Full frame rocks

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by lubecki@hotmail.com, Sep 18, 2006.

  1. Guest

    This weekend I used a Canon 5D for the first time. I was helping a
    friend of mine shoot a wedding, and we were using a 5D and a 30D. I
    guess the 30D is also considered a semi-pro camera, but man, what a
    difference between the two. Even with the same lenses, the 5D is so
    much nicer. The 5D with an 85mm f/1.8 lens is just amazing for
    portraits.

    And of course the biggest difference is in low-light performance. The
    30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400, but the 5D gets useable pictures
    all the way up to ISO 1600. I'm starting to look at DSLRs to buy, and I
    was thinking I might be happy with a cropped sensor camera. But after
    playing around with the 5D it looks like I'll have to save up a bunch
    more cash...

    -Gniewko
    , Sep 18, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Scott W Guest

    wrote:
    > This weekend I used a Canon 5D for the first time. I was helping a
    > friend of mine shoot a wedding, and we were using a 5D and a 30D. I
    > guess the 30D is also considered a semi-pro camera, but man, what a
    > difference between the two. Even with the same lenses, the 5D is so
    > much nicer. The 5D with an 85mm f/1.8 lens is just amazing for
    > portraits.
    >
    > And of course the biggest difference is in low-light performance. The
    > 30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400, but the 5D gets useable pictures
    > all the way up to ISO 1600. I'm starting to look at DSLRs to buy, and I
    > was thinking I might be happy with a cropped sensor camera. But after
    > playing around with the 5D it looks like I'll have to save up a bunch
    > more cash...


    Or wait a while. 3 years ago the 1Ds was selling for $8000, from what
    I have seen the 5D at under $3000 produces better images. What will we
    have three years from now?

    When I bought a second DSLR body I thought about the 5D, but it was
    more money then I was willing to spend, so I got a cheap 350D, we now
    have a 20D and 350D. In a few years I will pick up a FF camrea but I
    am hoping the price will be down to around $1800 buy the time I do and
    have a resolution of closer to 16 MP.

    Scott
    Scott W, Sep 18, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Kinon O'Cann Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > This weekend I used a Canon 5D for the first time. I was helping a
    > friend of mine shoot a wedding, and we were using a 5D and a 30D. I
    > guess the 30D is also considered a semi-pro camera, but man, what a
    > difference between the two. Even with the same lenses, the 5D is so
    > much nicer. The 5D with an 85mm f/1.8 lens is just amazing for
    > portraits.
    >
    > And of course the biggest difference is in low-light performance. The
    > 30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400, but the 5D gets useable pictures
    > all the way up to ISO 1600. I'm starting to look at DSLRs to buy, and I
    > was thinking I might be happy with a cropped sensor camera. But after
    > playing around with the 5D it looks like I'll have to save up a bunch
    > more cash...


    Now you know why someone like me who grew up with the 35mm frame size has
    such trouble making the switch to one of those damned sub-frame models. I
    had a 20D, and while it's a nice cam, once I tried the 5D it was over. Same
    viewfinder size, same angles of view, same depth of field as the "old days."

    >
    > -Gniewko
    >
    Kinon O'Cann, Sep 18, 2006
    #3
  4. Clive Guest

    It's a personal decision, but I personally will stick with the 20/30D at the
    moment. I am very happy with these bodies and they way surpass what I need
    them for.

    As for ISO, although not as good as the 5D for noise, the 20/30D is still
    useable at ISO 1600, unless you need to print big or crop significantly. Of
    course, you can see noise, but not as bad as some people make out, even at
    100%. Possibly this can be reduced even more during post production,
    however I haven't looked into it.

    It is rare I use ISO 1600 (only shot about 5 photos at 1600 ever), but this
    is one of those photos, which I took a couple of years ago using a normal
    consumer lens (in hindsight I would have used ISO 800 anyway). So that I
    don't change anything in any way, this is exactly as shot. There was no RAW
    adjustments during converting, no cropping, saturation, sharpening, etc, The
    only adjustments I have done is to resize the RAW image to 512 X 768,
    convert from 16bit to 8bit and convert to jpeg.

