If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Canon EOS 5D Review
Hello everyone,
for those who are interested - my review of the EOS 5D is online now - here is the link: http://www.gnyman.com/Canon5D.htm I know it is neither complete nor comprehensive, but I got the camera for one day only.... George Nyman |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Canon EOS 5D Review
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:59:24 -0600, "George N.Nyman"
wrote: Hello everyone, for those who are interested - my review of the EOS 5D is online now - here is the link: http://www.gnyman.com/Canon5D.htm I know it is neither complete nor comprehensive, but I got the camera for one day only.... George Nyman Good review, nice images, tonality definitely benefits from the FF sensor, but this paragraph from your review is questionable. "Both cameras use CMOS sensors and if one does the math, the D2x with its smaller sensor corresponds theoretically to a full frame 19MP camera but as their pixels are significantly smaller, the gain on theoretical resolution can not be realized due to the less efficient light collection and processing abilities of the smaller pixel geometry - which means that one can expect to see a slightly higher resolution with the D2X but definitely not as much as one could expect from the difference in pixel size - which confirms again that the size of the pixels is not the one and only determining factor for performance and resolution in digital images." Light collection above a certain point really has little to do with resolution of detail. If you consider each pixel element to be individually manipulatable by the incoming light, then if the Nikon were a FF sensor, you would see more fine detail with it because it's pixels are smaller. The linear resolution of the Nikon would be 58% greater than the Canon. For instance, if you were to shoot pictures of a railway track receding into the distance, if you lost the rails through "resolution extinction" on the Canon at a distance of 100 yards, the Nikon would still show the rails as distinct at 150 yards. Larger pixels are more efficient at gathering light, but as long as the light from the image is sufficient, the Nikon would display noticeably better resolution. If you were to image the same subject at the same scale on both the Canon and the Nikon, the subject would contain substantially more pixels and thus would show much more detail. We know that a sensor that is smaller than FF images an smaller angle with a given lens than does a FF sensor. If you were to "panorama" two images with the Nikon (enough to match the Canon's coverage) and take just one image with the Canon, thereby producing the same overall image in both, the Nikon image would show more detail because it would contain more pixels. Give it a try with the same focal length lens and see what happens. -Rich -Rich |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Canon EOS 5D Review
Rich, I do understand this argumentation and I have had some headache during
writing this paragraph but I can only comment that I cannot see the theoretically possible better resolution with the D2X as much as I would like to see it. Have you got an explanation why the resolution of the D2X is better as expected but not as much as it would be expected from the pixel count? I see also what the caveat of the APS sensor is - one needs to compare the image on the sensor with the same focal length for both cameras, this would then show that the Nikon is by a factor of about 1,5 better if one takes the same crop of the field of view but in practial usage, this is not the way it is done - so one uses a 24mm lens for the full frame and a 20mm lens for the APS size sensor camera - which I agree is as you stated not completely correct but in real life the actual comparison. I shall add some wording to the text, pointing this out.... Thanks and regards George "Rich" wrote in message ... On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:59:24 -0600, "George N.Nyman" wrote: Hello everyone, for those who are interested - my review of the EOS 5D is online now - here is the link: http://www.gnyman.com/Canon5D.htm I know it is neither complete nor comprehensive, but I got the camera for one day only.... George Nyman Good review, nice images, tonality definitely benefits from the FF sensor, but this paragraph from your review is questionable. "Both cameras use CMOS sensors and if one does the math, the D2x with its smaller sensor corresponds theoretically to a full frame 19MP camera but as their pixels are significantly smaller, the gain on theoretical resolution can not be realized due to the less efficient light collection and processing abilities of the smaller pixel geometry - which means that one can expect to see a slightly higher resolution with the D2X but definitely not as much as one could expect from the difference in pixel size - which confirms again that the size of the pixels is not the one and only determining factor for performance and resolution in digital images." Light collection above a certain point really has little to do with resolution of detail. If you consider each pixel element to be individually manipulatable by the incoming light, then if the Nikon were a FF sensor, you would see more fine detail with it because it's pixels are smaller. The linear resolution of the Nikon would be 58% greater than the Canon. For instance, if you were to shoot pictures of a railway track receding into the distance, if you lost the rails through "resolution extinction" on the Canon at a distance of 100 yards, the Nikon would still show the rails as distinct at 150 yards. Larger pixels are more efficient at gathering light, but as long as the light from the image is sufficient, the Nikon would display noticeably better resolution. If you were to image the same subject at the same scale on both the Canon and the Nikon, the subject would contain substantially more pixels and thus would show much more detail. We know that a sensor that is smaller than FF images an smaller angle with a given lens than does a FF sensor. If you were to "panorama" two images with the Nikon (enough to match the Canon's coverage) and take just one image with the Canon, thereby producing the same overall image in both, the Nikon image would show more detail because it would contain more pixels. Give it a try with the same focal length lens and see what happens. -Rich -Rich |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Canon EOS 5D Review
