File :-(, x, )
Canon or Canon? Anonymous
Hey /k/,

If you had the money:

EOS 5D or EOS 40D?

sincerely,

anon.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 350D DIGITALLens Size28.00 - 75.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.2Owner NameunknownSerial Number0630533280Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:05:04 12:50:25Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/4.0Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length75.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height533RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeProgramFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessHighSaturationHighContrastHighShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeManualDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed160Camera Actuations1740964065Color Matrix0
>> Anonymous
Nikon
>> Anonymous
this is /p/.
>> mrdevon
i love wide-angle. so 5D.

(but only if i could still afford a good lens or 2)
>> anon
5D. new range of canon camera products are shite. 5d gives you great pictures, colour, etc. 40d is just big screen improvement over 30 and 20d. 10mp is nothing. Live view isnt even auto focus.
>> Anonymous
Tough one.

5D Advantages:

1. More detail and dynamic range owing to larger sensor.
2. "Normal" (not in the sense of "a 50mm is a normal prime," but in the sense of not irregular) focal lengths, as opposed to the stupid 1.6x crop of the 40D. (1.5x crop, on the other hand, gets a better set of focal lengths than FF in my opinion).

40D Advantages:

1. Quieter shutter.
2. Weatherproofing.

OP, let's be direct: what are you going to be using it for, and why don't you just get a Nikon D300 instead?

(I say this not as a Nikonfag, because I never have ever even shot with a Nikon except a D40 I played around with in Staples once, but as someone who recognizes that it's basically a professional camera in a smaller non-professional-style body, with a full coverage viewfinder, etc.)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OP is not gonna switch to Nikon, for OP has too many lenses for his EOS 350, which is now nearing retirement age. OP haets PnS Cameras, basically, he needs a brick to hold steady, also OP shoots outdoors and indoors, long time exposures, partys, sports events, studio. OP wants to do it all.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 350D DIGITALLens Size28.00 - 75.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.0.2Owner NameunknownSerial Number0630533280Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:10:03 18:02:17Exposure Time1/13 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length33.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height533RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeProgramFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessHighSaturationHighContrastHighShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeContinuousFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed256Camera Actuations1905590387Color Matrix0
>> Anonymous
>>84381
who cares about a quieter shutter?

I want my camera to be loud enough to scare children and the elderly
>> Anonymous
40D also spits out more shots per second and Live View.
>> ?
>>84393
and the birds and bees and aeroplanes...

srsly, you point a DSLR with a decent lens at someone and they behave like you're holding a gun anyway. Apart from japs, they go all "peeeeeeaaasu" - well conditioned reflexes.
>> Anonymous
>>84404
I'm quite serious. I want a loud-ass camera that lets you hear each machination of it's gears and cogs. I want to know I'm using a machine, not a mobile phone
>> canon > nikon Anonymous
GO!!!!!
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>84425
Nikon F5, i own one, when it fires at 8fps, everyone knows you have a film machine gun lol
>> Anonymous
>>84430

The Nikon D2H is as fast, if not faster and digital to boot!
>> Anonymous
If I was starting from scratch and money was no object? Probably the 5D. With the EF-S lenses though, it's worth me sticking to the 40D instead.
>> Anonymous
5D, no contest. Full-frame is win.
>> Anonymous
>>84449

Why is the full frame automatically better?
>> Anonymous
>>84445
digital is for failures
>> Anonymous
>>84452
1. Lower noise than an APS-C sensor at a given ISO
2. Higher useful resolution (I.e., not just higher resolution, but bigger pixels so you're less limited by the inherent resolution of the lens)
3. Don't have to deal with a crop factor. The nifty fifty is actually a normal lens again instead of a too-short-for-tele, too-long-for-normal. Also: Ultrawides are actually ultrawide.

Granted, #3 could also be read "Can't use small, cheap EF-S lenses", but that's a tradeoff I'm willing to make for points 1 and 2. Everything else being equal, a larger imaging surface (and at 864 square millimeters, a full frame sensor is noticeably bigger than the 328 square millimeters of an APS-C) is going to give you higher image quality.

Let's look at the "advantages" of the 40D:
* Live view. Meh. After I moved up from a P&S to an SLR, I found that I greatly preferred a real glass viewfinder. And lack of autofocus in live view mode makes it pretty useless to me.
* Dust reduction. Meh. I've got an XTi, and I can assure you that the EOS anti-dust system is teh suck
* 6.5 vs. 3fps. This is a real one, but I would say that 3fps is "enough". The ability to use a higher ISO more than makes up for it.
>> Anonymous
>>84459

"Full frame" is for weaklings. You need at least medium format. There's the real deal.
>> Anonymous
>>84460
Medium format digital (or film, for that matter) is too heavy, slow, and expensive. The added quality doesn't make up for the lack of flexibility in that case.

