Mel Gross
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.9 #8 · Some better A900 samples | |
Tariq Gibran wrote
no doubt, ergonomics is important to everyone. We do have the Canon vs the Nikon camp there. Both companies do things just differently enough that many people won't use the "other" because of it. I don't know what problems you have with the grip, but I don't have it. The 5D is such a popular camera, that few seem to have a problem with it. I don't know too many people who have the grip, though some do. Some will require Sony's grip, I would imagine.
The issue with a gripless 5D is that there is no lower support from the pinky finger with someone with medium to large hands. This causes stress on the wrist and results in a more unstable hold. A camera with a slightly longer grip area, such as my old Fuji S2, Canon T90 and yes, the Sony A700/A900 bodies have longer grip area. ...Show more →
I have medium hands with no problem. For large hands everyone will have problems with every camera.
Mel Gross wrote
There is so little difference between 98% and 100% that I doubt you'd notice, 98% of the time, even when you think it matters. We're talking less than 0.36mm from each edge. Hardly meaningful. That's 0.1 inch from each edge of an 8 x 10 print. no one would notice. This difference is overblown.
Well, of course its going to be very difficult for you to get even close to an 8x10 print from the proportion of FF 35mm If you are never using the whole frame anyway, no doubt you could care less about 90%, 100% or whatever Seriously though, whenever I'm doing critical work, it matters. That extra PP step of cropping something out of the final image that did not show up in the viewfinder can be an unnecessary pain, particularly if your editing through hundreds of images. YMMV...Show more →
Well, I thought you would understand without my having to say 8 x 12. so we're talking about 0.12 inch. If that's a problem for you then you would always have needed to use a Nikon, because for many years, only one or two Nikons ever had 100%. Most photographers didn't like the 100%, because then, image bits would not be seen because of the slide mount. It was only useful for negatives on a copy stand.
Mel Gross wrote
As far as it's being brighter, I don't know. Maybe. Sharper? What do you mean? The 5D viewfinder is pretty sharp. You could get the fine matte screen if you want a sharper image than the standard.
I have tried different screens on the 5D. The issue can show up with trying to manually focus wide angle lenses. Add a 1.3 magnifier on the viewfinder of a 5D(I have tried many) as an aid and you will quickly find out that often the image is not actually easier to focus because the 5D viewing system does not deliver an extremely sharp image to begin with. It's not that the 5D image is bad or noticeably soft without a magnifier, just that it could be much more precise and sharper. It's something you might notice if you have looked through much better viewfinders....Show more →
I find that to be true of all D-SLRs. Actually, auto focus screwed up manual focus for all time.
Mel Gross wrote
If the user is looking for a medium replacement, then the 5D mkII would be better. The IQ of the mkII seems to be noticably better than th IQ of the A900. Certainly in as far as s/n and dynamic range go, that will be true. As far as sharpness goes, it looks to be true as well, going by the two field tests that are out. Both say the A900 smears fine details when compared to the 1Ds mkIII, which as we now know, has lower IQ than the 5D mkII.
So the Sony loses out there as well.
That remains to be seen as I don't think these tests have shown the best from either the 5DII or A900. When both cameras are finally released, we should get a better idea as to their respective capabilities....Show more →
I agree that we haven't seen the best. But it does look that way. I doubt that we have seen much better of the 5D mkII than of the A900. I don't expect the relative differences to change.
Mel Gross wrote
Digital lenses need orthogonal light rays to the sensor. Older lenses don't do that, except for long tele's (which is why there can be mirror cut-off with long tele's).
Yes, that's why there are so many poorly performing classic wide angle lenses here on the alternative forum. Sounds like you bought into the marketing hype about "digital" lenses hook, line and sinker.
There aren't "so many". There are a few. If you read my above post, you can see why.
Otherwise I recommend a book on optics.
There is a difference between hype, and reality. The reality is that the lens manufacturers understand this. The public does not.
|
