August 20, 2014, 09:00:40 PM

Author Topic: 5D Mark II Replacement  (Read 28003 times)

Osiris30

  • Guest
Re: 5D Mark II Replacement
« Reply #60 on: October 18, 2010, 02:15:53 AM »
With a Bayer sensor a 2:1 binning (14mp) is good enough. A special color-filter arrangement is needed, though.

It would also be nice if Canon implements in-camera crops modes - 5:4, 1.2x, etc..
Good solution for reducing file size in cases where full resolution is not needed.

But if I'm not mistaken (and it's far too late for me to do the math) isn't a 4:1 *far* easier to implement and would it not offer significantly better snr than a 2:1 bin, without needing to redo the CFA layout and that risking other weird problems.

Cheers,
O

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 5D Mark II Replacement
« Reply #60 on: October 18, 2010, 02:15:53 AM »

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2787
    • View Profile
Re: 5D Mark II Replacement
« Reply #61 on: October 18, 2010, 06:39:20 AM »
Yep, I mean underperforming. For example auto focus. The AF of th 5D series is simply insufficient for sports and barely usable on low light concerts.  I tried, I failed. Perhaps it is my fault, perhaps not, bit facts are simple: the D700 just works. I prefer the Nikon ergonomics too, especially the flash control, the AF switch button and the programmable auto ISO. They are awesome!

Ergonomics is personal preference, like whether you take your coffee with 0, 1 or 2 sugars.

Programmable auto ISO ... I don't understand why Canon haven't implemented this. I can only imagine that there must be core logic choices that are embedded by the camera that are not trivial to make dynamic without redesigning the hardware and firmware.

In other web forums, I've seen folks claim that the 5Dmk2 had an approximately 1 stop advantage over the D700 for low light focus. The only time I've really had trouble was with trying to focus on the outline of trees against the dark sky in the middle of the night with just a hint of moonlight present. At others when it cannot focus I just find something better for it to lock on to - like use a bright outline that's at the same distance as the dark smudge that's in the center of the view (for example.) Suffice to say that I'm tempted to suggest that problems finding focus are not always the fault of the camera.

Flake

  • Guest
Re: 5D Mark II Replacement
« Reply #62 on: October 18, 2010, 08:14:26 AM »
I've had the 5D MkII out in the dark against a D700, and 70 - 200mm f/2.8 sigma lenses on both of them.  The Nikon refused to focus where the 5D MkII carried on albeit a bit slower than normal.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13845
    • View Profile
Re: 5D Mark II Replacement
« Reply #63 on: October 21, 2010, 06:34:47 AM »
I've had the 5D MkII out in the dark against a D700, and 70 - 200mm f/2.8 sigma lenses on both of them.  The Nikon refused to focus where the 5D MkII carried on albeit a bit slower than normal.

But...but...the D700 has over 5 times the number of AF points.  So the Nikon AF has to be better, right??   :o
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

unexposure

  • Guest
Re: 5D Mark II Replacement
« Reply #64 on: October 21, 2010, 03:34:47 PM »
I've had the 5D MkII out in the dark against a D700, and 70 - 200mm f/2.8 sigma lenses on both of them.  The Nikon refused to focus where the 5D MkII carried on albeit a bit slower than normal.

But...but...the D700 has over 5 times the number of AF points.  So the Nikon AF has to be better, right??   :o
I guess, the autofocus-feature on 5d mkII is rather a nice "giveaway" from canon, rather than really needed for the typical usage of the camera. It should just make it some more flexible. ;-)

- When using it for Movies (and this is probably the most obvious) you don't need an af.
- When using it for studiowork, you'll have all the time in the world to set a properly focus manually. As mkII tethered usage performs quite well, it's, in my opinion, the far superior method to focus manually than letting the af do the photographers job.
- When doing (wide) Landscape, there's in 9 out of 10 cases only one applicable setting to your focus-ring.
- When doing (narrower) Landscape and makro-stuff, manually focussing while in live-view and tripod-using has proven do be a good choise, regarding precision.

So for most cases, you would consider making use of a 5d mkII, it's probably the better option to do manual focus.

For shooting stuff like Wildlife the crop-cams are (due to the longer focal-length) far superior. 7d is, in this case also a better choise over 5d because of some few more fps...
For shooting sports it might either be the best choise to get a 1d-body or go with the 7d, as burst-rate is far superior compared to 5d mkII.
And in both cases - either 1d oder 7d - you get LOADS of more af-points of which you can actually make use of!

(don't take this whole post from me to serious!!!)

Edwin Herdman

  • Guest
Re: 5D Mark II Replacement
« Reply #65 on: October 21, 2010, 09:19:44 PM »
I can only imagine that there must be core logic choices that are embedded by the camera that are not trivial to make dynamic without redesigning the hardware and firmware.
I think it's simply that their programmers are busy elsewhere, or perhaps the company is lazy about these things (wanting to sell you cameras with auto ISO - conspiracy theorists might detect a plot to sell the 5D Mark III brewing, in that they don't want the Mark III to seem like a small, safe refresh of the Mark II).  Maybe both, but we have just gotten a couple firmware updates for other cameras, and the 5D Mark II's one shouldn't have been held back for the sake of adding in and testing some auto ISO features.

Given what I've read about Canon firmware - it's basically the camera's operating software on the main logic board, with other parts acting independently as devices, the firmware is updated all in one go (or perhaps piecemeal, but they still don't have any kind of automatic recovery to a good firmware like cheap PC BIOSes have).  I doubt they've run out of space in the camera's internal memory; they give the firmware room to grow in case fixes or new features are needed.

Of course, it could be something like what you say, and there may be some assumptions in the code about how ISO is adjusted or limited that would make adding the user limit very involved.  But I tend to think that it could be as simple as adjusting the limit which is normally the upper level of sensitivity.  Of course, right now we already have something rather like Auto ISO limit in that you can select ISO expansion...the interface is just a bit clunky (at least on the T1i, heh heh).

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 5D Mark II Replacement
« Reply #65 on: October 21, 2010, 09:19:44 PM »