Canon cannot even make a good APS-C mirrorless. People are asking FF from Canon??? Dream on!! Don't get me wrong, I like mirrorless. Like the other poster says, if Canon comes up with a GOOD mirrorless, even in APS-C, I will jump on it.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Thanks , I though he is refering to manual focusing.Canon have the same technology in MF. They just abandon it when they get out of the Range-finder camera segment 40 years ago.Agreed on no MF - it would require development of a complete system in a very niche market.... which is already occupied by Leica.
I guess Athlon is referring to the S2; a whopping big camera for whopping big money - and that's before you start on the lenses
Canon have the same technology in MF. They just abandon it when they get out of the Range-finder camera segment 40 years ago.Agreed on no MF - it would require development of a complete system in a very niche market.... which is already occupied by Leica.
The thing I'm not sure about though, is the security aspect of it. It sure does look easy for someone steal the cameraout of the side pocket in the street.
As long as your lens can out resolve the senser, the DOF does not matter any more. Also the DOF is governed by the acceptable size of circle of confussion. As long as you have the acceptable size of circle of conffussion, your DOF can either be 1 inch or 10 ft, both will give you the same result on the point of focus.Sharpness has got nothing to do with perspective, or DoF.I disagree. That's not even true when you only shoot ISO test charts. The larger DoF, the smaller the circle of confusion and the higher the resolution/sharpness (disregarding diffraction etc.).
2. There are isolated incident that the APS-C can actually sharper than the FF if the lens use for FF have a severe problem in curvature of field or severe unsharp conrners. Since APS-C snesor only using the center part of the FOV of the lens. These problem may not exist. Therefore the APS-C is actually sharper.
well, you have soon 24x36 with the same pixel density then you have both cropping and 24x36 to chose between.
as todays d800 APS crop 15,3Mp. Next will be 54Mp 24x36 if they keep the schedule and the APS crop 24Mp
My discussion is based on both FF and APS-C ARE of the same pixel count. Not pixel density.
If you read my post carefully, I started by staying that both FFand APS-C are of the same pixel count. Also sharpness has got nothing to do with FOV or DOF. Your disussion talks about cropping the FF to APS-C size. Therefore you have already thrown away more than half of the pixel from FF. Do you expect a 10 Mp picture to be sharper than a 22 MP APS-C picture with an very sharp lens (center area only)??2. There are isolated incident that the APS-C can actually sharper than the FF if the lens use for FF have a severe problem in curvature of field or severe unsharp conrners. Since APS-C snesor only using the center part of the FOV of the lens. These problem may not exist. Therefore the APS-C is actually sharper.
I don't see why, because if you were taking the same lens on the full frame, even if it had bad corners, if you took a center 1.6 crop size on the FF to get the same FOV, you would be throwing away the FF bad corners. It would be same as then comparing the same image area. Nearly every lens chart I have ever looked at the lens is sharper in the middle, so unless you were comparing edge of FF to centre of APS-C (which is not really a reasonable comparison) that is not the case.
Sharpness has got nothing to do with perspective, or DoF. You quoted all the lenses are wide open for the tests. It is not fair either. Every body knows that ALL lenses is not in their best behaviour when they are wide open ( more distortion, less resolution and less contrast ). Are you sure that the lenses can out resolve the APS-C sensor under test??? if not, then the result becomes a test of the lenses, not the sharpness of the sensor.For one, I asked you what exactly you meant by "the APS-C lens has to be better than the FF lens"?
I followed that up with a clarifying question asking if you were talking about two different lenses such as one EF-S lens and one EF lens.
Sorry if I was the cause of any additional confusion...
-Yes, to get two images, one taken with APS and one taken with FF appear equally sharp when viewed at equal presentation size in your presentation format of choice, the lens used on the APS camera needs to be sharper, when sharpness is defined by "lines or line-pairs per mm".
-Yes, at least I am talking about two different lenses in the comparison. Why compare an 85mm on FF with an 85mm on APS? they don't "do" the same thing any more. If the shot taken with the FF camera was at a 10 feet target distance, you'd have to back of to 16 feet to get the same framing on APS. And by backing off to 16 feet, you change the perspective of the shot so much that it wouldn't even be the "same shot" any more.
Taking that into account is where the "FF is sharper than APS" starts to make sense....
Using a 135L 2.0 wide open on a 5D3 gives the same field of view, the same short DoF and the same amount of noise as using the 85L 1.2 on a 60D. But the 135 on 5D3 image will be a LOT sharper and more contrasty.
For the same reason, a bog-standard 85/1.8 on FF gives sharper images with the same short DoF as a 50L 1.2 does on APS. And a 50mm vs 35mm F1.4 on APS and so on.
The 20D marked a tremendous step forward in it's day for the Canon lineup, a nice improvement on the 10D and not really bettered for it's class in terms of IQ until the 40D came out many years later. I used a pair of them as a professional wedding photographer for many years with complete satisfaction. It's no worse a camera today, just been passed up by the capabilities of newer cameras. Considering it's value on the used market is little more than pocket change (in photographic equipment terms) it's probably worth keeping as a backup/beater camera unless you never anticipate needing such a thing. As noted by someone else, it also makes a great entry camera for a beginner photographer, maybe find a niece or nephew who might be a budding shutter bug and pass on the joy of photography to them, it's value in this respect may far exceed it's market worth.