Congrats the on the 5D! I surely love mine! Great pics! Get some ducks to make it official! =)
jdizzle Darth Noink ![]() 69,419 posts Likes: 65 Joined Aug 2006 Location: Harvesting Nano crystals More info | Sep 27, 2007 14:47 | #16 Congrats the on the 5D! I surely love mine! Great pics! Get some ducks to make it official! =)
LOG IN TO REPLY |
sinitry23 Senior Member 504 posts Joined Feb 2007 More info | Sep 27, 2007 14:48 | #17 The 5D has a 1x crop factor, this is why it's better when using the 50mm lens on this body? Nick_C wrote in post #4020196 ![]() Some will say you can get near 5D quality with the 40D, while there are also others that have tried the 40D & say its nothing more than a 30D with a few extras. I would suggest you try the 5D (if you can afford it) to see for yourself. Remember the 5D & 40D are completely different, one being full frame, the other a cropped body the same as your 400D (XTI), they require a different strategy when deciding what lenses to buy, as a 50mm f/1.4 is far better on the 5D than it is on the 40D (so I hear) as you already know a 50mm is also more like 80mm on the 40D, so you can see for wideangle you have to purchase even wider lenses than what you do for a 5D. Its really down to what you shoot the most, for landscapes most people will agree the 5D is king, or at least those that have tried it will, some will say you can get away with a 10-22 on a cropped body but ive been there & its not quite as enjoyable, seeing a wide scene through a smaller viewfinder isnt great if your using the camera all day. Personally if I were you I would buy better glass, I dont know what you use now but your 400D (XTI) is a very good camera & from what I have seen on comparisons between the 400D & 40D there isnt a major difference, it might just be a case of needing to perfect your own talent a little further before blaiming the gear, I hope that doesnt offend you by me saying that, im not trying to down your own skills, what would I know!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nick_C Goldmember ![]() 4,042 posts Joined Jul 2006 Location: Tin Mine Country (Cornwall UK) More info | Sep 27, 2007 14:53 | #18 sinitry23 wrote in post #4020257 ![]() The 5D has a 1x crop factor, this is why it's better when using the 50mm lens on this body? I am using a Tamron 17-55 F2.8 lens. I do plan on purchasing the 24-70mm L lens in the near future. Yes all this means is that a 50mm lens on a 5D is a 50mm lens! a 50mm on a camera like yours looks more like an 80mm mounted on a 5D.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 27, 2007 14:57 | #19 sinitry23 wrote in post #4019929 ![]() Wow sharp pictures. Are you using a L lens? No photoshop enahancements? Was a tripod used? Will I get good quality pictures like this on my XTI? Yes, I used the 17-40mm L lens for those shots as Nick pointed out. It's actually the only lens I have so far since I just made the switch to Canon from Nikon. Yes, a tripod was used. I forgot to mentioned that I had a UV Filter attached. I'm curious to know if using the UV filter at night may degrade image quality a little?? Maybe some expert here can help answer that. I put it on for protection purpose. My passion for getting into photography happened one day last winter when I stumbled across a website that posted many beautiful night landscape shots. Thus, I started my research and here I am still trying to learn. I'm still very new to photography in general as I have no experience whatsoever. I spend most of my time at the bookstores and online reading whatever that I can. I've also learned a lot from this forum as I searched around and read some of the old threads. Canon 5D Mark IIComplete Gear / Feedback
LOG IN TO REPLY |
MaDProFF Goldmember ![]() 4,369 posts Likes: 2 Joined May 2007 Location: East Sussex, UK More info | Sep 27, 2007 14:59 | #20 MR2nice wrote in post #4020318 ![]() Yes, I used the 17-40mm L lens for those shots as Nick pointed out. It's actually the only lens I have so far since I just made the switch to Canon from Nikon. Yes, a tripod was used. I forgot to mentioned that I had a UV Filter attached. I'm curious to know if using the UV filter at night may degrade image quality a little?? Maybe some expert here can help answer that. I put it on for protection purpose. My passion for getting into photography happened one day last winter when I stumbled across a website that posted many beautiful night landscape shots. Thus, I started my research and here I am still trying to learn. I'm still very new to photography in general as I have no experience whatsoever. I spend most of my time at the bookstores and online reading whatever that I can. I've also learned a lot from this forum as I searched around and read some of the old threads. ![]() learning pretty quick then too Photographic Images on Brett Butler
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nick_C Goldmember ![]() 4,042 posts Joined Jul 2006 Location: Tin Mine Country (Cornwall UK) More info | Sep 27, 2007 15:01 | #21 MR2nice wrote in post #4020318 ![]() Yes, I used the 17-40mm L lens for those shots as Nick pointed out. It's actually the only lens I have so far since I just made the switch to Canon from Nikon. Yes, a tripod was used. I forgot to mentioned that I had a UV Filter attached. I'm curious to know if using the UV filter at night may degrade image quality a little?? Maybe some expert here can help answer that. I put it on for protection purpose. My passion for getting into photography happened one day last winter when I stumbled across a website that posted many beautiful night landscape shots. Thus, I started my research and here I am still trying to learn. I'm still very new to photography in general as I have no experience whatsoever. I spend most of my time at the bookstores and online reading whatever that I can. I've also learned a lot from this forum as I searched around and read some of the old threads. ![]() It depends on what UV filter was used, if its a good quality one then you wouldnt notice any differences which has been shown in lots of tests recently, a bad quality one though will have a large effect!