Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Spotting With A Canon 5D?  
User currently offlineBanderas911 From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 22 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3960 times:

After reading the preview on Dpreview, http://www.dpreview.com/articles/canoneos5d/ im not certain about the cam, would it be a good cam for spotting all around, ...?

I work with a Canon 70-200 IS USM and Canon 28-105.


All opinions are welcome

Friendly Regards
Banderas

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineA346Dude From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1282 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3945 times:

Well, it is a high priced digital SLR, so of course. To be honest I think it might be a little too good, unless you have money to burn - you probably won't notice much of a difference between something like a 20D and this camera (for aviation photography, anyways) unless you are really putting it to good use.

A346Dude



You know the gear is up and locked when it takes full throttle to taxi to the terminal.
User currently offlineAdamWright From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3942 times:

These days in Aviation photography.. if you don't have the latest and greatest.. no one will give you the attention you deserve!

Go out and shell 3700 euro's so you can be the envy of everyone at the viewing park! The vanity is worth it  Smile


User currently offlineBanderas911 From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 22 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3925 times:

Quoting AdamWright (Reply 2):
Go out and shell 3700 euro's so you can be the envy of everyone at the viewing park! The vanity is worth it  

+- 3000 euro's here in several online shops adam!!

I have a 10D now and dont know if the upgrade will be worth!!


User currently offlineFiveholer From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1013 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3920 times:

Quoting AdamWright (Reply 2):
Go out and shell 3700 euro's so you can be the envy of everyone at the viewing park! The vanity is worth it Smile

That's what its all about, no?  Wink



Bring back Bethune!
User currently offlineAdamWright From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3918 times:

Anthony..

This 5D doesnt even have a built in flash. So, if you were to go to an office party, out on the town one night with your family/wife and you want to take pictures, you'll have to lug around a huge external flash. And with only 3fps.. this camera is obviously not designed for fast pace shooting like you do in Aviation photography.

If you want to upgrade from your 10D, the 20D is an excellent consideration. For the 1024x768 and occasional print/photosale you might want to make, the 20D has you covered. Its a fast, reliable camera that will really perform for you. No need to pay double and get a 5D when it's not even designed for "Sports" photography.

-Adam


User currently offlineJavibi From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1371 posts, RR: 42
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3916 times:

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 1):
you probably won't notice much of a difference between something like a 20D

In fact you'll be LOSING the 1.6 crop factor... a camera not meant for spotting IMHO, specially when you can access the 20D for a lot less money. I plan to wait until they launch a full frame sensor with at least 21 Mp.

j



"Be prepared to engage in constructive debate". Are YOU prepared?
User currently offlineBanderas911 From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 22 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3877 times:

Ok guys, maybe not a good job than...the 5D!
Thanks for info

Banderas


User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3869 times:

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 1):
you probably won't notice much of a difference between something like a 20D and this camera (for aviation photography, anyways)

A full frame sensor and 3.0 fps? no, that's not good at all (for aviation). I'd save the money and get a 20D.


User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1057 posts, RR: 33
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3767 times:

I'd be saying that if you dont need the crop factor to help give you an effective increase in focal length this camera will be stunning.
Think about it.
An instant increase in sharpness of over 60%!!
Take a look at shots taken with 70-200's at 100mm and imagine a shot whichj is 60% sharper straight out of the camera.Then combine it with a superior AF system.
It will start to show up why L glass is so amazing remembering that every shot in the DB here with a 10D or 20D or even a 1Dmk2 range from 30 to 60% softer than a full frame body shot.
As for the flash well really if you are using such a good camera why would you bother with an in built poorer quality unit instead of a 550 or 580EX?
Darren



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlineChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3748 times:

Quoting Dehowie (Reply 9):
An instant increase in sharpness of over 60%!!

Alot of that is eaten up by the reduced edge sharpness and light falloff you'll suffer.



what seems to be the officer, problem?
User currently offlineSean377 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1225 posts, RR: 41
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3748 times:

Quoting Dehowie (Reply 9):
I'd be saying that if you dont need the crop factor to help give you an effective increase in focal length

Is this where we go astray with crop factors again? You could easily replicate a picture taken on a full frame sensor camera by cropping couldn't you. After all, with the 5D, you'd have the extra pixels so wouldn't see any loss of quality???

Is that right?

Sean



Flying is the second greatest thrill known to man... Landing is the first!
User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3738 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Sean377 (Reply 11):
After all, with the 5D, you'd have the extra pixels

because its a full frame the extra pixels are needed to break even with say a 20d with the 1.6 crop .
Please correct me if im wrong here but take the 1.6 crop out of the equation and the difference between say a 20d and the new 5d don't look all that much
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1057 posts, RR: 33
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3701 times:

Hi Chris
Well with good quality L glass falloff and softness will be very limited to say the least.
I'd say with consumer lenses it would be fairly prevalent but not with L stuff.
How much fall off do you get with your Nikon ED lenses?
I'd imagine very little as the lenses are designed for full frame.
Same with the L's.
Darren



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlineChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 16
Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3691 times:

L-glass is no guarantee really. Check this out:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X_rev06.html

I assume the 16-35 is a little better. I know the 100-400 shows falloff even on the 1.6x.

