Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 22 Sep 2011 (Thursday) 22:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

60d to 5d classic

 
LifeUnFraged
Member
89 posts
Joined Jun 2011
     
Sep 24, 2011 01:11 |  #31

tonylong wrote in post #13149200 (external link)
To the OP, I'd suggest you spend time checking out the 5D Classic Admirers thread:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=996038

Ask there about who has switched from what, and specifically about the 6D (but don't limit it to that), and what their experience has been.

I do have a 5DC but don't have a 60D. My 1.6 crop body is the trusty ol' 30D, so the 5DC had some definite improvements in performance: AF is improved and definitely high ISO/low noise performance. And, the 5DC with its full-frame viewfinder is, well, so nice!

But, I also have a 1D3, and it is my "workhorse" for high performance, delivers great IQ on a par with the 5DC, and, it's weather-resistant, which can be a real plus for this outdoor shooter. My 5DC has shown little problems with just a light sprinkle, so on iffy days the 1D3 is the body of choice.

Now, the interesting thing is that I still get used to all three of these bodies. The 5DC is my walkaround body of choice, as well as my favored landscape body. The 1D3 is, like I said, my workhorse for things like wildlife/birds, sports, many events (although the 5D does handle itself quite well for a lot of things -- I've even gotten some good Birds-In-Flight shots with the 5D!

And, even the 30D gets some use! It's got better "pixels on-target" than the 5DC, and when that comes in handy and the light is good enough to get a good exposure using a low ISO, then the 30D can deliver! Lately, I've been grabbing it for macro shooting and it delivers!

As to the 60D, well, the newer cameras are certainly in a different ballpark. I don't know that I'd consider the 5DC to be "better", except that a lot of the Admirers love it for its "classic" simplicity in delivering great images. Yeah, the rear LCD is small, but you know what? My 1D3 has a nicer LCD, but I mostly use the LCD for shot reviews with the histogram. My 1D3 does have Live View, which I do occasionally use in challenging light conditions, and I'm glad I can, but still the 5DC is great for my general shooting.

I suppose if it was me I wouldn't jump that way. I'd probably hang onto the 60D until I knew that another body would really help me move forward in my photography. Sure, I'd be looking at the 5D2, and sure at the 1D4, but I don't know if I'd be looking at the 5DC except as maybe and enjoyable body to have with the 60D.


Wow, great post!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TexasPete
Member
Avatar
185 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Newquay, Cornwall, UK
     
Oct 19, 2011 21:43 as a reply to  @ post 13149200 |  #32

Hi, just jumping in here,,

'Pixels on target'....

Swift explanation if you would be so kind.

Thanks.


The path of least resistance
http://ilikepete.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Old ­ Baldy
Senior Member
718 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Sep 2010
Location: South Lyon, MI
     
Oct 19, 2011 23:13 as a reply to  @ TexasPete's post |  #33

I moved from a 50D to a 5Dc and would never switch back. Sure, I miss some of the 50D features, primarily Live View for manual focusing and auto ISO and more comprehensive info in the viewfinder, and the 50D's screen is sure nice, but IMO, the 5D simply makes better images....and THAT in the end is what is important to me.

All the rest is nice...but it's the end result that counts, and my 5Dc takes noticeably better pics than my 50D.

And besides, it's kinda cool oldschool feel is somehow just fun to master and use. There is no better camera for still or slow moving objects at the price, IMO.


OB
Gear list
Flickr Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 541
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Oct 20, 2011 04:16 |  #34

TexasPete wrote in post #13276767 (external link)
Hi, just jumping in here,,

'Pixels on target'....

Swift explanation if you would be so kind.

Thanks.

Well, hey...

"Pixels on target" describes the effect you get from being able to fully frame a shot using a "crop" body, compared to shooting it with a "full frame" body from the same distance using the same focal length.

So, if you have a scene and composition that you want to shoot with a full-frame 5D2 but can't get the subject fully framed and end up with an image that you have to crop, but if you had a 7D that could fully frame that shot, then you would potentially get a better resolution from the 7D shot, meaning the 7D gave you more "pixels on target". A 5D2 image cropped to the same "field of view" as a 7D shot (at the same focal length) gives an 8 MP image, compared to the 18MP 7D shot, so more "pixels on target".


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TexasPete
Member
Avatar
185 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Newquay, Cornwall, UK
     
Oct 20, 2011 11:02 as a reply to  @ tonylong's post |  #35

Cheers Tony,
Perfect sense...