    For my use, shooting at 1600 is not ideal, but still useable on 20/30D.

    http://i9.tinypic.com/2wegvwl.jpg



    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > This weekend I used a Canon 5D for the first time. I was helping a
    > friend of mine shoot a wedding, and we were using a 5D and a 30D. I
    > guess the 30D is also considered a semi-pro camera, but man, what a
    > difference between the two. Even with the same lenses, the 5D is so
    > much nicer. The 5D with an 85mm f/1.8 lens is just amazing for
    > portraits.
    >
    > And of course the biggest difference is in low-light performance. The
    > 30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400, but the 5D gets useable pictures
    > all the way up to ISO 1600. I'm starting to look at DSLRs to buy, and I
    > was thinking I might be happy with a cropped sensor camera. But after
    > playing around with the 5D it looks like I'll have to save up a bunch
    > more cash...
    >
    > -Gniewko
    >
    Clive, Sep 18, 2006
    #4
  5. Clive Guest

    Me too. However, I see more disadvantages to the 5D over the cropped bodies
    for my shooting needs. Each to their own.


    "Kinon O'Cann" <> wrote in message
    news:gPAPg.3$...
    >
    > Now you know why someone like me who grew up with the 35mm frame size has
    > such trouble making the switch to one of those damned sub-frame models. I
    > had a 20D, and while it's a nice cam, once I tried the 5D it was over.
    > Same viewfinder size, same angles of view, same depth of field as the "old
    > days."
    >
    >>
    >> -Gniewko
    >>

    >
    >
    Clive, Sep 18, 2006
    #5
  6. wilt Guest

    <<Now you know why someone like me who grew up with the 35mm frame size
    has
    such trouble making the switch to one of those damned sub-frame models.
    I
    had a 20D, and while it's a nice cam, once I tried the 5D it was over.
    Same
    viewfinder size, same angles of view, same depth of field as the "old
    days." >>

    And even THAT sucks in comparison to Olympus OM-1 viewfinder's size at
    0.92x (vs. 0.72x for the 5D)!
    wilt, Sep 18, 2006
    #6
  7. wilt Guest

    Clive wrote:
    > For my use, shooting at 1600 is not ideal, but still useable on 20/30D.
    >



    ISO1600 on a 20/30D is not merely useable, but with postprocessing with
    noise reduction software it is darned good!
    wilt, Sep 18, 2006
    #7
  8. JohnR66 Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > This weekend I used a Canon 5D for the first time. I was helping a
    > friend of mine shoot a wedding, and we were using a 5D and a 30D. I
    > guess the 30D is also considered a semi-pro camera, but man, what a
    > difference between the two. Even with the same lenses, the 5D is so
    > much nicer. The 5D with an 85mm f/1.8 lens is just amazing for
    > portraits.
    >
    > And of course the biggest difference is in low-light performance. The
    > 30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400, but the 5D gets useable pictures
    > all the way up to ISO 1600. I'm starting to look at DSLRs to buy, and I
    > was thinking I might be happy with a cropped sensor camera. But after
    > playing around with the 5D it looks like I'll have to save up a bunch
    > more cash...
    >
    > -Gniewko
    >


    "30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400"

    You must have hated film!
    JohnR66, Sep 18, 2006
    #8
  9. Kinon O'cann Guest

    I shot with an OM2 for a while, but actually lost the damned thing along
    with two lenses! Absolutely wonderful camera, though.

    "wilt" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > <<Now you know why someone like me who grew up with the 35mm frame size
    > has
    > such trouble making the switch to one of those damned sub-frame models.
    > I
    > had a 20D, and while it's a nice cam, once I tried the 5D it was over.
    > Same
    > viewfinder size, same angles of view, same depth of field as the "old
    > days." >>
    >
    > And even THAT sucks in comparison to Olympus OM-1 viewfinder's size at
    > 0.92x (vs. 0.72x for the 5D)!
    >
    Kinon O'cann, Sep 19, 2006
    #9
  10. Guest

    JohnR66 wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > This weekend I used a Canon 5D for the first time. I was helping a
    > > friend of mine shoot a wedding, and we were using a 5D and a 30D. I
    > > guess the 30D is also considered a semi-pro camera, but man, what a
    > > difference between the two. Even with the same lenses, the 5D is so
    > > much nicer. The 5D with an 85mm f/1.8 lens is just amazing for
    > > portraits.
    > >
    > > And of course the biggest difference is in low-light performance. The
    > > 30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400, but the 5D gets useable pictures
    > > all the way up to ISO 1600. I'm starting to look at DSLRs to buy, and I
    > > was thinking I might be happy with a cropped sensor camera. But after
    > > playing around with the 5D it looks like I'll have to save up a bunch
    > > more cash...
    > >
    > > -Gniewko
    > >

    >
    > "30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400"
    >
    > You must have hated film!


