Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > 20D or 1D Mk2?

Reply
Thread Tools

20D or 1D Mk2?

 
 
Phil Wheeler
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-16-2004


Joseph Meehan wrote:

> Onepercentf wrote:
>
>>Does anyone know whether the 1D Mk2 is significantly better than the 20D?
>>I am aware that the frames per second, burst/buffer capacity of the 1D Mk2
>>are greater than the 20D, but what about picture quality,

>
>
> I believe it is a full 35mm frame imager with about 14 meg and uses
> standard 35mm lenses, no digital lenses. As for the rest, I have no idea.
>


Nope. 8.2 megapixels, 1.3x crop factor. EF mount (not EF/EF-S as 20D).

You may be thinking of the newly announced 1DsMkII which is full frame
and 16 mp or so -- and $8000.

Phil

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2004
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Its WAY better than the 20D


Not if you're trying to resolve small, distant subjects (e.g., bird
photography) with a sharp telephoto lens. The 20D has a virtual 1.23x
teleconverter that robs no light, and has no abberations.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
GT40
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2004
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:34:35 GMT, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Its WAY better than the 20D

>
>Not if you're trying to resolve small, distant subjects (e.g., bird
>photography) with a sharp telephoto lens. The 20D has a virtual 1.23x
>teleconverter that robs no light, and has no abberations.


The 1D Mark 2 has a 1.3x crop factor, and its got a faster AF tracking
system then the 20D
 
Reply With Quote
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2004
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:34:35 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
>>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>Its WAY better than the 20D

>>
>>Not if you're trying to resolve small, distant subjects (e.g., bird
>>photography) with a sharp telephoto lens. The 20D has a virtual 1.23x
>>teleconverter that robs no light, and has no abberations.

>
>The 1D Mark 2 has a 1.3x crop factor, and its got a faster AF tracking
>system then the 20D


Yes, but the maximum potential resolution of a subject with the same
lens is lower.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2004

"GT40" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:34:35 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
> >In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> >GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >>Its WAY better than the 20D

> >
> >Not if you're trying to resolve small, distant subjects (e.g., bird
> >photography) with a sharp telephoto lens. The 20D has a virtual 1.23x
> >teleconverter that robs no light, and has no abberations.

>
> The 1D Mark 2 has a 1.3x crop factor, and its got a faster AF tracking
> system then the 20D


Yes, but the 20D has a 1.6x factor.
The 1.23 he mentions above is in comparison to the 1D Mark II.
As he says...for telephoto applications...this means you get to spend all of
your megapixels on a smaller (and therefore more detailed) portion of the
scene.


 
Reply With Quote
 
GT40
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2004
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:51:52 -0700, "Mark M"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"GT40" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:34:35 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>>
>> >In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> >GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Its WAY better than the 20D
>> >
>> >Not if you're trying to resolve small, distant subjects (e.g., bird
>> >photography) with a sharp telephoto lens. The 20D has a virtual 1.23x
>> >teleconverter that robs no light, and has no abberations.

>>
>> The 1D Mark 2 has a 1.3x crop factor, and its got a faster AF tracking
>> system then the 20D

>
>Yes, but the 20D has a 1.6x factor.
>The 1.23 he mentions above is in comparison to the 1D Mark II.
>As he says...for telephoto applications...this means you get to spend all of
>your megapixels on a smaller (and therefore more detailed) portion of the
>scene.



You should be filling the image with what you want, not shooting it
wide and croping in post

 
Reply With Quote
 
JPS@no.komm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2004
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:51:52 -0700, "Mark M"
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>>"GT40" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
>>> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:34:35 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>>>
>>> >In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>> >GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>Its WAY better than the 20D
>>> >
>>> >Not if you're trying to resolve small, distant subjects (e.g., bird
>>> >photography) with a sharp telephoto lens. The 20D has a virtual 1.23x
>>> >teleconverter that robs no light, and has no abberations.
>>>
>>> The 1D Mark 2 has a 1.3x crop factor, and its got a faster AF tracking
>>> system then the 20D

>>
>>Yes, but the 20D has a 1.6x factor.
>>The 1.23 he mentions above is in comparison to the 1D Mark II.
>>As he says...for telephoto applications...this means you get to spend all of
>>your megapixels on a smaller (and therefore more detailed) portion of the
>>scene.

