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 Oct 2009 (Thursday) 17:12
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "Are you glad the 1D mk4 is 1.3x?"
I've used Full Frame and I'm glad the MK4 is 1.3x, not FF
146
39.6%
I've never shot Full Frame, I'm glad its 1.3x
74
20.1%
I have never shot 1.3x and I would have prefered it to be Full Frame
80
21.7%
I've used 1.3x and I would have prefered it to be Full Frame
69
18.7%

369 voters, 369 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Are you glad the 1D mkIV is 1.3x?

 
JMHPhotography
Goldmember
Avatar
4,784 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2005
Location: New Hampshire
     
Oct 22, 2009 20:59 |  #16

I have both... and the 1DmkIIn that I currently use was purchased primarily for sports. It makes my 70-200mm a little longer so I'm enjoying that aspect of it. I don't need the wide angle when shooting sports and action, so I don't miss the extra space in my FOV with it. For landscapes (which I don't do much of) I would certainly use my 5D. For portraits... I 'd use either... but more likely the 5D for the extra sense of depth. I say there is no reason for it to be FF like so many are complaining about. The 1DsmkIV is not far off and it will be FF, and the 5DmkII is already on the market and that is FF as well. Why does the sports/PJ body have to be as well? Just because the Nikon is? If there is something to complain about with the current Canon lineup is that the AF system on the 5DmkII wasn't revamped to be at LEAST what the 7D is using... though I would prefer the system used by the 1 series on it.


~John

(aka forkball)
Have a peek into my Gearbag. and My flickr (external link)
editing of my photos by permission only. Thanks

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
mattograph
"God bless the new meds"
Avatar
7,693 posts
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:02 |  #17

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #8875650 (external link)
All four choices are akin to "When Did You Stop Beating Your Wife?"

When she started hitting back.


This space for rent.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Johanson
Member
116 posts
Joined Dec 2008
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:09 |  #18

I've got a 5D and a 50D. I'd love to try a 1.3X camera. Kind of like the best of both worlds, or perhaps stuck between two worlds?
It is amazing the difference between the FF and 1.6 with a lens like the 70-200mm 2.8 IS.


I own a buch of cool camera stuff...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drewr
Member
Avatar
224 posts
Joined May 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:17 |  #19

It's amazing the difference between FF and 1.6x with any lense, i use a 40d traditionally, but used my mates 5d the other week and loved it! The full frame is amazing, i can't see the benifits in a 1.6x or 1.3x over a full frame? Even as a sports shooter, i really beleive the FPS is a crock, and is used purely by punters.
I'm gonna go and say it should be FF, but know it never would be because it would go to far into it's superior brothers territory (1Ds).



http://www.flikr.com/d​rewrphoto (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rafal_BC
Member
79 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Canmore, AB
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:33 |  #20

I currently shoot 2x 1DII.

Don't care if the IV was FF or 1.3x. Either way, I want two!


What I do (external link)
What I do it with

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikeassk
Goldmember
Avatar
2,329 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2006
Location: San Diego/ San Fran/ Berkeley
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:41 |  #21

syntrix wrote in post #8875620 (external link)
Having shot lots of X0D's 5D's, 5Dii's, and 1D's.... there are probably two main concerns.

1. FF gives you the full image, and some like the falloff around the corners in some situations.
2. FF has a mirror with more mass, so you won't get bursty.plus performance

AF tracking is usually better on 1D type bodies. My 1D mkii tracks WORLDS better than say a 40D when used in motorsports. But my classic 5D tracked fine, there's gotta be a moving target curve out there :mrgreen:

I have not shot with a 7D yet, maybe that's the magic token, but maybe not.

Just my 3 cents~!

More mass?


Stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
syntrix
Goldmember
Avatar
2,031 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Little Rock, AR
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:47 |  #22

mikeassk wrote in post #8876500 (external link)
More mass?

Isn't that the reason for less FPS on the FF 1Ds's? The mirror assembly weighs more (more mass), on a 1DS series.

Imagine you can get 8.5 FPS on a 1dMKii 1.3crop aps-h.

Now realize a FF mirror, larger size... ugh, painful, it's a fact, but maybe it's a sensor limitation. You'll see that FF usually has a smaller FPS.


moew!!!!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
M ­ Powered
Goldmember
Avatar
1,476 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:47 |  #23

Yes


Canon 5D Mark III | EF 24-70 f/ 2.8 L II

http://www.keslertran.​com (external link)
http://keslertran.tumb​lr.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikeassk
Goldmember
Avatar
2,329 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2006
Location: San Diego/ San Fran/ Berkeley
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:51 |  #24

M Powered wrote in post #8876529 (external link)
Yes

no,
they are the same sized mirrors.
Just the sensor, shutter and view finder are smaller.

Although a smaller shutter does not really mean much as it is the mirror that is flapping around in there.


Stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikeassk
Goldmember
Avatar
2,329 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2006
Location: San Diego/ San Fran/ Berkeley
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:52 |  #25

The technology is there,
but for some reason everyone likes the 1.3 crop. I am totally stumped.


Stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lazuka
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,639 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2008
Location: in a movie studio, in full production.
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:57 |  #26
bannedPermanent ban

mikeassk wrote in post #8876579 (external link)
The technology is there,
but for some reason everyone likes the 1.3 crop. I am totally stumped.

You get a little more "reach" on lenses=lighter traveling, closer to the action, etc.


I suck at Photoshop.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
syntrix
Goldmember
Avatar
2,031 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Little Rock, AR
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:57 |  #27

mikeassk wrote in post #8876567 (external link)
no,
they are the same sized mirrors.
Just the sensor, shutter and view finder are smaller.

Although a smaller shutter does not really mean much as it is the mirror that is flapping around in there.

Source? Visually, they are different. Hmmm.


moew!!!!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robtography
Senior Member
322 posts
Joined May 2009
Location: San Diego
     
Oct 22, 2009 21:58 as a reply to  @ mikeassk's post |  #28

Yes...hence it being a 1D mk4...not a 1DS mk4.


5DMarkII/40D/hacked Canon FL 50mm f/1.4/and some other old, cheap, MF glass/RF-602's/2-283's and 4-285's/Macbook/My eyeballs.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikeassk
Goldmember
Avatar
2,329 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2006
Location: San Diego/ San Fran/ Berkeley
     
Oct 22, 2009 22:01 |  #29

syntrix wrote in post #8876620 (external link)
Source? Visually, they are different. Hmmm.

Well,
my 5D mirror and 1D mirror are identical.


Stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikeassk
Goldmember
Avatar
2,329 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2006
Location: San Diego/ San Fran/ Berkeley
     
Oct 22, 2009 22:03 |  #30

Lazuka wrote in post #8876616 (external link)
You get a little more "reach" on lenses=lighter traveling, closer to the action, etc.

You are right. That is a real world benefit.

I could sit here and complain all day about how they could just have a crop feature but... Ill never win.


Stuff

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

17,504 views & 0 likes for this thread
Are you glad the 1D mkIV is 1.3x?
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 Yekeen Jamiu
929 guests, 285 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.