The Nikons do the same yeah but with DX-sensors that problem is outta the way. So that 60% increase is highly theoretical (perhaps achievable with a Zeiss prime or something). Also checking Dpreviews review of the 1dsmk2 the edge sharpness is suffering. The sensor is outresolving the lens.



what seems to be the officer, problem?
User currently offlineFergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 53
Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3687 times:

Personally if I had that kind of money I would get the 1D MKII it's only an extra £500 a small amount if you're forking out over £2100 for a body 5D body, and a better camera too. 1.3 FOV crop factor, which by the way does not increase the focal length. With a 40/20 JPEG/RAW buffer at 8fps, can't go wrong, there. But if you really want the big boy then of course the 1Ds is the answer.  drool 

Have fun, and we wish you all the best in your decision, No really we do,  grumpy  Now if only I could win the Irish lotto this weekend, a few weeks roll over has brought it up to a nice healthy €6 million, God I'd be happy with €½ a million, Big grin

Take care

Fergul  sun 



Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
User currently offlineJavibi From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1371 posts, RR: 42
Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3678 times:

Quoting JumboJim747 (Reply 12):
because its a full frame the extra pixels are needed to break even with say a 20d with the 1.6 crop .

I've done the math and if I am not mistaken you'll need 21 Mp in a full frame to break even with the 20D. I'd rather invest in lenses for the time being.

j



"Be prepared to engage in constructive debate". Are YOU prepared?
User currently offlineJRowson From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 351 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3619 times:

Nice looking piece of kit, but for me reverting back to 3fps isn't the way to go. I never found it restrictive, but the 20d's burst is just that little bit more useful. I've no need for full frame anyway, since most of my photos are edited for online use, so i'd be wasting my money. I'd rather spend the extra on expanding my glass collection. Just my 2p.


James Rowson. Canonite and lover of all things L. JAR Photography.
User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3611 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Javibi (Reply 16):
I've done the math and if I am not mistaken you'll need 21 Mp in a full frame to break even with the 20D. I'd rather invest in lenses for the time being.

Thx javibi i thought so .
Ill stick with my 20D
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1057 posts, RR: 33
Reply 19, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3585 times:

G'day Chris
As we are talking lenes used for aircraft photography ie telephoto's fall off is not an issue.
Wide angles will be but i dont use a wide angle when taking aeroplane photo's.
I am not sure what 100-400 you are talking about?
Couldn't possibly be the Canon one as i have never seen fall off at 1.6 or on a 1.3 body and i have only shot off around 50000 frames with mine?
Love to see an examply of fall off with the 100-400 on a 1.6 or 1.3 if you have one as i'd imagine every 100-400 user would dispute your claim to the highest level.
This shot has 10 pixels off the edge and 21 off the top and taken at a full 400mm.Please feel free to point out the fall off in the shot.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Howie


Quite surprised to see a dedicated Nikon pro rate the D2X so highly as well  Smile
You are totally correct about edges not being as sharp with lens sharpness.
However by the time you resize your 4000+ pixel shot down to 1280 or 1024 it will be that sharp that it will be irrelevant for aviation use.
Having used a 1DsMK2 with Canon's long primes(500+300)the quality you will get out of a 5D full frame will be unmatched except by its Nikon equivalent.
Darren



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlineChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 16
Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3559 times:

Quoting Dehowie (Reply 19):
As we are talking lenes used for aircraft photography ie telephoto's fall off is not an issue.

But edge sharpness will be.

If you want to see the fall-off, shoot a velvia slide with the 100-400 wide open. =) It's a non-issue though, on 1.6x it's only against blue sky and levelized in PS you can barely make it out. Point is it's there, and FF will make every slight flaw bigger. So that 60% sharpness increase is, as I said, theoretical. I got tons of falloff with the 80-400 which is the Nikon equivalent when I shot slides with it.

"However by the time you resize your 4000+ pixel shot down to 1280 or 1024 it will be that sharp that it will be irrelevant for aviation use."

you mean Airliners.net use ;o) Yeah I know, I use the D2x and at 1024x there's no difference between that and the D70 really. When printing.... that's another story.



what seems to be the officer, problem?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Possible Flaw With Canon EF70-200 F4 L posted Tue Dec 5 2006 16:46:52 by JakTrax
My First Day With Canon Digital Rebel XT.. posted Thu Aug 10 2006 06:27:24 by COIAH756CA
Canon 5D Or Future Canon Cameras. posted Wed Jul 12 2006 02:52:09 by Res
Vignetting On Canon 5D - A Small Test posted Wed Jul 12 2006 01:02:43 by Parsival
Trouble With A Canon 430EX posted Tue Jun 13 2006 05:13:44 by AdamWright
Experience With Canon Lenses posted Sat Mar 25 2006 18:52:31 by TACAA320
Which Lenses Do You Recommend For A Canon 5D posted Mon Mar 6 2006 23:27:54 by Parsival
Canon 5D Announced....official posted Mon Aug 22 2005 15:25:33 by AndyHunt
Exposing Correctly With Canon 10-22 posted Mon May 16 2005 07:38:27 by United737522
Experiences With Canon 50mm F/1.8 EF II Lens? posted Fri Apr 8 2005 00:42:45 by F9Widebody