Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Canon 5D???

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 8:06:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I am probably a few days behind on this one. But how real is the Canon 5D?
See http://news.techwhack.com/1878/canon-5d-is-finally-unve...

A full-format CMOS chip with 13 MPixels for around US$3500, doesn't sound
bad at all.

Gregor

More about : canon

Anonymous
August 15, 2005 8:06:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:p wULe.634$AT7.512@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>I am probably a few days behind on this one. But how real is the Canon 5D?
>See http://news.techwhack.com/1878/canon-5d-is-finally-unve...
>
> A full-format CMOS chip with 13 MPixels for around US$3500, doesn't sound
> bad at all.
>
> Gregor

Search the forum, and you'll find extensive discussion of this topic within
the last several days.
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 8:25:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Found it. Thanks. - So, then we'll soon see some nice new model come later
this month. I wonder what Nikon's response will be. - A D2Xs with a larger
screen and an improved battery, perhaps? - Just kidding.

Gregor


"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
news:UDULe.1066$ct5.148@fed1read04...
>
> "GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:p wULe.634$AT7.512@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>>I am probably a few days behind on this one. But how real is the Canon 5D?
>>See http://news.techwhack.com/1878/canon-5d-is-finally-unve...
>>
>> A full-format CMOS chip with 13 MPixels for around US$3500, doesn't sound
>> bad at all.
>>
>> Gregor
>
> Search the forum, and you'll find extensive discussion of this topic
> within the last several days.
>
Related resources
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 8:41:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> Found it. Thanks. - So, then we'll soon see some nice new model come later
> this month. I wonder what Nikon's response will be. - A D2Xs with a larger
> screen and an improved battery, perhaps? - Just kidding.

FWIW, Nikon seems to be competing on something other than megapixels. I had
the chance to shoot a friend's D70 and was quite impressed. Of course I
then went out and bought a 20D. :) 

--
Mark

Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 8:41:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Mr. Mark" <e.cartman@southpark.com> wrote in message
news:X1VLe.16271$Yx1.5087@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> Found it. Thanks. - So, then we'll soon see some nice new model come
>> later
>> this month. I wonder what Nikon's response will be. - A D2Xs with a
>> larger
>> screen and an improved battery, perhaps? - Just kidding.
>
> FWIW, Nikon seems to be competing on something other than megapixels. I
> had
> the chance to shoot a friend's D70 and was quite impressed. Of course I
> then went out and bought a 20D. :) 
>
> --
> Mark

Not sure I follow your comment. It seems to imply that they've captured
some other mystical quality, and yet you passed it over for the 20D. :)  ??

I don't think the 5D qualifies so much as a "pixel competition" camera as
much as it is a breakthrough in full-frame availablity. This will mark the
beginning of wide-spread appeal for true wide-angle coverage--with DSLRS
that more people can afford. Granted, it's still quite expensive, if
predictions are right, but it's a move inthe right direction. Personally, I
think Nikon has missed a significant boat by ignoring the full-frame issue.
Wide angle enthsiasts who are invested in top optics will be mighty glad to
see this from Canon. I recently mounted my Canon 16-35 2.8 L lens on my EOS
3 film body...and BOING--I had almost forgotten what TRUE wide angle
as! -On my 10D, that 16 doesn't look very wide by comparison. Come on
Nikon! Get in the game and compete! I don't like paying Canon prices when
there's no competetive alternative. :) 
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 10:40:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Agreed (10-22 availability). But, that means that the 20D really costs
>$2k if it forces you to buy an $800 lens (assuming you already had wide angle glass).
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 12:03:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>FWIW, Nikon seems to be competing on something other than megapixels. I had
>the chance to shoot a friend's D70 and was quite impressed. Of course I
>then went out and bought a 20D. :) 

I had a chance to shoot with my son-in-law's D70, was quite impressed,
then went out and bought a 20D, too!!!

--Wilt
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 12:09:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> It seems to imply that they've captured
> some other mystical quality, and yet you passed it over for the 20D. :)  ??

In my case, the D70 proved that shutter lag was gone and that 6Mpixel
was darned good. But I shoot professionally on occasion, and have need
for a camera with PC connection for studio flash (but cannot justify to
myself spending $8k on a single camera body, for the 1Ds MkII!) and as
low noise as possible and with more pixels, so the 20D was a better
choice for me.

--Wilt
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 1:16:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 22:58:32 -0700, Mark² wrote:

>
> "Mr. Mark" <e.cartman@southpark.com> wrote in message
> news:X1VLe.16271$Yx1.5087@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>> Found it. Thanks. - So, then we'll soon see some nice new model come
>>> later
>>> this month. I wonder what Nikon's response will be. - A D2Xs with a
>>> larger
>>> screen and an improved battery, perhaps? - Just kidding.
>>
>> FWIW, Nikon seems to be competing on something other than megapixels. I
>> had
>> the chance to shoot a friend's D70 and was quite impressed. Of course I
>> then went out and bought a 20D. :) 
>>
>> --
>> Mark
>
> Not sure I follow your comment. It seems to imply that they've captured
> some other mystical quality, and yet you passed it over for the 20D. :)  ??
>
> I don't think the 5D qualifies so much as a "pixel competition" camera as
> much as it is a breakthrough in full-frame availablity. This will mark the
> beginning of wide-spread appeal for true wide-angle coverage--with DSLRS
> that more people can afford. Granted, it's still quite expensive, if
> predictions are right, but it's a move inthe right direction. Personally, I
> think Nikon has missed a significant boat by ignoring the full-frame issue.
> Wide angle enthsiasts who are invested in top optics will be mighty glad to
> see this from Canon. I recently mounted my Canon 16-35 2.8 L lens on my EOS
> 3 film body...and BOING--I had almost forgotten what TRUE wide angle
> as! -On my 10D, that 16 doesn't look very wide by comparison. Come on
> Nikon! Get in the game and compete! I don't like paying Canon prices when
> there's no competetive alternative. :) 
Contax never ignored the full frame sensor and look what happened to them.

--
Neil
Delete delete to reply by email
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 1:16:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Neil Ellwood" <carl.elllwood2@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.08.15.09.16.30.280603@btopenworld.com...
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 22:58:32 -0700, Mark² wrote:
>
>>
>> "Mr. Mark" <e.cartman@southpark.com> wrote in message
>> news:X1VLe.16271$Yx1.5087@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>>> Found it. Thanks. - So, then we'll soon see some nice new model come
>>>> later
>>>> this month. I wonder what Nikon's response will be. - A D2Xs with a
>>>> larger
>>>> screen and an improved battery, perhaps? - Just kidding.
>>>
>>> FWIW, Nikon seems to be competing on something other than megapixels. I
>>> had
>>> the chance to shoot a friend's D70 and was quite impressed. Of course I
>>> then went out and bought a 20D. :) 
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mark
>>
>> Not sure I follow your comment. It seems to imply that they've captured
>> some other mystical quality, and yet you passed it over for the 20D. :) 
>> ??
>>
>> I don't think the 5D qualifies so much as a "pixel competition" camera as
>> much as it is a breakthrough in full-frame availablity. This will mark
>> the
>> beginning of wide-spread appeal for true wide-angle coverage--with DSLRS
>> that more people can afford. Granted, it's still quite expensive, if
>> predictions are right, but it's a move inthe right direction.
>> Personally, I
>> think Nikon has missed a significant boat by ignoring the full-frame
>> issue.
>> Wide angle enthsiasts who are invested in top optics will be mighty glad
>> to
>> see this from Canon. I recently mounted my Canon 16-35 2.8 L lens on my
>> EOS
>> 3 film body...and BOING--I had almost forgotten what TRUE wide angle
>> as! -On my 10D, that 16 doesn't look very wide by comparison. Come on
>> Nikon! Get in the game and compete! I don't like paying Canon prices
>> when
>> there's no competetive alternative. :) 
> Contax never ignored the full frame sensor and look what happened to them.

