Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 7, 2008, 4:25 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

Looking forwards to the inevitable shootout between the Nikon D700 (or D3...same sensor) and the upcoming Canon 5D MkII. Will Canon's needed 5D 21MP replacement deliver when tested? People are already saying the 3 year old 5D trumps the D700/D3 in image quality. Just not in terms of ergonomics.

We should hear something at the upcoming Photokina show about the 5D MkII. Details. Can't see Canon waiting that much longer to deliver the news. Then hopefully by Decembers reviews might start popping up. Should be an interesting year for FF body fans.
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 7, 2008, 8:00 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

I've also read reports that Pentax is coming out with a FF body.

With that one plus Sony's, the only hold out will be Olympus. What do you think the chances of that are? :-)

Photokina will be interesting.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2008, 12:25 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

TCav wrote:
Quote:
I've also read reports that Pentax is coming out with a FF body.

With that one plus Sony's, the only hold out will be Olympus. What do you think the chances of that are? :-)

Photokina will be interesting.
Hello TCav,

Pentax too huh? Great! The more the better. Olympus? Perhaps 2009? Unless they are keeping things super quiet till Photokina. And as for Sony's A900? That's been "in the news" for a long time. I think since Nikon debuted their D3.

With so many manufacturers possibly putting out FF bodies this year (or early next) this should help drive the pricing down a little. Competition GOOOOD!! And even better for us!!

My money is on the Nikon D700 and the Canon 5D MkII. Maybe more on the 5D MkII if the rumored specs are correct and it performs beyond expectation. This is Canon's chance to grab the spotlight and market share back from Nikon. Besides, it's been 3 years since they put out the 1st gen 5D. That and the D700 was first to market.
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2008, 12:52 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

DarkDTSHD wrote:
Quote:
With so many manufacturers possibly putting out FF bodies this year (or early next) this should help drive the pricing down a little. ...
I don't think so.

With so many manufacturers bringing out so many lenses that only work with APS-C sensors (Canon's EF-S, Nikon's DX, Sony's DT), people will see that FF dSLRs have a limited selection of lenses and those lenses will be expensive.I think FF dSLRswill remain an extraordinarily capable tool, but atool for the elite, much like "Medium Format" film SLRs were, not very long ago.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2008, 2:46 AM   #5
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

My 5D is still chugging along fine, and I won't replace it until it breaks, because it does everything I want in a camera.

But there is every chance that Canon will soon have 3 or 4 FF options, 1 from Sony, likely 3 or 4 from Nikon, and I guess one from Pentax makes sense - seeing as how they were left with a lot of red faces after having to abandon their MFD plans.

As my lens selection gets smaller I find I am less attached to a single manufacturer. All I need is a really good fast 50mm lens and a body and I'm good to go. But at the moment there is really nothing from Nikon or Sony to compete with the Canon L primes at the focal lengths I'm interested in. (50 and 24/28 ).

One rumour that is really exciting is the new Zeiss ZE lenses. An EOS mount for the Zeiss lenses? Can it be true? With AF confirmation? In fact it is the Zeiss 50mm f2 Macro Planar that makes Nikon (ZF) and Pentax (ZK)attractive options in thefuture, the lack of those lenses in ZA mount is bothersome.

Just when I thought things were likely to start settling down in the digital camera market there seems to be an explosion of new options.

Now I just need to start saving...

P.S. as for "elite" well not really. My Canon 5D and 50L are not exactly cheap, but still considerably cheaper (combined) than most of the decent quality telephoto lenses that the sports and wildlife guys use. In fact even with a crop mid-range camera it doesn't take that many lenses to more thanmake up the cost of the FF body. Mix it up with a couple of decent primes and a great deal is possible at a reasonable cost.

peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2008, 10:23 AM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

If you haven't see it yet, here is Sony's first full frame entry (24.6 Megapixels at 5 frames per second, available next month for approximately $2,999).

Sony DSLR-A900 Press Release

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2008, 1:14 PM   #7
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

*Personal reaction warning*

Looks very nice.

They seem to have given plenty of attention to the viewfinder, so that's nice.

The in-body stabilization is a feature I could have done without, I have never had motion blur problems with the 5D and fast lenses, but sure stabilization at 1/30s or 1/50s can't hurt. IMO stabilization doesn't actually work any slower than that anyway, because you run into camera movement issues rather than camera shake.

I like the built-in infrared AF assist, excellent for low-light work.

