Canon 5D with full frame sensor

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by aniramca, May 7, 2007.

  1. aniramca

    aniramca Guest

    How does the picture quality for this camera differ from other DSLR
    with smaller size sensor?
    I notice that Canon boasts this as the only full frame sensor (size of
    sensor - 36 mmx 24mm) in their camera line.
    Canon 1D has smaller size sensor (29x19mm). Other Canon DSLR (XT, XTi,
    20D, 30D), as well as other DSLR cameras such as Nikon, Pentax and
    Sony all has smaller size sensor (typically 22x15mm). High end point
    and shoot cameras (such as Canon G7, Nikon P5000,etc) have much
    smaller size sensor (7x5mm)
    Is larger sensor a definite plus to produce much better quality
    pictures, considering the picture qualities of these cameras are
    generally close together?
    Thanks for info.
    aniramca, May 7, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. aniramca

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    Not true: the 1Ds and 1Ds II also have FF sensors.
    The FF sensor allows for larger photo sites at equivilant resolutions, which
    in turn allows for wider dynamic range and lower noise at high ISOs.
    However, please keep in mind that a talented pro will usually produce
    superior images using a Rebel XTi than I can with my 5D.

    Kinon O'Cann, May 7, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Yes.

    But how much "better", what defines that, and is it worth the price
    increase over a smaller sensor are questions only you can answer.

    It's not the only Canon with a full sensor; there's one in the 1D series.
    John McWilliams, May 7, 2007
  4. aniramca

    Neil Ellwood Guest

    Canon eos 1d mk111 has a 1.3 'crop' size sensor so that really it is one
    of the larger sensors.
    Neil Ellwood, May 7, 2007
  5. aniramca

    John Sheehy Guest

    wrote in
    A 5D is basically a 20D/30D with less pixels per unit of area in the
    focal plane, but with more area and also, more pixels.

    The great dividing point on which is better for a given situation, image-
    quality-wise, is whether or not you have a good lens to fill your frame
    with the subject the way you'd like to. If you have such a lens, then
    the 5D is going to have a more detailed capture of the subject. If you
    use the same lens, however, then the 5D is only better in that it has a
    wider FOV; the capture of any area of the subject is going to be slightly
    more detailed on the 20D/30D (and even further still, with the XTi), if
    the lens is sharp enough and focus and diffraction allow.

    At the pixel level (zoomed in to 100% pixel view), the 20D/30D and 5D are
    nearly identical, noise-wise, except that the 5D is a little cleaner
    around ISO 400, and the 5D has slightly more banding (line) noise at the
    higher ISOs.

    John Sheehy, May 7, 2007
  6. Consider the difference between a point and shoot and an APS-C sensor size.
    Now consider the difference between APS-C and 35mm. You gain a LOT going from
    point and shoot to APS-C and not nearly as much going from APS-C to 35mm
    [although still substantial].
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, May 7, 2007
  7. aniramca

    Aaron Guest

    I'd say that Kinon O'Cann is absolutely right. A more aesthetic way of
    observing the difference between APS-C and full-frame sensors is to
    look at the performance of a very wide lens with both types.

    Here is a photo I made in Death Valley with the 5D and 15mm fisheye:

    The difference between the 10D (APS-C, 1.6x crop) and the 5D
    (full-frame) is like night and day when viewed through the 15mm
    fisheye lens. I was practically *startled* by how much more I could
    Aaron, May 8, 2007
  8. Of course, the 15mm fisheye was designed for use on 35mm film or sensor and to
    do a proper comparison you need to use a 9 or 10mm fisheye designed for a
    APS-C sized sensor. Otherwise, you are not complaining about wide-angle
    ability, but instead complaining about lens compatibility between the formats.
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, May 8, 2007
  9. aniramca

    Aaron Guest

    A full-frame sensor gives you more field-of-view bang for your buck in
    the lens marketplace. The 15mm fisheye is already a $550 lens, so you
    probably want to be able to see as much as you can, especially
    considering its high optical performance at the edges of the frame.

    There are always APS-C focal length equivalents to do image quality
    comparisons between different sensor sizes; my point was that a
    full-frame sensor is a one-time investment that unlocks a lot of edge
    visibility in the lenses you probably already own. While 24mm was
    workable with my 10D, the 5D turns it into a truly formidable
    landscape lens.

    At the other end of the spectrum, 200mm on the 10D appears to be
    320mm, so you wind up spending a bit more to go long with the 5D.
    There are always tradeoffs.

    Speaking entirely from an aesthetic standpoint, I do find the images
    from the 5D to be more pleasing. The high-ISO noise, especially, looks
    almost like film grain and is quite comfortable to look at.
    Aaron, May 9, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.