No, they just ignored teh fact that they had nearly no market or lens-owner
base...meaning teh masses couldn't utilize their body without starting from
scratch. Canon and Nikon both had hoards of people who already owned lenses
they could use on an expensive body. Contax had a good reputation with some
in the know...but they had the worst with the masses...that being **no**
reputation. If you took a survery of camera brands people were aware of,
Contax would have been WAY down the list for all but people like you and me.

Oh... And they also forgot to make a DSLR that worked.
:) 
That always helps.
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 5:15:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark² wrote:
> "Mr. Mark" <e.cartman@southpark.com> wrote in message
> news:X1VLe.16271$Yx1.5087@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>> Found it. Thanks. - So, then we'll soon see some nice new model come
>>> later
>>> this month. I wonder what Nikon's response will be. - A D2Xs with a
>>> larger
>>> screen and an improved battery, perhaps? - Just kidding.
>>
>> FWIW, Nikon seems to be competing on something other than
>> megapixels. I had
>> the chance to shoot a friend's D70 and was quite impressed. Of
>> course I then went out and bought a 20D. :) 
>>
>> --
>> Mark
>
> Not sure I follow your comment. It seems to imply that they've
> captured some other mystical quality, and yet you passed it over for
> the 20D. :)  ??
> I don't think the 5D qualifies so much as a "pixel competition"
> camera as much as it is a breakthrough in full-frame availablity. This
> will mark the beginning of wide-spread appeal for true
> wide-angle coverage--with DSLRS that more people can afford. Granted,
> it's still quite expensive, if predictions are right, but it's a move
> inthe right direction. Personally, I think Nikon has missed a
> significant boat by ignoring the full-frame issue. Wide angle
> enthsiasts who are invested in top optics will be mighty glad to see
> this from Canon. I recently mounted my Canon 16-35 2.8 L lens on my
> EOS 3 film body...and BOING--I had almost forgotten what TRUE wide
> angle as! -On my 10D, that 16 doesn't look very wide by comparison.

It may not be what you need but the 10-22mm does a great job for me.
Frankly I doubt if I would have bought the 20D if it were not available.

> Come
> on Nikon! Get in the game and compete! I don't like paying Canon
> prices when there's no competetive alternative. :) 

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 8:33:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <pan.2005.08.15.09.16.30.280603@btopenworld.com>,
carl.elllwood2@btopenworld.com says...
> Contax never ignored the full frame sensor and look what happened to them.

That was... CONTAX.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
Anonymous
August 15, 2005 10:52:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Neil Ellwood" <carl.elllwood2@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> Contax never ignored the full frame sensor and look what happened to them.

The Contax FF dSLR was a 6MP camera with an insane price tag and uninspired
performance.

Heck, even the original 1Ds was problematic, with its inadequate low-pass
filter (nasty Moiré) and poor noise performance compared to the 10D.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Anonymous
August 16, 2005 2:43:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Joseph Meehan" <sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> It may not be what you need but the 10-22mm does a great job for me.
> Frankly I doubt if I would have bought the 20D if it were not available.

It's not wide enough: http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/47227687/large

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Anonymous
August 16, 2005 4:45:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"wilt" <wiltw@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1124118548.784277.241130@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> It seems to imply that they've captured
>> some other mystical quality, and yet you passed it over for the 20D. :) 
>> ??
>
> In my case, the D70 proved that shutter lag was gone and that 6Mpixel
> was darned good. But I shoot professionally on occasion, and have need
> for a camera with PC connection for studio flash (but cannot justify to
> myself spending $8k on a single camera body, for the 1Ds MkII!) and as
> low noise as possible and with more pixels, so the 20D was a better
> choice for me.

For 39 cents you can get a flash mount to PC converter...