Here I have 47 pixels on target.....!

http://www.flickr.com …/in/set-72157624074260063 (external link)


The path of least resistance
http://ilikepete.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TexasPete
Member
Avatar
185 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Newquay, Cornwall, UK
     
Oct 20, 2011 11:03 as a reply to  @ tonylong's post |  #36

Apologies for that one....
I digress from the thread.

Thanks again.


The path of least resistance
http://ilikepete.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Old ­ Baldy
Senior Member
718 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Sep 2010
Location: South Lyon, MI
     
Oct 20, 2011 18:42 |  #37

tonylong wrote in post #13277903 (external link)
Well, hey...

"Pixels on target" describes the effect you get from being able to fully frame a shot using a "crop" body, compared to shooting it with a "full frame" body from the same distance using the same focal length.

So, if you have a scene and composition that you want to shoot with a full-frame 5D2 but can't get the subject fully framed and end up with an image that you have to crop, but if you had a 7D that could fully frame that shot, then you would potentially get a better resolution from the 7D shot, meaning the 7D gave you more "pixels on target". A 5D2 image cropped to the same "field of view" as a 7D shot (at the same focal length) gives an 8 MP image, compared to the 18MP 7D shot, so more "pixels on target".

So basically, we're talking about the "advantage" of a higher pixel density, because that is the differentiator here, right? If so...it seems to me that part of the advantage of a lower pixel density, given equivalent technology, is better ISO performance and overall pixel "quality" (I'm not a camera techie, so excuse my lingo!), which seem to point the advantage back to the FF given this example.

So, if that is true, then it seems that crop density can give you more pixels on target, assuming the crop provides the better composition, but that is at least partly offset by other advantages for the FF, and then certainly offset by the polar opposite composition advantage for wide angle, where the crop camera might need a much wider lens for the same composition, with the lower IQ (I think) that wider angle lenses provide. Or am I totally offbase? :) :)


OB
Gear list
Flickr Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 541
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Oct 21, 2011 01:28 |  #38

Old Baldy wrote in post #13281533 (external link)
So basically, we're talking about the "advantage" of a higher pixel density, because that is the differentiator here, right? If so...it seems to me that part of the advantage of a lower pixel density, given equivalent technology, is better ISO performance and overall pixel "quality" (I'm not a camera techie, so excuse my lingo!), which seem to point the advantage back to the FF given this example.

I'd say you are getting an idea of the tradeoffs...

So, if that is true, then it seems that crop density can give you more pixels on target, assuming the crop provides the better composition, but that is at least partly offset by other advantages for the FF, and then certainly offset by the polar opposite composition advantage for wide angle, where the crop camera might need a much wider lens for the same composition, with the lower IQ (I think) that wider angle lenses provide. Or am I totally offbase? :) :)

So, in practice, here's what I do. I have three older bodies: the 1.6 crop 30D, with 8MPs, the 1.3 crop 1DM3, and the full-frame trusty ol' 5D Classic.

The 5DC and the 1DM3 compare very much as far as IQ when it comes to anything above ISO 400. The 30D has the "more pixels on target", meaning that at pics at say ISO 400 and lower can come out great, not needing noise reduction that can take away from image detail.

I don't know how much this helps, but I don't want to be too "Long..winded":)!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
danny819
Senior Member
520 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: San Francisco, California
     
Oct 21, 2011 01:40 |  #39

JoeyBowman wrote in post #13149008 (external link)
If you want slower frames per second, slower AF, no video, less mega pixels, worse high ISO performance, no weather proofing at all (compared to the little that the 60D has) then why not.

In all honesty the 60D is a great camera, I would think that buying a 5D would be a downgrade in every single way except for the fact that it is full frame and the 60D is not. Of course some of the 5D enthusiasts will say I am wrong about this.

Just cus you own a 60D? Forgot to mention the IQ difference. ISO is better than most rebels. It would be a downgrade if you wanted those features you mentioned, but an upgrade for IQ. I don't know about you, but I shoot to get the best IQ possible.


5Dc | 17-40L | 35L | 85 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Oct 21, 2011 02:00 |  #40

If you compare spec for spec, the 5D has the disadvantage in everything but viewfinder and sensor size. So I can see how someone would say the 5D is a downgrade.

Funny how everyone just defends what they own. You calling him out cause he defended a 60D against the 5D that you own! :)

Personally I'd be happy with either but I got a better deal on a 60D.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,841 views & 0 likes for this thread
60d to 5d classic
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is bsipka
977 guests, 338 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.