A full-frame digital camera, on the other hand, isn't that much less convenient to use than an APS-C digital camera.
>> Anonymous
where was this taken?
looks like the Oboke Gorge in Shikoku.
>> Anonymous
Some River leading to Doro Gorge, Kii-Peninsula, Honshu...but i'm moving to Shikoku on 1st of Nov, so i am really looking forward to seeing Oboke =)
>> Anonymous
>>84393
I do. If you're doing studio work, landscapes, macros or other abstracts, sports photography, wildlife photography, then yeah, it doesn't matter. If you're doing candid portraits, street photography, or other types of documentary work, the quieter a shutter the better, all other things being equal. They're not, in this case, but it still is a powerful factor to consider.

>>84396
A huge number of shots per second is awfully nigh useless for anyone except sports and wildlife photographers, and even they don't need it as much as they think they do.

Live view on a DSLR is only really usable for tripod work, where it's actually a huge improvement over stooping down into the viewfinder. But try walking around holding a DSLR with, say, a 70-200 f/2.8 attached to it out in front of your face all the time. Not even desirable with a fifty on it, or even on those tiny digicams where it's the only option. Only use I see for walkaround is if it has a swiveling screen, to use as a waist level finder, but only the new Panasonic DSLR has that. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)

>I'm quite serious. I want a loud-ass camera that lets you hear each machination of it's gears and cogs. I want to know I'm using a machine, not a mobile phone

Then buy a Leica M, a camera coincidentally praised both for the sensual mechanical feel and the quiet shutter. Eatable cake.
>> Anonymous
>>84459
>1. Lower noise than an APS-C sensor at a given ISO

Low noise is overhyped in my opinion. I mean, it's a benefit and great, but anything but camera-phone-shooting-in-the-woods-on-a-cloudy-moonless-night noise won't kill a great photograph. And people put up with being stuck with Kodachrome 200 as their fastest color film for quite some time.

>Don't have to deal with a crop factor
Only a huge advantage if someone has a bunch of old lenses they like. A 28mm makes a great normal prime on a crop sensor camera, and the nifty fifty becomes a great medium telephoto portrait lens.

>Medium format... film, for that matter) is too heavy, slow, and expensive.

I've never shot with MF anything, but while the various digital MF options seem like all that applies, I can't imagine a little TLR or one of those Mamiya MF rangefinders being any of those things, except "expensive" for developing costs.

But that doesn't really matter if quality is what you're after; the 5D beats medium format film for image quality. I haven't seen any head-to-head test with an APS-C sensor camera.
>> Anonymous
>>84682
oooooh
yeh, i roadtripped shikoku in golden week 2k6. from tokushima i headed west, and then south through the gorges to kochi city. really one of the most awesome places i've ever been in japan.

that and ise jingu. Oh Ise Jingu~
>> I've had my 5D since May... Anonymous
...and it's an absolutely amazing piece of hardware, but yeah, you're going to want to shell out for some L or prime glass. Is it worth more than twice the price of the 40D? Well, value-wise that may be a push, but I have no regrets with mine. Full-frame is great, the thing can focus in barely any light and it gives saturation that I love. Also lets me "push" images a lot further in RAW. Admittedly, it's kind of an unfair comparison to my previous XT, but the 5D is worth it - there's no comparable camera out there.

My only caveat is when the next iteration is coming, and whether you want to get the new one, or wait on the heavy discounts for the discontinued model.

10,000 pictures since May. I'm happy with it.
>> Anonymous
any ideas when the next one will roll out?
>> Anonymous
>>84713
I was counting the developing step in the slowness of of medium format film.

Also, while I can't speak for the rangefinders, medium format SLRs are definitely XBOXHUEG. I still want one, though.

TLRs are about the same volume as an SLR (as in, size volume, not sound volume) but they're damned inconvenient to use.

So yeah, all the medium format gear I've used is way more of a hassle to use than a 35mm-format SLR.
>> anonymous
I sell cameras for a specialist store. I can safely say buy a 40D. I did. Money was not an object.
>> Anonymous
Medium format digital is better for stock, portraits and weddings.