michael49 wrote:
My 40D's AF smokes my 5D's, which is to be expected, but if my 40D's AF smokes the 5DII's AF, well that would just be pathetic, IMO.
Actually, the 40D's Af seems to prefer slower longer lenses, the 5D seems to prefer faster primes. Let me give an example, My 40D just loves my 400mm f5.6L, it tracts fast and it's AF is almost precognitive....I click, the AF is nailed to a spooky extent. But the same lens on my 5D feels sluggish and slightly lethargic.
When I put my 85L and shoot wide open, my 40D struggles to get an accurate AF lock. It's to the point of shambollic, where as my 5D nails it every time.
At a guess, I'd say that the 40D's AF is tuned for longer slower lenses, the 5D is geared more to landscape and portraiture....which isn't a surprise.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Let me see Canon didn't offer spot metering, but everyone else did in every model and then finally the 30D added a spot meter and now even the 450D has it.
You are quite right, but it was the 5D (not the 30D, that came later) that actually first offered a single spot meter. Before that time Canon had categorically stated that "their" spot meter was reserved for the pro models only and used an AF point linked and multi spot meter system. Which the 5D doesn't have...unfortunatly.
M Vers wrote:
ONE good AF point may be all YOU need
Oddly, the 5D has a high precision f2.8 vertical cross AF sensor, but an f5.6 low precision horizontal AF sensor. Which I've never managed to work out why.
The only AF upgrade that I was hoping for in the 5DII was that both directions of the centre cross sensor would be f2.8...but it's not, so I'll get over it.
The other points, well I hardly use them. I'm a point and recompose man using the centre AF spot...a legacy from my old Eos 650 days. And yes before you ask...I regularly shoot clost ot MFD with a 85L and 135L wide open with no issues.
ulrikft wrote:
I would get that in a heartbeat I think.
16.7 mpix
5 fps
3.2 inch lcd
iso 50-25600
pro af
pro build
spot-metering at each af-point
100% viewfinder @ 0.88
if I could get that for 4000-5500 somewhere, I would be a overly happy camper:P
Actually, the 1D4 is likely to be very simular to those specs, except a 1.3x cropped sensor and 10 fps. Assuming that Canon have nailed their AF woes, this potential camera could be the most versatile pro camera ever released from Canon.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
They should have made a 1Ds IIn, with better LCD, improved ISO, 5fps and it would be a killer.
They could probably achieve this in a "1DsMkIIIn" pretty easily by sticking the new 5DMkII sensor and LCD on the current 1DsMkIII and perhaps tweaking it a bit.
Lotusm50 wrote:
They could probably achieve this in a "1DsMkIIIn" pretty easily by sticking the new 5DMkII sensor and LCD on the current 1DsMkIII and perhaps tweaking it a bit.
That's true. Along with two Digic IV chips, they could also achieve 6, and possibly more, frames per second.
I have a suggestion. Can we close this thread and open a new one with "NO more talk about AF until camera released" warning? This is just getting B O R I N G. There's no discussion taking place anymore!
I see you are talking about the ability of tracking moving objects of the 5D MK2;what about tha ability to focus right in low light(a church for example-I 'm taking this example 'cause I shoot mostly weddings) ,beside the center AF point,the others are almost useless(in really low light-situation that is very comon in the ortodox churches from Romania).What can I do with an exceptional IQ if the picture is not sharp!!! I think CANON is LAUGHING about US!!!! The same very,very old AF sistem. And you now what? D700 is now 2730$ on AMAZON! Tell me that you aren't tempted to MAKE THE MOVE!!!!!
gazzajagman wrote:
Actually, the 40D's Af seems to prefer slower longer lenses, the 5D seems to prefer faster primes. Let me give an example, My 40D just loves my 400mm f5.6L, it tracts fast and it's AF is almost precognitive....I click, the AF is nailed to a spooky extent. But the same lens on my 5D feels sluggish and slightly lethargic.
When I put my 85L and shoot wide open, my 40D struggles to get an accurate AF lock. It's to the point of shambollic, where as my 5D nails it every time.
At a guess, I'd say that the 40D's AF is tuned for longer slower lenses, the 5D is geared more to landscape and portraiture....which isn't a surprise....Show more →
Interesting. My fast primes are the 50 1.4 and the 85 1.8 and they are both faster on the 40D.
Yes,you're right,the 40D/50D's AF sistem is much more faster and more precise than that from the 5DII. I think they could use the same af sistem for the 5DII,IT wouldn't put in danger the 1DMK4's position(this it will use a new and with many,many AF POINTS and cross-type points,and maybe not defective like the predecessor).
WilliamG wrote:
I have a suggestion. Can we close this thread and open a new one with "NO more talk about AF until camera released" warning? This is just getting B O R I N G. There's no discussion taking place anymore!
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I not surprised a 2008 40D outperforms a 1998 EOS 3. It's like comparing a 1998 Porsche to a 2008 LS6 Vette - 10 years is a heck of a long time in the technology ladder. What you should be comparing the 40D to is the 1D III (working version) to see how far the 45pt system has come.