    Well, film grain is somehow different than digital noise. Grain looks
    much cooler, especially in black and white. Digital noise looks just
    artificial and too uniform.

    -Gniewko
    , Sep 19, 2006
    #10
  11. Guest

    JohnR66 wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > This weekend I used a Canon 5D for the first time. I was helping a
    > > friend of mine shoot a wedding, and we were using a 5D and a 30D. I
    > > guess the 30D is also considered a semi-pro camera, but man, what a
    > > difference between the two. Even with the same lenses, the 5D is so
    > > much nicer. The 5D with an 85mm f/1.8 lens is just amazing for
    > > portraits.
    > >
    > > And of course the biggest difference is in low-light performance. The
    > > 30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400, but the 5D gets useable pictures
    > > all the way up to ISO 1600. I'm starting to look at DSLRs to buy, and I
    > > was thinking I might be happy with a cropped sensor camera. But after
    > > playing around with the 5D it looks like I'll have to save up a bunch
    > > more cash...
    > >
    > > -Gniewko
    > >

    >
    > "30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400"
    >
    > You must have hated film!


    Well, film grain is somehow different than digital noise. Grain looks
    much cooler, especially in black and white. Digital noise looks just
    artificial and too uniform.

    -Gniewko
    , Sep 19, 2006
    #11
  12. Guest

    wrote:
    > JohnR66 wrote:
    > > <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > This weekend I used a Canon 5D for the first time. I was helping a
    > > > friend of mine shoot a wedding, and we were using a 5D and a 30D. I
    > > > guess the 30D is also considered a semi-pro camera, but man, what a
    > > > difference between the two. Even with the same lenses, the 5D is so
    > > > much nicer. The 5D with an 85mm f/1.8 lens is just amazing for
    > > > portraits.
    > > >
    > > > And of course the biggest difference is in low-light performance. The
    > > > 30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400, but the 5D gets useable pictures
    > > > all the way up to ISO 1600. I'm starting to look at DSLRs to buy, and I
    > > > was thinking I might be happy with a cropped sensor camera. But after
    > > > playing around with the 5D it looks like I'll have to save up a bunch
    > > > more cash...
    > > >
    > > > -Gniewko
    > > >

    > >
    > > "30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400"
    > >
    > > You must have hated film!

    >
    > Well, film grain is somehow different than digital noise. Grain looks
    > much cooler, especially in black and white. Digital noise looks just
    > artificial and too uniform.
    >
    > -Gniewko


    Aargh, the dreaded double posting. Damn Google Groups. Sorry about
    that...

    -Gniewko
    , Sep 19, 2006
    #12
  13. Scott W Guest

    wrote:
    >
    > Well, film grain is somehow different than digital noise. Grain looks
    > much cooler, especially in black and white. Digital noise looks just
    > artificial and too uniform.


    But the point is that a print from the 30D shooting at ISO 400 there
    will be no noise visible. If you look at the pixel level you can see a
    very small amount of noise but not much. If someone objects to this
    very small amount of noise then they are the kind of person that film
    gain would drive nuts.

    Scott
    Scott W, Sep 19, 2006
    #13
  14. Mark² Guest

    wrote:
    > This weekend I used a Canon 5D for the first time. I was helping a
    > friend of mine shoot a wedding, and we were using a 5D and a 30D. I
    > guess the 30D is also considered a semi-pro camera, but man, what a
    > difference between the two. Even with the same lenses, the 5D is so
    > much nicer. The 5D with an 85mm f/1.8 lens is just amazing for
    > portraits.
    >
    > And of course the biggest difference is in low-light performance. The
    > 30D gets noticeably noisy by ISO 400, but the 5D gets useable pictures
    > all the way up to ISO 1600. I'm starting to look at DSLRs to buy, and
    > I was thinking I might be happy with a cropped sensor camera. But
    > after playing around with the 5D it looks like I'll have to save up a
    > bunch more cash...
    >
    > -Gniewko


    I am continually amazed at images viewed at 100% from my 5D.
    Images from just about any other digital seem to "degrade" as you approach
    100%, but on the 5D...it just gets better and better...and often actually
    BEST at 100. Real pop and amazing detail.

