sinuhexavier
Explorer
Thought that was a strange post...
Canon DSLRs: on the edge of reason
- Thread starter articulate
- Start date
articulate
Expedition Leader
It's the 1D Mark III that's 8 months out ... just fyi.
Okay! Thanks for the excellent tips, fellas. Tempe Camera sees my transparencies before I do since they do the processing for me, and I'll be there tomorrow picking up a batch. I thought I'd gauge some (excellent) Canon users before talking with Tempe Camera. They just put up a new website too: www.tempecamera.biz
I was almost sold on the 30D for a minute until Sinuhe said this:
What a bad influence! Great information, thank you.
With such a glowing report for the 5D, I'll need to sleep on this for a few days. Perhaps drive me to sell a few more photos and articles before making the purchase.
Regarding the mega pixel game: I read an article somewhere about this as well, but I've forgotten the details. Can we elaborate on that a little? IIRC, it has to do with the quality of the pixels having more value than the absolute quantity of pixels(?) So those 8.2 available with the 30D and 20D are plenty adequate?
Regarding this thing being a computer, and Sinuhe's body failure: has anyone else had a DSLR die? If so, what was the service life? All things have a shelf life of course, but how long did your DSLR last and what was the failure? I mean in terms of usage, not the simple amount of time you owned the camera. Maybe that's a massive can-o-worms, but I'm curious.
Thanks for all the information. I'm in debt to you masters.
Okay! Thanks for the excellent tips, fellas. Tempe Camera sees my transparencies before I do since they do the processing for me, and I'll be there tomorrow picking up a batch. I thought I'd gauge some (excellent) Canon users before talking with Tempe Camera. They just put up a new website too: www.tempecamera.biz
I was almost sold on the 30D for a minute until Sinuhe said this:
sinuhexavier said:
What a bad influence!
Great information, thank you.With such a glowing report for the 5D, I'll need to sleep on this for a few days. Perhaps drive me to sell a few more photos and articles before making the purchase.
Regarding the mega pixel game: I read an article somewhere about this as well, but I've forgotten the details. Can we elaborate on that a little? IIRC, it has to do with the quality of the pixels having more value than the absolute quantity of pixels(?) So those 8.2 available with the 30D and 20D are plenty adequate?
Regarding this thing being a computer, and Sinuhe's body failure: has anyone else had a DSLR die? If so, what was the service life? All things have a shelf life of course, but how long did your DSLR last and what was the failure? I mean in terms of usage, not the simple amount of time you owned the camera. Maybe that's a massive can-o-worms, but I'm curious.
Thanks for all the information. I'm in debt to you masters.
sinuhexavier
Explorer
Mine died and was replaced at 18,500 +/- shutter clicks. About 10months old. I fried something I can't recall exactly what it was... It was electronic though, not mechanical. It was my first dslr and I lost myself in the shooting more composing less trap. I used up a lot of megapixels...
As far as the quality I am not super technical, but it has something to do with bit depth shooting in .raw. I did find this http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml
"When a digital camera makes an exposure the imaging chip (whether it's CCD or CMOS) records the amount of light that has hit each pixel, or photo site. This is recorded as a voltage level. The camera's analog to digital circuitry now changes this analog voltage signal into a digital representation. Depending on the camera's circuitry either 12 or 14 bits of data are recorded. Incidentally, if the camera records 12 bits of data then each pixel can handle 4,096 brightness levels (2^12), and if 14 bit then it can record 16,384 different brightness levels (2^14). (To my knowledge no current imaging chip records a true 16 bits worth of data).
Of course what happens after you've taken the photograph depends on whether you have the camera set to save images to the memory card as raw files or JPGs.
If you've saved the file in raw mode when it is subsequently loaded into a raw conversion program and then saved to a TIFF or .PSD format file it can be exported in 16 bit mode. The 12 or 14 bits recorded by the camera are then spread over the full 16 bit workspace. If you've saved the file in-camera as a JPG than it is converted by the camera's software to 8 bit mode and you will only ever have 256 brightness levels to work with."
The other bonus to the 5D option is it's light weight . By that I mean, I can take the battery pack off and lose substantial weight and bulk unlike the 1DS.