Now if only they had some decent wide and normal primes to compete with the Canon L's I'd be very interested. Unfortunately they don't even have the Zeiss MF lenses available in Alpha mount, so in that respect it is far less attractive than Nikon or Pentax.

Alas most people use zooms nowadays and they are bound to focus their efforts there first.

Not at all clear of course how good the low-light performance will be, time will tell. I have never once had a situation with the 5D where I thought I needed more pixels, so the whole 24Mp thing is not relevant to me.

5fps - oh please, who cares? Ditto for hdmi/tv/DRO/picture styles/LCD/19 AF points, intelligent preview, etc. Pointless rubbish for 300-item feature by feature comparison charts.

In conclusion it looks like a very nice camera, if only it had some interesting lenses to go with it.

Adding a single lens could change this all around for me: A Zeiss 50mm f1.4 planar or f2 macro planar with AF in alpha mount and they would put themselves in top spot. Or perhaps a 50mm f1.4 sonnar. Hmm, delicious.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2008, 1:55 PM   #8
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
*Now if only they had some decent wide and normal primes to compete with the Canon L's I'd be very interested. Unfortunately they don't even have the Zeiss MF lenses available in Alpha mount, so in that respect it is far less attractive than Nikon or Pentax.
You can get adapters for Alpha mount bodies that let you use a wider variety of MF lenses. All of the Alpha bodies can still meter without any communication with the lens. Some mount adapters require optical elements if you want focus to infinity and some do not. Scroll down on this page past the info on teleconverters and you'll see a section with info on adapters for manual focus lenses.

http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/TC/index.asp

But, I wouldn't assume that the existing Sony full frame primes won't be superb on it. G series lenses like the 35mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.4 are full frame designs from Minolta, and I suspect Sony has updated the coatings for digital (not that they needed it, based on what I can see from lenses like my Minolta 100mm f/2 on digital, which is as close in quality to a G lens as you'll see in Minolta's less expensive offerings).

Most lenses tend to do better on one format versus another (APS-C versus Full Frame) from what I've seen from tests of Nikon and Canon's lenses on both digital body types. We'll have to wait and see how these designs perform on the A900.

Quote:
5fps - oh please, who cares?
I think it's important because it matches the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III, which can shoot 21.MP images at 5fps, and the Canon lists for more than twice as much at $7999. The Sony sensor's 24.6MP output is a lot of data to move and process at frame rates that fast. Although it certainly doesn't match the frame rate of models like the Nikon D3, 5fps makes this model more versatile for use in more conditions. You'd have higher resolution for studio photography, landscapes, etc., but could still use it for action type photography, too (for example, where you may trying to catch a hand touching a basketball or volleyball, or a bat touching a baseball, etc.). Nobody's timing is always perfect. ;-)

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2008, 3:09 PM   #9
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

I'm not convinced by adapters at all I'm afraid, unless they have the stamp of a major manufacturer, and none do. AFAIK

The Sony 50mm f1.4 is really rather horrible from the review at photozone.de. And the 35 f1.4 G is hardly any better.

Not in the same league as the Canon L's at all, and even the aging Nikkors put them to shame.

They are working on the zooms first, and that makes good commercial sense, they seem to have a winner in the 24-70f2.8 and I have little doubt they will do a good job with their newly announced 16-35.

But for now if you want some nice primes Sony is not the right choice.

P.S. my "who cares?" comment is a personal one. I think this is a lovely camera, but at the moment not particularly interesting to me. I would rather have a D700 or 5D. I wouldn't want a 1DsMkIII, if I got it as a gift I'd sell it.


peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2008, 4:08 PM   #10
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Looking at the photozone.de reviews, I'll admit that those primes don't look great on an APS-C size sensor. We'll have to wait and see how they perform on a full frame sensor, as you can see differences between lens performance with different sensor designs/sizes. I'd be more concerned about things like Center Sharpness, smoothness of the bokeh and color/contrast versus most other parameters.

I don't own either of those lenses (35mm f/1.4G or 50mm f/1.4G). I use the less expensive alternatives (for example, my Minolta 28mm f/2 AF lens versus a 35mm f/1.4G) for my shooting using primes. Much of the time, the lenses starting out at f/2 tend to do better at wide open apertures anyway, and they have the benefit of being smaller and lighter. For example, my Minolta 100mm f/2 AF lens is sharper wide open at f/2, compared to the Minolta 85mm f/1.4G stopped down to f/2 from tests I've seen, and I've seen a number of comments from owners of both lenses that prefer the 100mm. ;-)

JimC 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 12:33 AM.