    I find myself literally saying "Wow" out loud while looking at my
    images...as soon as I switch to 100%.
    Skin tones are incredible, too.

    -M²

    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
    Mark², Sep 19, 2006
    #14
  15. Scott W Guest

    Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
    > I am continually amazed at images viewed at 100% from my 5D.
    > Images from just about any other digital seem to "degrade" as you approach
    > 100%, but on the 5D...it just gets better and better...and often actually
    > BEST at 100. Real pop and amazing detail.


    If the image is really sharp at the pixel level then when viewing with
    just about any software 100% will look the sharpest, viewing software
    does not normally do a good job of resizing going for speed more then
    quaility.

    That the 5D looks best at 100% does speak well for it.

    Scott
    Scott W, Sep 19, 2006
    #15
  16. Mark² Guest

    Scott W wrote:
    > Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
    > > I am continually amazed at images viewed at 100% from my 5D.
    >> Images from just about any other digital seem to "degrade" as you
    >> approach 100%, but on the 5D...it just gets better and better...and
    >> often actually BEST at 100. Real pop and amazing detail.

    >
    > If the image is really sharp at the pixel level then when viewing with
    > just about any software 100% will look the sharpest, viewing software
    > does not normally do a good job of resizing going for speed more then
    > quaility.


    I agree with that. Often true. But...most images from lesser capture
    devices tend to "fall apart" a bit when viewed at 100%. The 5D, coupled
    with high quality optics (like L lenses) and proper focus is about as good
    as it gets with 35mm gear.

    > That the 5D looks best at 100% does speak well for it.


    Ya. :)




    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
    Mark², Sep 19, 2006
    #16
  17. wrote:
    >>
    >> You must have hated film!

    >
    > Well, film grain is somehow different than digital noise. Grain looks
    > much cooler, especially in black and white. Digital noise looks just
    > artificial and too uniform.
    >


    Agreed 100%.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Sep 19, 2006
    #17
  18. Annika1980 Guest

    Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
    >
    > I am continually amazed at images viewed at 100% from my 5D.
    > Images from just about any other digital seem to "degrade" as you approach
    > 100%, but on the 5D...it just gets better and better...and often actually
    > BEST at 100. Real pop and amazing detail.
    >
    > I find myself literally saying "Wow" out loud while looking at my
    > images...as soon as I switch to 100%.
    > Skin tones are incredible, too.
    >


    And samples you'd care to post or send me?
    Annika1980, Sep 19, 2006
    #18
  19. Annika1980 Guest

    Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
    > I am continually amazed at images viewed at 100% from my 5D.
    > Images from just about any other digital seem to "degrade" as you approach
    > 100%, but on the 5D...it just gets better and better...and often actually
    > BEST at 100. Real pop and amazing detail.


    > I find myself literally saying "Wow" out loud while looking at my
    > images...as soon as I switch to 100%.
    > Skin tones are incredible, too.




    Any samples you'd care to post or send me?
    Annika1980, Sep 19, 2006
    #19
  20. Mark² wrote:

    >
    > I am continually amazed at images viewed at 100% from my 5D.


    I just got the lowly 30D. With the provided lens it is not
    "wow", just OK. With the Canon 50 mm f/1.8 prime lens,
    and correct post processing in Photoshop, it does provide
    a wow. Same as the 5D. That's 100% on the computer screen.
    Of course, your 5D will provide a larger print image at the
    same wow factor.

    Doug McDonald
    Doug McDonald, Sep 19, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. fred

    NetMeter rocks! Thanks

    fred, Feb 24, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    393
  2. peter

    Achtung: SIPGATE Rocks !!!!

    peter, Oct 1, 2005, in forum: UK VOIP
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    2,028
  3. wylbur37
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,081
    Jukka Aho
    Nov 6, 2006
  4. Don and Liz Campbell

    1 Frame per second frame capture rate

    Don and Liz Campbell, Mar 24, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    366
  5. asprigoftrig

    view loaded clip frame-by-frame on PC?

    asprigoftrig, Dec 14, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    695
    asprigoftrig
    Dec 14, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page