5D review...what says you all ?

Canon Bob

Canon Bob

Loves the Enemy
Messages
9,754
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
Have a read of the first post here.....
http://www.amazon.com/review/produc...rtBy=bySubmissionDateDescending#RF0O20XWHEYKB

Bob

popcorn4jj.gif
popcorn4jj.gif
popcorn4jj.gif
 
want one!:love:
 
It's not going to be there very long is it. :LOL:
 
The worrying thing is that you've got to assume he actually believes himself :LOL:
 
[JEREMY PAXMAN]Yeeees[/JEREMY PAXMAN]

He's not quite grasped the whole concept of full frame has he. By that rationale he should be recommending all sports photographers use large format cameras.
 
mmcp42 said:
I do so hope that refers to the link..... :thinking:
Click to expand...

Well I never questioned it at first reading but now you've raised the question........... :LOL:
 
:razz:
 
For the record, the bloke on Amazon is a moron. mmcp42 isn't a moron unless he believes the bloke on Amazon.

Happy now, oh one-whose-glass-is-half-empty? ;)
 
I wonder if he actually has any of the kit he mentions

It's a bit sad though that someone with so little knowledge can post a review
 
Has anyone reported it....considering its complete spiff?
 
The worrying thing is that people read things like this and then quote it.
I'm not belittling anybody's knowledge...we all have to learn from others but it shows how careful you have to be when choosing your sources. Amazon is a big name and you'd expect facts to be facts.

Foodpoison...don't feel stupid for believing it...we have to believe some things that we read otherwise we learn nothing.

Bob
 
One saving grace for UK photogs is that it's the US amazon site
 
That review is for the 5D version with an 'aperture magic' conversion.


Or complete rubbish :LOL:
 
If you're referring to the guy from Pleasanton, CA (is that for real?), I think he might have referred to depth of field rather the amount of light getting on the sensor.
I'm not quite sure about it, though, it could be a confused person as well.
 
Slapo said:
If you're referring to the guy from Pleasanton, CA (is that for real?), I think he might have referred to depth of field rather the amount of light getting on the sensor.
I'm not quite sure about it, though, it could be a confused person as well.
Click to expand...

I too think he is talking about DoF. There are DoF benefits of larger sensor sizes at the same focal length i.e. using the same 50mm lens on a 1.6x and a 1x crop. But equals itself out if the Field of View is the same i.e. 50mm on 1x and 80mm on 1.6x.

I won't call him a moron but I'm giving the chap a rather large amount of benefit of doubt ;).
 
I think it reflects tremendously well on this forum that so many members are prepared to give this reviewer the benefit of the doubt. Whilst some of us jump straight in and call him a moron (that was me - my wife says I'll never win any medals for tact), several other people have been much more charitable and have refused to rush to such a harsh (and rude) judgement.

Maybe he's just a bit confused. Maybe he's struggling to articulate a difficult concept. Maybe he's referring to the Depth Of Field effects rather than saying that a full-frame camera actually makes lenses faster.

Personally, I think reading the review carefully helps one appreciate just how extraordinarily charitable these people are being. I just hope that next time I say something stupid - which probably isn't far away, knowing me - I say it here on Talk Photography where people are kind.
 
StewartR said:
I think it reflects tremendously well on this forum that so many members are prepared to give this reviewer the benefit of the doubt. Whilst some of us jump straight in and call him a moron (that was me - my wife says I'll never win any medals for tact), several other people have been much more charitable and have refused to rush to such a harsh (and rude) judgement.

Maybe he's just a bit confused. Maybe he's struggling to articulate a difficult concept. Maybe he's referring to the Depth Of Field effects rather than saying that a full-frame camera actually makes lenses faster.

Personally, I think reading the review carefully helps one appreciate just how extraordinarily charitable these people are being. I just hope that next time I say something stupid - which probably isn't far away, knowing me - I say it here on Talk Photography where people are kind.
Click to expand...

Very well put Stewart (y)...I thought "moron" was a little excessive.

Bob
 
SW4peter said:
He may be referring to the fact that the full frame sensor is less noisy and can therefore be used at higher ISO effectively. Surely that's true?:geek:
Click to expand...
And another extremely charitable person!

Please, can some one tell me how this can possibly mean anything other than what it says? He's not talking about depth of field. He's not talking about noise. He's saying that f/4 on a 5D is faster than f/4 on a 40D, simple as that.
In other words if you need approximately F2.8 to photograph a subject on a 40D, you can achieve that same result with F4.5 with the 5D while keeping the ISO, effective focal length and shutter speed constant.
...
On a more practical level, you can stop down lenses to the aperture settings where their image quality is best and still have reasonable shutter speeds and ISO settings.
Click to expand...
 
Does the crop sensor effect aperture on lenses that are designed for full frame?
The 17-40 is wide open at f4, if the crop sensor only see's the centre area of the glass, do the blades open up wider than the sensor? :thinking:

Does a full frame sensor gather light quicker, would f4 on a crop sensor have the same shutter speed as f4 on a full frame?
 
I think he's gotten confused about how much DoF a FF sensor gives over a 1.6x crop sensor when comparing lenses with the same fov on each system. An f2.8 lens on a 1.6x crop sensor would give the same aparant depth of field for a given fov as a f4 lens of the same fov.

The actual depth of field isnt smaller on a full frame sensor as if you took a 200mm lens on a FF sensor and cropped it by 1.6 to (give the approx 280mm you would get with a 200mm lens on a 1.6) you would see on a 1.6 crop then the pictures would have the same depth of field. But since you have a larger sensor area when you take a picture at 200mm on a 1.6 crop camera and 280m on a full frame camera you would have a picture with the a similar fov but narrower depth of field.

Its quite a confusing subject to talk about and I assume this guy is just getting depth of field from fast lenses confused with actual speed increases from them, That blurb above probably doesnt read well. I understand it myself but trying to figure out a way of actually putting it into words makes my head implode.
 
WanderingMind said:
Does a full frame sensor gather light quicker...
Click to expand...

Nope, speed of light is the maximum we can get near now. ;)

WanderingMind said:
would f4 on a crop sensor have the same shutter speed as f4 on a full frame?
Click to expand...

If you set it to the same ISO and shutter speed, why not (metering can differ from model to model)?

The f-number is the focal length divided by the diameter of the entrance pupil.
Remember that it's the field of view that's different on full frame and APS-C or 4/3 sensors, not the physical focal length of the lens.

More here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top