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 27, 2007 15:04 | #22 Nick_C wrote in post #4020342 ![]() It depends on what UV filter was used, if its a good quality one then you wouldnt notice any differences which has been shown in lots of tests recently, a bad quality one though will have a large effect! I'm currently using the B & W 77mm UV (Ultra Violet) Haze Multi Coated (2C) Glass Filter. I researched on this forum and many have said to be a good one. I also have one from Hoya as well. Canon 5D Mark IIComplete Gear / Feedback
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Sep 27, 2007 15:10 | #23 jdizzle wrote in post #4020247 ![]() Congrats the on the 5D! I surely love mine! Great pics! Get some ducks to make it official! =) Thanks! I will go duck hunting this weekend then. Canon 5D Mark IIComplete Gear / Feedback
LOG IN TO REPLY |
formula4speed Senior Member 903 posts Likes: 1 Joined Apr 2005 Location: Delaware More info | Sep 27, 2007 15:38 | #24 Nick_C wrote in post #4020290 ![]() Yes all this means is that a 50mm lens on a 5D is a 50mm lens! a 50mm on a camera like yours looks more like an 80mm mounted on a 5D. I hear lots of good things about the 24-70, but remember that this wont be very wide on your camera, you can actually see this for yourself, simply set your Tamron to just slightly under 40mm & this is how wide the 24-70 will look when mounted on your camera, for me its not wide enough for landscapes. Sorry, this is incorrect. The 17-50 at 24mm is exactly the same as the 24-70 at 24mm the lenses designed for smaller sensors can't cover larger sensors, but focal length has nothing to do with the sensor size. A 50mm lens is also a 50mm lens on both bodies, field of view and focal length are two different things. I'm taking pictures of everything, so go ahead and take this place away from me.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nick_C Goldmember ![]() 4,042 posts Joined Jul 2006 Location: Tin Mine Country (Cornwall UK) More info | Sep 27, 2007 17:19 | #25 formula4speed wrote in post #4020555 ![]() Sorry, this is incorrect. The 17-50 at 24mm is exactly the same as the 24-70 at 24mm the lenses designed for smaller sensors can't cover larger sensors, but focal length has nothing to do with the sensor size. A 50mm lens is also a 50mm lens on both bodies, field of view and focal length are two different things. Oops yes your correct, my mistake (was in a hurry as I was off out), yes you set the 17-50 to 24mm, NOT 40mm.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
DDan Goldmember ![]() 1,725 posts Joined Nov 2006 Location: Oceanside, Calif. More info | Sep 27, 2007 17:55 | #26 Nick_C wrote in post #4020290 ![]() Yes all this means is that a 50mm lens on a 5D is a 50mm lens! a 50mm on a camera like yours looks more like an 80mm mounted on a 5D. formula4speed wrote in post #4020555 ![]() Sorry, this is incorrect. The 17-50 at 24mm is exactly the same as the 24-70 at 24mm the lenses designed for smaller sensors can't cover larger sensors, but focal length has nothing to do with the sensor size. A 50mm lens is also a 50mm lens on both bodies, field of view and focal length are two different things. I don't see anything wrong with what Nick said. He did not mention field of view or focal length. And yes, if you look at the print, a 50mm on 1.6 looks like an 80mm on a FF. My Gear
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nick_C Goldmember ![]() 4,042 posts Joined Jul 2006 Location: Tin Mine Country (Cornwall UK) More info | Sep 27, 2007 18:05 | #27 DDan wrote in post #4021319 ![]() I don't see anything wrong with what Nick said. He did not mention field of view or focal length. And yes, if you look at the print, a 50mm on 1.6 looks like an 80mm on a FF. I agree with what formual4speed is saying but this is all a bit confusing for someone new. Can't we just tell them what the effects look like and let them soak up the gory details of "why" later. Yes all of what I said was correct.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Hikin Mike Walkin' Like a Penguin Now! ![]() More info | Sep 27, 2007 20:58 | #28 Welcome to the "club"! Images in the Backcountry
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Denny G Goldmember ![]() 1,870 posts Likes: 5 Joined Jul 2004 Location: On the border - US/Mexico More info | There are hundreds of comments on these forums about going ff. Up until 2004 I shot nothing but full frame (film) on Canon's best (EOS1 and 1n).
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tonylong ...winded ![]() More info | Sep 27, 2007 21:09 | #30 Denny G wrote in post #4022341 ![]() Now after looking at your photos I'm more convinced than ever that I will buy something in ff (Canon). Since I shoot landscape and sports (rodeo). More than likely I will continue with the 20d and probable buy the 5d. Denny, for now, that's my approach. I like having the 30D as both a backup camera and as a grab-and-shoot wildlife camera -- the cropping is cropping out pixels, but I do get to frame telephoto shots with my 30D. Tony
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
y 1600 |
Log in 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!
|
| ||
Latest registered member is Aristosan 432 guests, 196 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 |