>
>
>You should be filling the image with what you want, not shooting it
>wide and croping in post


To a person shooting elusive, distant wildlife with a sharp telephoto,
smaller pixel pitch is the only thing that takes them closer to their
goal. You can use a teleconverter, but it reduces contrast, and eats up
light by spreading it wider.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <(E-Mail Removed)>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2004

"GT40" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:51:52 -0700, "Mark M"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >
> >"GT40" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
> >> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:34:35 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> >>
> >> >In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> >> >GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Its WAY better than the 20D
> >> >
> >> >Not if you're trying to resolve small, distant subjects (e.g., bird
> >> >photography) with a sharp telephoto lens. The 20D has a virtual 1.23x
> >> >teleconverter that robs no light, and has no abberations.
> >>
> >> The 1D Mark 2 has a 1.3x crop factor, and its got a faster AF tracking
> >> system then the 20D

> >
> >Yes, but the 20D has a 1.6x factor.
> >The 1.23 he mentions above is in comparison to the 1D Mark II.
> >As he says...for telephoto applications...this means you get to spend all

of
> >your megapixels on a smaller (and therefore more detailed) portion of the
> >scene.

>
>
> You should be filling the image with what you want, not shooting it
> wide and croping in post


We're talking about telephoto here.
When shooting distant critters, the limitation is certainly not because one
is shooting wide and cropping...rather it is because the subject is at such
a distance that you can use all the extra enlargement and resolution you can
muster.
The higher cropping factor of 1.6 can be helpful in this case--especially
considering that we're talking about the same number of pixels between the
two cameras, and where those pixels get used.


 
Reply With Quote
 
GT40
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2004
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 02:25:49 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:51:52 -0700, "Mark M"
>><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"GT40" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) ...
>>>> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:34:35 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >In message <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>>> >GT40 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>Its WAY better than the 20D
>>>> >
>>>> >Not if you're trying to resolve small, distant subjects (e.g., bird
>>>> >photography) with a sharp telephoto lens. The 20D has a virtual 1.23x
>>>> >teleconverter that robs no light, and has no abberations.
>>>>
>>>> The 1D Mark 2 has a 1.3x crop factor, and its got a faster AF tracking
>>>> system then the 20D
>>>
>>>Yes, but the 20D has a 1.6x factor.
>>>The 1.23 he mentions above is in comparison to the 1D Mark II.
>>>As he says...for telephoto applications...this means you get to spend all of
>>>your megapixels on a smaller (and therefore more detailed) portion of the
>>>scene.

>>
>>
>>You should be filling the image with what you want, not shooting it
>>wide and croping in post

>
>To a person shooting elusive, distant wildlife with a sharp telephoto,
>smaller pixel pitch is the only thing that takes them closer to their
>goal. You can use a teleconverter, but it reduces contrast, and eats up
>light by spreading it wider.


One photographer I know uses a 600mm f4 lens for birds and wildlife.
Another uses a 24mm lens on a remote trigger.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2004

"GT40" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 02:25:49 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:


> >>You should be filling the image with what you want, not shooting it
> >>wide and croping in post

> >
> >To a person shooting elusive, distant wildlife with a sharp telephoto,
> >smaller pixel pitch is the only thing that takes them closer to their
> >goal. You can use a teleconverter, but it reduces contrast, and eats up
> >light by spreading it wider.

>
> One photographer I know uses a 600mm f4 lens for birds and wildlife.
> Another uses a 24mm lens on a remote trigger.


I believe the discussion involved telephoto???
Pay attention.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon 20D leaked offical photos! Drazen Stojcic / BUNTOVNIK Digital Photography 77 08-28-2004 08:19 AM
EOS 20D Low Noise des Digital Photography 19 08-21-2004 07:24 AM
Canon EOS 20D (LEAKED PHOTOS backups) Richard Cockburn Digital Photography 22 08-21-2004 01:02 AM
Canon 20D Sample Images and Review des Digital Photography 0 08-19-2004 09:51 PM
Canon 20D?? BEN TSANG Digital Photography 13 08-19-2004 08:43 PM



Advertisments