As far as the quality I am not super technical, but it has something to do with bit depth shooting in .raw. I did find this http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml
"When a digital camera makes an exposure the imaging chip (whether it's CCD or CMOS) records the amount of light that has hit each pixel, or photo site. This is recorded as a voltage level. The camera's analog to digital circuitry now changes this analog voltage signal into a digital representation. Depending on the camera's circuitry either 12 or 14 bits of data are recorded. Incidentally, if the camera records 12 bits of data then each pixel can handle 4,096 brightness levels (2^12), and if 14 bit then it can record 16,384 different brightness levels (2^14). (To my knowledge no current imaging chip records a true 16 bits worth of data).
Of course what happens after you've taken the photograph depends on whether you have the camera set to save images to the memory card as raw files or JPGs.
If you've saved the file in raw mode when it is subsequently loaded into a raw conversion program and then saved to a TIFF or .PSD format file it can be exported in 16 bit mode. The 12 or 14 bits recorded by the camera are then spread over the full 16 bit workspace. If you've saved the file in-camera as a JPG than it is converted by the camera's software to 8 bit mode and you will only ever have 256 brightness levels to work with."
The other bonus to the 5D option is it's light weight . By that I mean, I can take the battery pack off and lose substantial weight and bulk unlike the 1DS.
DaveInDenver
Middle Income Semi-Redneck
His failure was the shutter, which isn't a digital body uniqueness. Lots of cameras have shutter failures. Whether or not a digital SLR shutter is more prone to failure or not really seems a wash in comparison, since the fundamental design is the same on all SLRs, film or digital. The question is really how well the particular shutter is made. There are more electronics in a digital SLR, but it's not like a F5 or F6 (sorry, I only have some idea about Nikons) is a simple mechanical camera or anything. And even then mechanical or electro-mechanical shutters fail. Just last year I had to have the shutter curtains replaced on one of my cameras. OK, yeah, it was a 41 year old body, but they do eventually wear out.articulate said:
bigreen505
Expedition Leader
jeffryscott said:
Ever notice that actual working pros tend to dole out advice like that? There is a lot more to image quality than megapixels.
I personally would rule out the Rebel purely on ergonomics. The 20D and 30D are both good tools, but you will never get really attached to it. The 5D takes gorgeous pictures and is one of the few digital cameras that feel like a good film camera. Considering that you are probably going to be keeping if for a while and you enjoy shooting slides, that would get my vote. The functional differences between the 30D and 20D are pretty small, but important to some.
jeffryscott
2006 Rally Course Champion: Expedition Trophy
Marketing is what drives the megapixel race, not quality ... basically, as sensor size stays the same, the pixels get smaller (this is point and shoots mostly, as DSLRS have much more space to play with) and because the individual pixels are smaller, they gather less light. So, as ISO goes up, the quality of the photo actually goes down and becomes noisier.
And as far as my comment on these being computers - that is what they are. You aren't going to be using an EOS 1DMkIIn 50 years from now as you can easily use a Leica M3. As with computers, a 5-year-old computer still works, but does it do what you need it to. Same with digital cameras, it may work, but how does the quality compare to the newer generation? As a working pro, you are at a disadvantage if the quality of your work is dependant on outdated technology. Each generation of digital camera (again, I'm talking professional grade) gets X-times better. We are still in the relative infancy of pro digital and it is getting so much better with every generation.
Oh, and Mark, get the 5D, you know it is what you want ... oh, and NEED. All those baby photos you are soon to be taking REQUIRE full frame :wings:
And as far as my comment on these being computers - that is what they are. You aren't going to be using an EOS 1DMkIIn 50 years from now as you can easily use a Leica M3. As with computers, a 5-year-old computer still works, but does it do what you need it to. Same with digital cameras, it may work, but how does the quality compare to the newer generation? As a working pro, you are at a disadvantage if the quality of your work is dependant on outdated technology. Each generation of digital camera (again, I'm talking professional grade) gets X-times better. We are still in the relative infancy of pro digital and it is getting so much better with every generation.
Oh, and Mark, get the 5D, you know it is what you want ... oh, and NEED. All those baby photos you are soon to be taking REQUIRE full frame :wings:
Mlachica
TheRAMadaINN on Instagram
jeffryscott said:
I'm by no means a pro or selling to magazines but I've got a 2.5yr old and a 4.5 month old and the 5D would be great to have for shots of the little one.