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Anonymous
August 17, 2005 11:40:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Let's hope, who knows what the actual price will be. I still believe
that Canon might bring it in lower (than $3500, maybe below $3k) to
keep it's price away from the 1D professional cameras. And who knows
what the 1DMkIIN will be? maybe same sensor as 5D but with high frame
rate and all the other pro bells and whistles. If Canon did that, than
they would have to bring the 5D in at a significanltly lower cost. Who
knows we will just have to wait and see.
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 2:58:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:p wULe.634$AT7.512@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>I am probably a few days behind on this one. But how real is the Canon 5D?
>See http://news.techwhack.com/1878/canon-5d-is-finally-unve...
>
> A full-format CMOS chip with 13 MPixels for around US$3500, doesn't sound
> bad at all.

Too much freaking money! I wish it was closer to $2500.
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 2:58:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dave R knows who wrote:
> "GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:p wULe.634$AT7.512@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>> I am probably a few days behind on this one. But how real is the
>> Canon 5D? See
>> http://news.techwhack.com/1878/canon-5d-is-finally-unve... A
>> full-format CMOS chip with 13 MPixels for around US$3500, doesn't
>> sound bad at all.
>
> Too much freaking money! I wish it was closer to $2500.

One thing it seems to mean is..

Buy More Cards.

Or a big-volume quick-download device.

Arrggghhhhhh.
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 2:58:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Frank ess" <frank@fshe2fs.com> wrote in message
news:m-udneSozKs2X57eRVn-pA@giganews.com...
> Dave R knows who wrote:
>> "GTO" <gregor_o@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:p wULe.634$AT7.512@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>>> I am probably a few days behind on this one. But how real is the
>>> Canon 5D? See
>>> http://news.techwhack.com/1878/canon-5d-is-finally-unve... A
>>> full-format CMOS chip with 13 MPixels for around US$3500, doesn't
>>> sound bad at all.
>>
>> Too much freaking money! I wish it was closer to $2500.
>
> One thing it seems to mean is..
>
> Buy More Cards.
>
> Or a big-volume quick-download device.
>
> Arrggghhhhhh.

It's not as bad as it seems. Consider this:
When I bought my D30 (100 digital-years ago in 2000), my 1GB microdrive cost
around $400 (still works every day, too, BTW). Now a 1GB *solid state* card
(which wasn't even available at that time) can be had for around $70-$90.
This means we're on a fairly even keel with 2000 in terms of storage cost
per image, since the D30's 3.25MP creates almost exactly 1/4th the file size
image that the 5D likely will. With these figures, it becomes clear that
cost-per image--**even at such high res** is about the same, or even
cheaper.
:) 
Now doesn't that just brighten your day?

Heck...If we stay with the Microdrive comparison, you can get about 4GB for
less than half what 1GB cost then. That's 8 times cheaper byte for byte,
and yet the images are only 4 times bigger.
-By now you should be giddy with laughter...
Woo-hoo!! -Let's go blow 5 grand! :) 

Mark
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 9:49:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <wiVMe.2945$ct5.1509@fed1read04>, "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest
even number here)@cox..net> says...
> Now a 1GB *solid state* card
> (which wasn't even available at that time) can be had for around $70-$90.

More like $50-60. Newegg, baby!

I don't buy the fast stuff - no need, the 10D couldn't use it anyhoo.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 9:49:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Brian Baird" <no@no.thank.u> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6deb78835397c098988c@news.verizon.net...
> In article <wiVMe.2945$ct5.1509@fed1read04>, "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest
> even number here)@cox..net> says...
>> Now a 1GB *solid state* card
>> (which wasn't even available at that time) can be had for around $70-$90.
>
> More like $50-60. Newegg, baby!
>
> I don't buy the fast stuff - no need, the 10D couldn't use it anyhoo.

In that case...forget blowing 5 grand...Let's go blow 10!
:) 
Anonymous
August 18, 2005 10:20:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <YEVMe.2955$ct5.50@fed1read04>, "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even
number here)@cox..net> says...
> > More like $50-60. Newegg, baby!
> >
> > I don't buy the fast stuff - no need, the 10D couldn't use it anyhoo.
>
> In that case...forget blowing 5 grand...Let's go blow 10!

As long as you're buying!
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
!