Could someone humor me and project the spacing of the 50D\'s AF system onto a 5DII\'s viewfinder? I\'m thinking it might help a few people appreciate why they don\'t use the 50D\'s on the 5D replacement--the spacing would be even worse than the present system.
Also, I see nothing wrong with a $2600 replacement using the same AF hardwear: no other SLR uses that system, so they\'re getting the benefit of using an already amortized process ($$ saved), that is well known, characterized and probably running quite tightly in production (all good things). With the additional computer processing, it may be that much better.
Lastly, and maybe I\'m weird, but why would wedding pros, landscape dudes (liveview is probably best here), etc need an absolutely crushing af system? It\'s not like these things are moving that quickly, so why not use MF and place the focus where you want? The center point in AI-Servo works great for action stuff, where you\'re more likely to want to keep things in the middle (as to capture them) and crop in post.
I say this as a 5D user who primarily uses the cam for landscape and portraiture and uses MF a lot to that end. The 5D\'s AF system is more than sufficient for the job at hand and I cannot imagine it will go backwards with some extra processing power + af adjust.
Sep 17, 2008 at 01:09 PM
Previous versions of Daniel Heineck's message #6178502 « Canon 5D Mark II master thread »