Pertinent point, but consider this.
Its the same AF that is still, to this day, in the 1V. A 'pro camera' no less.
In fact many consider the 1V the pinnacle of film cameras in general, I havent shot the Nikon so I cant say, but I know no one moans that the 1V has poor focus.
And yet, it isnt as good as the 40D in most situations.
This was my point, a lot of rhetoric going on, especially on a camera very few have even held, let alone shot with.
The numbers and spec sheets do not tell you everything, and one needs to hold fire on criticism until there is some real world experience with production cameras.
WilliamG wrote:
I have a suggestion. Can we close this thread and open a new one with "NO more talk about AF until camera released" warning? This is just getting B O R I N G. There's no discussion taking place anymore!
+2 There's no way to definitively resolve this issue until the camera is actually released anyway. In the meantime all we have is different opinions wrangling & at this stage most every point has been made several times!
parintele wrote
is not even about precision of AF, which was fine in the old 5D...
is about where those poor 9 points were spreaded...they put a 20D AF little tuned in a 5D...now they tuned a little more and put it again in a new 5D2..that is the issue...
in a APS-C frame those close to each other 9 points were fine, in a FF like 5D camera the same points become almost useless , 1, 5 or 9 is the same thing with single center point...
u need to recompose a lot, which is not best thing to do most of the times, u need to crop a lot when shooting even simple shots of a kid playing when use servo....because the subject need to ne in the center of the frame
so number of points MIGHT be acceptable compromise, their position and functionality is ZERO from many perspectives...
nobody really expected 45 points...many of us expected a more FUNCTIONAL AF system, no matter how many points it have... ...Show more →
Are aware that on a 1DSMk2/3 the points are not any closer to the edges of the frame?
There are just more of them.
the second thing is about speed...a 5D user, which is a pro or a semi-pro, so a person who knows the limits of the camera, will not expect to shoot football or birds in flight sequences like it would with a 1D camera with it's 7-8 or 10 FPS...that is not the complain , really...
is all about the mirror mechanism and its speed...
the camera is SLOW just because the mirror mechanism is slow...and is so because is cheaper to be so not only because canon wanted to differentiate the camera's specification in terms of speed...
they used a slower mechanism because is cheaper... ...Show more →
How many picture have you missed because the 5D shutter and mirror? As a 1DMK2 owner and 5D owner I can tell my missed count with the 5D is 0.
michael49 wrote:
Interesting. My fast primes are the 50 1.4 and the 85 1.8 and they are both faster on the 40D.
Sure, the 40D's AF is faster than the 5D's...but it was AF accuracy I was talking about. The 85L and the 40D aren't a great match, in my opinion. The 5D handles that particular lens far better, at least that's what mine does, your milage may vary.
Daan B wrote:
Is this thread still going on about the 5D2's AF? Amazing...
Yep. Telling that's all they can find to bitch about. They gave up on trying to sound sincere about too many megapixels and how it doesn't matter, or how the lenses aren't up to anyway.
Me - I would have loved to see a couple new innovations like Nikon's artificial horizon. Love to have that instead of my little bubble level that I loose every so often...
BubbaJon wrote:
Yep. Telling that's all they can find to bitch about. They gave up on trying to sound sincere about too many megapixels and how it doesn't matter, or how the lenses aren't up to anyway.
Me - I would have loved to see a couple new innovations like Nikon's artificial horizon. Love to have that instead of my little bubble level that I loose every so often...
"all they can find to bitch about"..
What is up with all the untrue statements about those that are not religiously defending the 5d mkII
"you just want a 1ds mark III for 2000"
"they don't care about art, they are just gadgetfreaks"
etc..
Is it so hard to understand that different people have different needs and wants and that this will reflect upon how people will like this camera?
Mel Gross wrote:
Oh, no one is saying auto focus is bad to have. I like it on my 5D, and on my now older EOS 3.
That's not the point some of us are trying to make to those who think the auto focus of the 5D and 5D mkII are bad.
They are saying that without great auto focus (according to what THEY think is great), they can't take great, or even good shots (without knowing that that's what they are saying).
We're just pointing out that great shots were taken before auto focus was invented.
I remember when we shot fashion without motor drives in 1970. When they became popular, we didn't get more good shots, we simply shot more.
We have to be careful when we assume that some new technologies are going to make us better at what we do. Sometimes, it makes us worse, because instead of depending on our own talents, we depend upon the machine's talents. Then we lose those talents, and when the machine breaks down, or doesn't work as well as we want it to, we can't do what we have to.
This all revolves about the concept of the auto focus of the 5D/mkII vs the 1D mkIII. One is a big, heavy, expensive, sports monster, and the other is a medium size, medium weight, medium price, camera, designed for more contemplative photography.
Different strokes for different folks. We shouldn't be trying to squeeze the 1DmkIII into the 5D mkII body....Show more →
There's no discussion taking place anymore!
