Re: New Image
- From: Mark <lurchl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leica@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:18:40 -0800
Some numbers:
EOS 5D pixel count: 13.3MP
EOS 5D effective pixels: 12.7MP
EOS 5D sensor size: 35.8 x 23.9mm
EOS 5D pixel size: 8.2um (square)
EOS 5D post-processing firmware: DIGIC II
EOS 40D pixel count: 10.5MP
EOS 40D effective pixels: 10.1MP
EOS 40D sensor size: 22.2 x 14.8mm
EOS 40D pixel size: 5.7um (square)
EOS 40D post-processing firmware: DIGIC III
In formal and informal reviews, DIGIC III has shown noise at least
one ISO-stop better than DIGIC II. That is, a DIGIC III camera gives
you the same noise at twice ISO1 as a DIGIC II camera does at ISO1.
That's a significant advantage. Some of that may be due to the 40D's
improved pixel microlens design over older cameras like the 5D.
The 40D offers 14-bits for each R, G and B color channel, versus the
5D's 12 bits. That gives finer color gradation in RAW files, which
give you nice adjustment options in Photoshop CS-3's 16-bit commands.
Going by area, an APS-sized chunk of the 5D's sensor gives you 38.4 %
of the total. That comes out to 4.877 effective megapixels, versus
10.1effective MP using all of the 40D's APS-sized sensor.
I used the first EOS 1D several years ago. It had a 4.1MP sensor. The
resolution difference between it and even a 10D's 6MP made me start
using the 10D all the time instead. 4-ish MP just wasn't enough.
The difference between Minox frames and 35mm frames is pretty
extreme. I don't think that's a very good comparison. And 1/2 frame
35mm cameras gave you half the frame of the same piece of film, with
that film's inherent grain and resolution limitations. So that's not
quite a valid comparison either when the smaller sensor has more resolution.
The biggest difference is in DIGIC III's noise reduction versus DIGIC
II. It's like getting a stop of push-processing with no increase in grain.
So it comes down to horses for courses. If you shoot wildlife and
compose tightly in the finder, the 40D makes sense. If you use wides
a lot, crop your shots, and/or shoot in good light, the 5D makes sense.
Using an APS-sensored camera on a regular basis accustoms you to
'seeing' with one. So you can still have all the habitat around the
animal to choose from. Cropping an APS-sized frame may make picture
resolution suffer, if you don't have enough pixels to start with and
want a 16 X 20 or larger print. An EOS 1Ds Mark III's 21.1 MP may be
the best $olution.
Mark Bohrer
Wildlife Photography on the Urban Edge
www.mountain-and-desert.com
At 12:55 PM 1/14/2008, you wrote:
At 11:32 AM 1/14/2008 -0800, David Young wrote:
1) The sensor is full frame and for what I do (90% wildlife work)
that is a major disadvantage. The effective boost in focal length
(crop factor) saves my buying much longer lenses.
This is a false thought. It's like saying that I'll use an APS film
camera over a 35mm film camera because my long lenses appear longer
on the smaller film format. Or my 270mm LF lens gives me a longer
look when I use my 645 or 67 roll film back on my 4x5. Going even
further, why not use Minox film in a 35mm camera so that one's long
lenses appear to be astronomically long and 'really' use the lens
sweet spot - dead center.
Several 35mm camera makers made 1/2 frame cameras. When using the
camera system's long lenses on those cameras, they got an apparent
focal length boost. But not really. They were only using half of the
film. You get exactly the same image when using a full frame 35mm
camera PLUS more around the subject so that there was more to work
from in the darkroom. The only economy was saving money on film. 72
frames rather than 36. This is not a problem with digital.
The middle of a 5D sensor is as good or better than the whole of
smaller sensors.
So by using an APS sensor, you are cropping in the camera rather
than cropping on your computer screen.
I personally like having more stuff around the image on film (or
digifile) so that when I print or present the image, I have a lot to
work with. I can either tightly crop the image (APS it) or I can
place it properly in the frame and leave in meaningful ancillary
stuff that makes for a great composition. It's always better to have
more stuff to choose from, than less. Especially since it is of the
same (or even higher) resolution.
Boiled down, your APS size sensor is simply the middle of a full
frame sensor in size. Full frame sensors are far more difficult to
make and thus go through a far more rigorous testing procedure. I
personally believe (and have seen) that the APS section (center) of
current full frame sensors is better than actual APS size sensors.
And... by packing smaller pixels into a space (roughly half the full
frame space) creates pixels with less dynamic range capability and
that are more noise prone. The small pixel problem. A FF 5D sensor
has larger pixels than 20/30/40D cameras and therefore exhibits
exemplary low light and dynamic range raw performance.
I personally don't think that you should continue to think about the
sensor size in a 'bass ackward' way. And since the GG screens in
Canon DSLRs are removable, you can engrave the APS size right on the
screen so that you'll never know that you are shooting with a larger
sensor. Then when you sit down at your computer, there's all of that
cool stuff around the subject that you can introduce in order to
make stunning compositions. I personally like to see some of the
environment where the animal is living/feeding/whatevering...
Plus... when you use the camera in a normal mode (landscape, trips,
etc.) rather than as a wildlife camera, it's performance will
definitely be a cut above the smaller sensor cameras.
IMHO,
:-)
Jim
=========================================================
To Unsubscribe: Send email to leica-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the Subject field. The acknowledgment that you then
receive MUST be replied to per instructions. You may also log in to
the Web interface to unsubscribe.
=========================================================
To Unsubscribe: Send email to leica-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in
the Subject field. The acknowledgment that you then receive MUST be replied to
per instructions. You may also log in to the Web interface to unsubscribe.
Other related posts:
