Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 16, 2009, 9:31 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 628
Default

I own a Canon XSi camera.

I am seriously considering the Canon 5D Mark II, even though I've never held one. But I'm tired of messing with the 1.6 focal length issue.

Anyway, I wish my XSi camera body was the same size as the Canon 50D, my hands are big and I like the feel of the 50D. It just fits my hands better.

Now the question... is the body size of the 5D the same size as the 50D or XSi?

Thanks!




FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 16, 2009, 10:10 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

www.usa.canon.com

In each camera's specifications they list dimensions and weight.


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 10:42 AM   #3
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

What is it about the 1.6x crop that you don't like? I have cameras with 1.6, 1.3 and FF sensors and they all can do good jobs with the right glass.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 10:52 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 628
Default

Based upon Moderator John's advice, I visited the Canon website and found the dimensions. Thanks JOHN!!

I thought I share my results with everyone. In the table below I compared the size of the cameras to one another. In the first example you could say that the XSi is 85% as wide as the 5D or the 5D is 15% wider than the XSi. (100-85=15) or about 1 inch wider.

All 3 cameras have 3 inch VGA screens. The 5d has 920,000 dots on the view screen vs 1/3 of that for the XSi.

Width Inches Comp to 5D
Xsi 5.1 85%
50D 5.7 95%
5D 6.0 100%

Height
Xsi3.8 84%
50D 4.2 93%
5D 4.5 100%

Depth
Xsi 2.4 80%
50D 2.9 97%
5D 3.0 100%

Total Cu. Inches
Xsi 46.5 57%
50D 69.486%
5D 81.0 100%

So, to answer my own question, the 5D is5% wider than the 50D, 7% taller and
about 3 % thicker. It should fit my intomy hands nicely!


Thanks John

FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 11:13 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 628
Default

Well, first of all, Mark1616, you're 10x the photographer I am. And I'm not one bit ashamed to admit that.

Second, my shortest lens is the 50 mm 1.8F lens that my 1.6 turns into an 80MM. And that causes me to fight group photos.

I know the answer is a wide angle lens, but those get incredibly expensive quickly.

So I think I'm attempting to overcome my lack of skill and multiple high priced lenses with this full frame format.

Attached is a family photo that I couldn't take due to the problems I'm trying to solve. I borrowed a cheap fisheye lens and didn't like the results at all.


Attached Images
 
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 11:36 AM   #6
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

Thanks, but seriously I'm not that good a photographer I just take a lot of shots and show the good ones .

I can see where you are coming from with this, but you can get some nice lenses for the cost of the 5D so that is another option to consider. Unless you need the really high res of the mkII I would take a look at the original 5D. I'm trying to justify the mkII to myself at the moment but the original still does a fantastic job for my shooting needs.

The 5D is the camera i use more than any other so will certainly not try to dissuade you from this option (and if you can afford it the mkII would rock) but would suggest taking a look at the outcome you want and which solution would get that best not only now but also moving into the future.

I'm not sure if that helps as there is no real advice there LOL, but it might give you some food for thought.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 2:05 PM   #7
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

FaithfulPastor wrote:
Quote:
I know the answer is a wide angle lens, but those get incredibly expensive quickly.

So I think I'm attempting to overcome my lack of skill and multiple high priced lenses with this full frame format.

OK, let's examine this. Widest lens = 50mm. On a full frame camera that's still not wide enough for group shots - you want something 28mm or wider. So you'd still have to buy another lens.

Second, the 5dmkII = $2700

Canon 17-40L = $620

or if you want even better quality, 16-35 f2.8 = $1200

In either case you'll get much better results than 5dmkII and 50mm 1.8 lens.

Think about it: $620 vs. $2700


If you're going to be doing a lot of groupshots like that then put the rest of the money into off camera lighting (2 speedlights and a trigger)


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 2:41 PM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
If you're going to be doing a lot of groupshots like that then put the rest of the money into off camera lighting (2 speedlights and a trigger)
I tend to agree with John...
Unless the lighting change another camera (or lens) will not make a difference... The next outfit will just capture the same light!
-> With better lighting come better contrast and saturation and you might also get away from shooting wide open which tend to bring better sharpness overall (and go easier on lens cost)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 2:49 PM   #9
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

The 5D is a bit bigger and heavier than the xxD cameras it feels very good though.

The 1D cameras are too big and heavy for my liking, but the 5D is just right. Especially when you put a nice small prime on like the 50 1.4 or 28 1.8.

The L lenses are bigger and bulkier and do balance quite nicely on the 5D, but feel very good on the 1D.

(I don't own a 1D, just messed around with one in the store.)
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 3:13 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 628
Default

Hi John..

Did my wife put you up to talking me out of that 5D?


OK, let's examine this. Widest lens = 50mm. On a full frame camera that's still not wide enough for group shots - you want something 28mm or wider. So you'd still have to buy another lens.

Second, the 5dmkII = $2700

Canon 17-40L = $620

or if you want even better quality, 16-35 f2.8 = $1200

In either case you'll get much better results than 5dmkII and 50mm 1.8 lens.

Think about it: $620 vs. $2700

FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:35 AM.