I think if you can hold out a little while for the 5D, do it. If not get the 30D for the larger lcd. I have the 20D and it works great, I love it. But everytime I play with a 30D I'm lusting after the larger lcd :shakin:
jeffryscott
2006 Rally Course Champion: Expedition Trophy
pskhaat said:
Hmmm, I just plug the camera in, OSX sees it and I can download it via image capture, iPhoto or Aperture. For RAW images, you can use their software, or Aperture or Photoshop.
bigreen505
Expedition Leader
pskhaat said:
Not quite sure what you mean. Aside from Leica and a couple others that support the dng standard, Canon plays much nicer than most.
sinuhexavier
Explorer
Don't bother with Aperture...
Adobe Lightroom makes the workflow between PS and Illustrator seamless... And the prints are amazing... http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/
On a different path I just picked up this beauty... Not my pic of the camera off the web... Can't wait to use it...
Adobe Lightroom makes the workflow between PS and Illustrator seamless... And the prints are amazing... http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/
On a different path I just picked up this beauty... Not my pic of the camera off the web... Can't wait to use it...
bigreen505
Expedition Leader
sinuhexavier said:
At the risk of a hijack, what about Lightroom do you prefer to capture 1 or Bibble? I seem to be heading in the same direction, just curious on your thoughts. For me I have become accustomed to the interface so I am faster on it.
sinuhexavier
Explorer
I have never used Bibble, but just by looking at the website it seems to lack the slick user interfaces of the others. Capture one is great if you are shooting tethered, but I still felt that the processing and management of those raw images wasn't as smooth as it could be.
I jumped on Aperture as soon as it came out... What I didn't like about Aperture was the redundancy in files and the fact that it changed the original .raw file in developing. Lightroom preserves the original file, but saves the commands used to process the image. You can directly interface with PhotoShop and Illustrator... It is one of the easiest out of the box programs I have ever used...
I hope that answers your questions...
I jumped on Aperture as soon as it came out... What I didn't like about Aperture was the redundancy in files and the fact that it changed the original .raw file in developing. Lightroom preserves the original file, but saves the commands used to process the image. You can directly interface with PhotoShop and Illustrator... It is one of the easiest out of the box programs I have ever used...
I hope that answers your questions...
tdesanto
Expedition Leader
Mark,
I'm a Nikon user, so I cannot offer advice on specific Canon bodies; however, I do have a lot of experience with Nikon’s pro film bodies and some of their DSLR’s. I would like to recommend that you visit your local camera shop and actually put your hands on each of these that you're thinking about.
Also, there are several factors that go into the different prices for the different bodies that don’t have anything to do with pixel count, such as:
1. AF system (fast, slow, ability to track moving objects, # and type of AF sensors, etc.)
2. Body construction--aluminum, magnesium alloy, polycarbonate, etc.
3. Weather sealing (usually the cheaper bodies don't have much or any of this); the more expensive ones will probably have either some or a lot.
4. Also look at the control layout. How many and what types of controls are easily reached? Usually with the cheaper, smaller, more consumer-oriented bodies, these are hidden deep in menus instead of being right there when you need it most. Controls that I like being handy are, DOF preview, ISO, WB, Mode (AP, SP, M), and frame advance selection (single or continuous).
5. Don't discount the whole cropping thing too. That is, consider saving for the 5D. When shooting landscapes, I absolutely cannot stand the wide angle lenses that are available for DSLR's with APS sized sensors. When shooting wildlife and sports, though, I love the fact that my 300mm lens is now a 450mm. There's still no comparison to using my Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 and my F5 with Velvia. If you use prime lenses already, then consider holding out until you can afford a camera with a full-sized sensor. The wide angle zooms made for digital still don’t compare to the wide angle prime lenses in terms of controlling flare and chromatic aberration. When I’ve gone back and compared some shots I’ve taken with my 20mm pointed directly into the rising sun, I’m amazed at how well that lens can handle just about anything I throw at it. Compare that to the 12-24 mm Nikkor—nowhere near the image quality of their prime lenses. Maybe the Canon lenses are better at handling these issues, but I suspect that they are similar.
6. Consider what type of photography you do now and any possible types of shooting you may do in the future. That is, you may not need a fast autofocus system or the ability to lock on and track moving subjects. Or, you may not care about how easy it is to quickly change ISO speed or switch from aperture priority to manual, etc. I think the main point I’m trying to make is look at the whole picture (no pun intended) and narrow down what’s most important to you.
