listening to your customers.
an ontopic question, as long as we're talking about the new 5D... doesn't it seem to you guys that canon was just sitting on their asses for most of this summer and when they saw what the competition was preparing they quickly input the features on it.
I mean... they're too lazy to make a MLU button, and remove the direct print one... :|
The modified ds mkIII senzor is cool, i can give them that...
and btw... why would you need 21 mpx? - because you get less noise when pixels are smaller and packed tighter together.. as this graphic cutsection of the senzor demonstrates: microlenses on the 21mpx senzor
truth is, even though i expected something different (and more) of the 5D mkII, i'm still dying to have it!
btw, the most significant upgrade factor for me: Magnesium Alloy body [i dropped my 5d once and it now has a crack on it]! (what is yours?)
9-point TTL CMOS sensor , 6 "Invisible Assist AF points", All points cross-type for lenses of F5.6 or faster, Center point additionally sensitive with lenses of F2.8 or faster, AF working range: -0.5 - 18 EV (at 23°C, ISO 100)
I don't know what to believe anymore :P
Seen quite a few differing specs now.
European press release:
9-point TTL CMOS sensor , 6 "Invisible Assist AF points", All points cross-type for lenses of F5.6 or faster, Center point additionally sensitive with lenses of F2.8 or faster, AF working range: -0.5 - 18 EV (at 23°C, ISO 100)
(same as northlight).
If this is true, then we have nothing more to complain about
dragonview wrote:
Thanks John for sharing this with us.
To Canon's Marketing Team:
I own about $35,000 worth of Canon equipment, including 1D-2, 1Ds-3, 600mm F4, 200mm F2.0 bla, bla, bla.
If my opinion worth anything to you, then please listen carefully. I WANT BETTER PIXELS NOT MORE PIXELS!! I want something that's lighter than my 1D's and something that CLEARLY outperforms the D700 and 5D-1. I held off buying a D700 only because I wanted to wait to see what you can deliver w/ 5D-2. Stop putting pressure on your engineers on the MP race and start listening to your customers.
I agree! While more is nice, keep the megapixel race for point and shoot customers who read their crappy (and I do mean crappy) consumer reports reviews and think that more megapixels = better pictures.
dmward wrote:
the sRAW files are made by the DigiIV after the RAW file leaves the sensor buffer so for burst shooting it is always capturing a full file, it is only the saving process that reduces file size. Sounds like an incamera version of the option to import a smaller file than camera native resolution into Photoshop.
Does this mean its basically a simple resizing and not actually "binning" to produce that slightly cleaner image? Im not sure if im understanding this.
> They described the AF as being 9 points of cross sensors with the
> center sensor having another cross at 45 degrees so it has 8 arms.
Simply incorrect, I'm afraid; only the centre point is cross-type. This isn't from theory, hearsay or even Canon specs, but from testing the 5D II which is currently on my desk.
--
Andy Westlake
dpreview.com/lensreviews
End of story. First they decide to use the old AF module and now they are trying to lie
to people about it. They were denying any AF trouble in 1D MkIII for a long time too...
Maybe a bit more tolerance to some members can be esteemed to by some: I find it difficult to reassure my students to frequent this forum as apposed to others because people here are (supposedly) more professionally and ethically inclined - enough said.
I think the 5DII will be an absolute blessing for the more money-strapped photographer entering the professional field. That said, maybe I should then reserve the word "professional" to mean not sports and action photographers. However, I have also done my share of these type photos, and can only state that I found even the 'lowly' 20D to be fair enough for many of my students.
Those claiming the superiority of Nikon AF, should search more. A simple Google led to many pages of complaints from their users - and I can substantiate this from my experience from some of my students' results as well.
As far as the MP wars are concerned, this is by no means reserved for the small format cameras. MF systems are also having field days about this, and seemingly to similarly mixed emotions about it.
For one, I find the IQ of the 1DsIII better than the 1DsII (which I sold after my first day of testing the Mark III) and I welcome the increase in resolution from the 5DII.
I firmly believe that if Canon gave the 5DII a 16.7MP sensor, people would bitch that it was a 3yr old sensor, picked up of the floor from whatever was left from the 1DsII. Bigger photo sites do not a better image make.
When doing a straight comparison between these two images, one can see clear differences between the sensors. The one from the Canon I like better, if mainly for the fact that Nikon's is over-sharpened and there is less fine detail rendering.
(Yes, and before you flame me for non-scientific testing, poor JPEG compression, etc., these images are straight from the 2 horses' mouths. Pulled into PS, and only the view changed to reflect similar crops. - Remember that most comments I read here are based on posted JPEG samples, and as of yet I do not have access to RAW images from the 5DII.)
If I have to base my opinion of this camera on the results from JPEGs alone, which we all have to do for now, I am definitely recommending this camera for anyone wanting resolution on a lower budget.
As far as AF points are concerned, I would have liked 1/3 points (just an extra four, c'mon now). But again this camera I am sure would be used more inline for studio and landscape work. So maybe more AF points would be more a want than a need. But I will take the res thanks.
> They described the AF as being 9 points of cross sensors with the
> center sensor having another cross at 45 degrees so it has 8 arms.
Simply incorrect, I'm afraid; only the centre point is cross-type. This isn't from theory, hearsay or even Canon specs, but from testing the 5D II which is currently on my desk.
--
Andy Westlake
dpreview.com/lensreviews
End of story. First they decide to use the old AF module and now they are trying to lie
to people about it. They were denying any AF trouble in 1D MkIII for a long time too......Show more →
This is in line with what my CPS rep. told me... He tried one out yesterday.
Pretty bold statement though... That they were lying about it to cover things up. It would have come out anyway before the thing would hit the shelves by the end of november. At least brushing up and using a 3 year old AF isn't something they are bragging about. Actually, you don't hear them at all about the AF... They probably know they didn't do something they should be proud off
Robert Loblaw wrote:
Perhaps I misunderstood. But the 40D/50D are the only cameras to feature a center AF point that's TRIPLE the precision with f2.8 lenses, correct? All previous incarnations were only double precision.
Maybe someone can clarify?
No, AFAIK the the x-type points in the 1 series are all triple precision with f/2.8 or faster lenses.
In case people don't believe Canon Japan that there are not 9 x-type sensors, it has just been confirmed by someone that actually has one for testing
. But an upgraded 40D/50D with the 6 assist points would have been nice. It would have made the 5D2 at least much more versatile (for my needs anyway) because my personal shooting style requires excellent outer AF point performance 
