5D or the new 40D

2»

Comments

  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,132 moderator
    edited September 11, 2007
    Manfr3d wrote:
    ... before we know it there will be a camera that is noise free at ISO 1600 and resolves even more detail.

    just my very personal 2 cents

    Wow, all that and it only costs 2 cents? WooHoo!
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited September 11, 2007
    ziggy53 wrote:
    Wow, all that and it only costs 2 cents? WooHoo!

    You're making fun of me rolleyes1.gif

    I say ney to punch card area style
    discussions in pixelpeeping awe :D
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • LiquidAirLiquidAir Registered Users Posts: 1,751 Major grins
    edited September 11, 2007
    Manfr3d wrote:
    I think it is no surprise that the 40D measures
    up with the 5D so well and before we know it there
    will be a camera that is noise free at ISO 1600 and
    resolves even more detail.

    The primary reason I like the full frame sensor of the 5D is the way lenses perform on it. Put a 50/1.4 on 5D and the image is noticably soft at apertures from f/1.4 to f/2.2 or so. While the 40D has nearly as many pixels as a 5D, they are 50% closer together. Packing the pixels closer together doesn't really gain you anything when your resolution is limited by the lens. So, while the 40D may have slighly lower noise, the 5D will still have a sharper image when shooting with fast lenses wide open simply because the lower pixel pitch of the sensor is less sensitive to lens softness. Personally, I think one of the primary reasons the 5D is considered a reference body for image quality is actually because its low pixel pitch makes most lenses look better. That said, unless you make big prints this distinction doesn't matter a great deal.
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited September 11, 2007
    LiquidAir wrote:
    The primary reason I like the full frame sensor of the 5D is the way lenses perform on it. Put a 50/1.4 on 5D and the image is noticably soft at apertures from f/1.4 to f/2.2 or so. While the 40D has nearly as many pixels as a 5D, they are 50% closer together. Packing the pixels closer together doesn't really gain you anything when your resolution is limited by the lens. So, while the 40D may have slighly lower noise, the 5D will still have a sharper image when shooting with fast lenses wide open simply because the lower pixel pitch of the sensor is less sensitive to lens softness. Personally, I think one of the primary reasons the 5D is considered a reference body for image quality is actually because its low pixel pitch makes most lenses look better. That said, unless you make big prints this distinction doesn't matter a great deal.

    No doubt about it. You could go on and include DOF and corner
    performance differences betwen APSC and FF format. Each camera
    has its own purpose and place in the market. Thats why they are
    there. Maybe the statement with no noise at ISO 1600 is bold,
    but essentialy thats the direction technology is heading. Noise behaviour
    is just one aspect of this. Dynamic range and contrast will improve
    with new camera generations and each time we will look back and
    compare an older "reference" model (5D) with a newer one (40D)
    end be "surprised" by how close these two different animals are.
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
Sign In or Register to comment.