7. The great thing about digital is the immediate feedback you get while in the field, but when I was shooting chromes a lot, if I was ever unsure about whether I nailed the exposure, I simply took a few more frames…no big deal.
8. Almost forgot—viewfinder. A lot of the cheaper bodies, especially the DSLR’s, have very small viewfinders. Not as easy to compose images as with their film-based siblings. This is something that I’ve wrestled with ever since I switched over. Even my D200 still doesn’t compare to my F5 in this respect. Again, I don’t have any first hand experience with the Canon lineup, but I suspect that the smaller bodies also have smaller viewfinders.
9. Finally, I want to caution you on your total cost of ownership for a DSLR. Most people don’t think about the cost of memory, or storage capacity (think in terms of 100’s of GB’s or even a few TB’s), and a solid backup solution—you’re gonna want to store these somewhere other than on the main hard drives.
I hope this wasn't a complete rant and that careful consideration of some of these "other" less discussed aspects will help in the decision.
I'm a Nikon user, so I cannot offer advice on specific Canon bodies; however, I do have a lot of experience with Nikon’s pro film bodies and some of their DSLR’s. I would like to recommend that you visit your local camera shop and actually put your hands on each of these that you're thinking about.
Also, there are several factors that go into the different prices for the different bodies that don’t have anything to do with pixel count, such as:
1. AF system (fast, slow, ability to track moving objects, # and type of AF sensors, etc.)
2. Body construction--aluminum, magnesium alloy, polycarbonate, etc.
3. Weather sealing (usually the cheaper bodies don't have much or any of this); the more expensive ones will probably have either some or a lot.
4. Also look at the control layout. How many and what types of controls are easily reached? Usually with the cheaper, smaller, more consumer-oriented bodies, these are hidden deep in menus instead of being right there when you need it most. Controls that I like being handy are, DOF preview, ISO, WB, Mode (AP, SP, M), and frame advance selection (single or continuous).
5. Don't discount the whole cropping thing too. That is, consider saving for the 5D. When shooting landscapes, I absolutely cannot stand the wide angle lenses that are available for DSLR's with APS sized sensors. When shooting wildlife and sports, though, I love the fact that my 300mm lens is now a 450mm. There's still no comparison to using my Nikkor 20mm f/2.8 and my F5 with Velvia. If you use prime lenses already, then consider holding out until you can afford a camera with a full-sized sensor. The wide angle zooms made for digital still don’t compare to the wide angle prime lenses in terms of controlling flare and chromatic aberration. When I’ve gone back and compared some shots I’ve taken with my 20mm pointed directly into the rising sun, I’m amazed at how well that lens can handle just about anything I throw at it. Compare that to the 12-24 mm Nikkor—nowhere near the image quality of their prime lenses. Maybe the Canon lenses are better at handling these issues, but I suspect that they are similar.
6. Consider what type of photography you do now and any possible types of shooting you may do in the future. That is, you may not need a fast autofocus system or the ability to lock on and track moving subjects. Or, you may not care about how easy it is to quickly change ISO speed or switch from aperture priority to manual, etc. I think the main point I’m trying to make is look at the whole picture (no pun intended) and narrow down what’s most important to you.
7. The great thing about digital is the immediate feedback you get while in the field, but when I was shooting chromes a lot, if I was ever unsure about whether I nailed the exposure, I simply took a few more frames…no big deal.
8. Almost forgot—viewfinder. A lot of the cheaper bodies, especially the DSLR’s, have very small viewfinders. Not as easy to compose images as with their film-based siblings. This is something that I’ve wrestled with ever since I switched over. Even my D200 still doesn’t compare to my F5 in this respect. Again, I don’t have any first hand experience with the Canon lineup, but I suspect that the smaller bodies also have smaller viewfinders.
9. Finally, I want to caution you on your total cost of ownership for a DSLR. Most people don’t think about the cost of memory, or storage capacity (think in terms of 100’s of GB’s or even a few TB’s), and a solid backup solution—you’re gonna want to store these somewhere other than on the main hard drives.
I hope this wasn't a complete rant and that careful consideration of some of these "other" less discussed aspects will help in the decision.