"George N.Nyman" wrote... Hello everyone, for those who are interested - my review of the EOS 5D is online now - here is the link: http://www.gnyman.com/Canon5D.htm I know it is neither complete nor comprehensive, but I got the camera for one day only.... George Nyman Thank you for an interesting review! There is much detail considering that you had so little time with the camera. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Canon EOS 5D Review
In article , DD
writes In article , says... Hello everyone, for those who are interested - my review of the EOS 5D is online now - here is the link: http://www.gnyman.com/Canon5D.htm I know it is neither complete nor comprehensive, but I got the camera for one day only.... George Nyman Your pages are too wide to read comfortably on a 1024x768 screen resolution. Try reducing the size of the table a bit. Works very well on 1280x1024. This clearly shows the advantage of a full-frame monitor, I think. OK Dallas, I'll turn the humour by-pass on again now.... David -- David Littlewood |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Canon EOS 5D Review
In article , George N.Nyman
writes Hello everyone, for those who are interested - my review of the EOS 5D is online now - here is the link: http://www.gnyman.com/Canon5D.htm I know it is neither complete nor comprehensive, but I got the camera for one day only.... George Nyman George, thanks for taking the time to prepare the review. I certainly found it very well presented and helpful, especially in view of your time constraints. In the Mamiya RZ67 comparison, are you sure the 120 film is not just resolving texture on the concrete panels which the smaller digital sensor is not resolving? Probably not, but it's hard to be certain just from the small web images. Either the originals or inspection of the walls themselves should clarify. David -- David Littlewood |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Canon EOS 5D Review
David Littlewood wrote:
In article , DD writes In article , says... Hello everyone, for those who are interested - my review of the EOS 5D is online now - here is the link: http://www.gnyman.com/Canon5D.htm I know it is neither complete nor comprehensive, but I got the camera for one day only.... George Nyman Your pages are too wide to read comfortably on a 1024x768 screen resolution. Try reducing the size of the table a bit. Works very well on 1280x1024. This clearly shows the advantage of a full-frame monitor, I think. OK Dallas, I'll turn the humour by-pass on again now.... David Actually, the lines are too long to read at full screen width, so that page shows the /disadvantages/ of a full-frame monitor..... David |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Canon EOS 5D Review
David J Taylor wrote:
David Littlewood wrote: In article , DD writes In article , says... Hello everyone, for those who are interested - my review of the EOS 5D is online now - here is the link: http://www.gnyman.com/Canon5D.htm I know it is neither complete nor comprehensive, but I got the camera for one day only.... George Nyman Your pages are too wide to read comfortably on a 1024x768 screen resolution. Try reducing the size of the table a bit. Try increasing your resolution a bit. Works very well on 1280x1024. This clearly shows the advantage of a full-frame monitor, I think. Actually, the lines are too long to read at full screen width, so that page shows the /disadvantages/ of a full-frame monitor..... What rez and size monitor? Page looks fine on my 19" monitor- takes up about 2/3 the width, but my resolution on this is higher than most would like, [or can get]: 1900x1200. It's amusing, tho, that the comment comes from a guy whose website says you'd better have Windows and IE 6 or summat like that. -- John McWilliams |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Canon EOS 5D Review
In article , David J
Taylor writes David Littlewood wrote: In article , DD writes In article , says... Hello everyone, for those who are interested - my review of the EOS 5D is online now - here is the link: http://www.gnyman.com/Canon5D.htm I know it is neither complete nor comprehensive, but I got the camera for one day only.... George Nyman Your pages are too wide to read comfortably on a 1024x768 screen resolution. Try reducing the size of the table a bit. Works very well on 1280x1024. This clearly shows the advantage of a full-frame monitor, I think. OK Dallas, I'll turn the humour by-pass on again now.... David Actually, the lines are too long to read at full screen width, so that page shows the /disadvantages/ of a full-frame monitor..... David As I said, works absolutely perfectly on my system. You must be doing something different. David -- David Littlewood |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: Canon T90 + lots of FD lenses | aeiouy | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | January 11th 05 05:14 AM |
FS: Canon FTb 35mm | Peter | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | December 9th 04 01:54 AM |
FS: Canon FTb Cameras | Peter | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | November 18th 04 02:57 AM |
review of Canon 1Ds M II (16 Mpixel full-frame dSLR) | Bill Hilton | Digital Photography | 7 | November 17th 04 04:27 AM |
Quick Canon EOS 300D/ Digital Rebel Review | Todd H. | Digital Photography | 0 | September 21st 04 10:41 PM |