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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 14, 2004, 9:12 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1
Default

Hi,

quote from the review:

The 20D retains the same 1.6x focal length multiplier of the 10D, turning your 50mm lens into 80mm, your 70-200mm into 112-320mm etc. That's great if your shooting involves a lot of telephoto work, but it has disappointed wide angle shooters whose 16-35mm wide angle zoom becomes a 25.6-56mm standard zoom on the 20D.

And from an other website:

The image on the left was shot using a 300mm lens on a standard SLR. The image on the right shows the effect of mounting the same 300mm lens on a digital camera with a 1.5x chip. The result is the equivalent of a 450mm lens. This is a good thing right? This was a good thing said the marketing folks. What they didn't say was that it would be more accurate to describe that 1.5x chip as a 2/3rds chip.

The reality is that these chips are smaller than the area covered by a frame of 35mm film. There was no extra magnification, as was sometimes implied, and erroneously reported by journalists in a number of articles.

All these smaller chips do is to crop the image. That 'gain' is in fact no gain at all. It is a loss. And that loss occurs for both telephoto and wide-angle lenses.

Image chips in current digital SLRs just crop the image provided by the lens. They don't offer any magnification. Is this really an advantage? In the example shown here it would be no different than shooting with a 300mm lens on your film SLR and cropping the final image for a tighter shot.
http://www.vividlight.com/articles/2014.htm

Who is right ?

tx

Vekis is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 14, 2004, 10:11 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 171
Default

In essence, both are correct. They just explain it from different viewpoints. Some refer to the 'multiplier' factor as focal length multiplier and some as 'crop factor'. There is also a bit of marketing strategy involved (not necessarily deception) allowing the uninformed to believe they are getting added magnification in a lens instead of explaining the crop factor.

When it is said 'turns your 50mm into 80mm', it means the crop factor crops the field of view of the 50mm down to include only the content that would be seen by an 80mm. No actual magnification is occuring. That's why the complaints you hear are always about wide angle lenses. The lens itself still has a 16mm field of view, but the crop factor essentially cuts off the edges and gives the view that a 26mm lens would show.
flint350 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2004, 11:40 AM   #3
J_R
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 26
Default

I was considering the new 20D, but I'm not clear if the new sensor is that much better than what I have with my 10D.

Or would it pay to try and purchase the MarkII? Cost may be an issue if that is the case.

Any comments would be appreciated.
JR
J_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2004, 12:57 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Freefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 368
Default

One major diff between the 10d and 20 is noise. Pics taken at 1600 ISO are amazing. I would recommend you try it out. I upgraded and am more than pleased with the added benefits of 5fps, low noise and of course more MP. I have had prints made already and I am very happy with the results. As for the crop factor, look at it this way. You have a 50mm lens on your 20d standing 20m away from your subject, it is the same as a person with full frame sensor and 80mm lens standing approx 30m away. Once you get used to it, there really is no problem...just takes some getting used to!!! :?... I think ...... :?:?:?:O
Freefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2004, 3:06 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 21
Default

Looking at the photos from the 20D. I use Steve's shot of the seafood restaurant for comparison and examine the stars on the US flag and the writing on the entrance door to check fine detail. No fllags in the 20D photo tho. The 20D picture has less resolution than the Digital Rebel much to my surprise. Any ideas as to what is going on?
arthogrefe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2004, 1:15 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Freefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 368
Default

Instead of checking other peopleĀ“s photos all the time, have you personally used these cameras yourself in any situation. I took this session (300 photos) with both the 10d and the 20d and I can see a definite improvement in the 20d. So much so, I sold the slow 10d to a work colleague. Get out and use this equipment for yourself, you may then see a difference, dont always rely on screen pics or other people. Had this pic printed to10"x 8" and you can count the hairs on her head!! In fact I showed this to a friend of mine, who has been a professional medium format film photographer for over 20 years, and asked if she could tell it was digital...could she hell. She has now bought the Kodak Pro 14n and been converted......happy snapping!!!



Regards,



Freefly


www.panphotography.com
Attached Images
 
Freefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2004, 7:26 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 21
Default

It's difficult to gain access to every new camera in a small town. I rely on the web sites and magazines for information, haven't been dissapointed after purchasing on web so far. I appreciate all the time the reviewers spend in their testing. It would be nice if they would use a single file size for the photos. For sure the EOS 1DS has the best resolution I've seen. Digital photography is great fun, even for those of us who only shoot now and then. The results are better than anything I've ever printed from both 35mm and 2 1/4 SQ. Thanks for all the inputs.
arthogrefe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2004, 11:02 AM   #8
J_R
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 26
Default

Freefly thanks for you comments. Noise at 1600 is a considerable factor for me since I usually shoot indoors w/out a flash. So I'm always at 1600 and do have quite a bit of noise w/the 10D. I ordered the 20D w/the 17-85 lens from Samy's. It will be my all around set up. I have a 70-200 2.8 IS USM for the kids sports. They said I should have it in a couple weeks and can't wait!!!!!!!!

Thanks again,
JR
J_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2004, 11:34 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Freefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 368
Default

No problem, you will have bags of fun, it is fast, fast, fast! Once you have it, you will realise that the extra cost for the MKII really cant be justified, unless you ABSOLUTELY need those extra 3FPS or weather resistance or 50 ISO. Quality is great and response time is great, you wont be disappointed! As with the 10d, I use a setting where the sharpness is set to highest and Ihave had QUALITY results, that is my preference though. If you have average, or big hands, and had the grip with the 10d, you will want to get it for this too! Feels a lot smaller, but once you get the grip on, it is Sweeeet. Have fun.




Freefly 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 4:52 PM.