7D sensor poll

[AprilForever]

Or, how about: "Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that APS-H is only MOSTLY dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive." (Miracle Max in The Princess Bride, sort of...)

I really like the ASP-C because of the reach it gives me... if they would put asp-c in a 1D body...

Exactly what I'm hoping for...but they can wait a year or so, until my gear fund recovers from the 1D X, and I'm looking to replace the 7D after experiencing 1-series AF for a while...

Me too!

Or, how about: "Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that APS-H is only MOSTLY dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive." (Miracle Max in The Princess Bride, sort of...)

Cant say I've ever seen princess bride [/crickets chirping]... anyways I understand the aps-c vs aps-h in terms of slightly bigger sensor, better IQ, but one of the tradeoff's for APS-C is the ability to use APS-C lenses and line up and reach... Especially since Canon has obviously shown a desire to develop this clientele and sensor size with lenses, I cant see canon abandoning that unless they make it so the lenses work on that style camera...

Go watch it!!! What would be hilarious is if Nikon came out with a 1.3/1.25 crop sensor (Although DX is 1.5)...

"Hey Inigo, are there rocks ahead?"

 

[K-amps]

I'm with you, neuro. The H-sensor is dead. It's an anachronism. It existed because there wasn't enough horsepower under the hood to drive a full-frame sports camera.

I am not sure the only reason for it's existence was horsepower or lack thereof but because the Yields were much better.

To illustrate (we are not even going into the 30 vs 112 sensor per 8" wafer or the contaminents per die argument): but also APS-C sensors need 1 pass-through/exposure during the photolithography, and FF sensors need 3 passes. the APS-H was the largest size that needed "only" one pass. This is why that size was chosen. We often forget, it is sometimes the production costs that drive Business decisions and not only what suits a small niche of hard-core cool guys like us.

Keeping that in Mind, one has to entertain the possibility of it's second birth... as they say, the second birth is easier than the first

 

[briansquibb]

I am looking forward to a Canon medium format sensor with serious mps, serious iso capability, serious dr improvement, serious AF system (90 point?).

 

[K-amps]

I am looking forward to a Canon medium format sensor with serious mps, serious iso capability, serious dr improvement, serious AF system (90 point?).

Haha, dont forget to buy a whole new set of serious lenses to go with that...

 

[briansquibb]

I am looking forward to a Canon medium format sensor with serious mps, serious iso capability, serious dr improvement, serious AF system (90 point?).

Haha, dont forget to buy a whole new set of serious lenses to go with that...

Perhaps they will do like Nikon with DX and FX and allow EF lens on the medium format to give ff sized images in compatibility mode

With 80+ mps you wont need bigger native lens than a 300mm

 

[wickidwombat]

it's easy to argue that a 24-70L 2.8 is a downgrade from a 17-55 2.8.

I'd agree with that I'm very keen to see what the new 7D comes out with purely from an interest in using this lens, that and the extra reach it will give my 300f4L in a relatively light and easy to use long range combo. then my 70-200 would basically live on my 5D2.
but I also really love the 16-35 on an APS-H sensor too so a lighter smaller body than a 1D that can hold that lens would be very nice.
As someone suggested a small camera with APS-H sensor that you can change to APS-C at say 16MP and excellent weather sealing with good AF would be a fun proposition indead and of course it would need to be able to use EF-S lenses too. ( Ah wishfull thinking)

 

[AprilForever]

Here's a serious lens...

http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=250

 

[dr croubie]

Here's a serious lens...

http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=250

For a 20x24" large format film, in 35mm Full Frame terms, it frames like a 65mm f/1.3 (or 40mm f/0.8 on a 7D), and that's only the f/22 version, me wanty the f/14...

 

[JonJT]

Here's a serious lens...

http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=250

For a 20x24" large format film, in 35mm Full Frame terms, it frames like a 65mm f/1.3 (or 40mm f/0.8 on a 7D), and that's only the f/22 version, me wanty the f/14...

Negative DOF.

 

[AprilForever]

Here's a serious lens...

http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=250

For a 20x24" large format film, in 35mm Full Frame terms, it frames like a 65mm f/1.3 (or 40mm f/0.8 on a 7D), and that's only the f/22 version, me wanty the f/14...

Boy would I love a 40 f 0.8!!!

 

[smirkypants]

I'd agree with that I'm very keen to see what the new 7D comes out with purely from an interest in using this lens, that and the extra reach it will give my 300f4L in a relatively light and easy to use long range combo. then my 70-200 would basically live on my 5D2.

I will be getting a 5D3 or 1Dx when they come out, mostly to use with my 70-200 and events and I'm at about 250K shutter actuations on my 1D4. The short end on any crop (70mm=112mm) just feels too cramped.

But.... The MTF charts are strikingly nicer on the 17-55 than on the 24-70, plus you have 4 stops of image stabilization. Also, the 7D will give you greater reach than adding a 1.4 teleconverter to your 300/f4, without the image degradation and the loss of light. Also, the long end of you 70-200 112-320) will be longer than your 300/f4. It's a no-brainer.

It's not either/or... it's BOTH.

 

[wickidwombat]

It's not either/or... it's BOTH.

yep thats the plan then my trusty 1Dmk3 will get a permanent IR conversion which should be fun

 

[JonJT]

I'd agree with that I'm very keen to see what the new 7D comes out with purely from an interest in using this lens, that and the extra reach it will give my 300f4L in a relatively light and easy to use long range combo. then my 70-200 would basically live on my 5D2.

I will be getting a 5D3 or 1Dx when they come out, mostly to use with my 70-200 and events and I'm at about 250K shutter actuations on my 1D4. The short end on any crop (70mm=112mm) just feels too cramped.

But.... The MTF charts are strikingly nicer on the 17-55 than on the 24-70, plus you have 4 stops of image stabilization. Also, the 7D will give you greater reach than adding a 1.4 teleconverter to your 300/f4, without the image degradation and the loss of light. Also, the long end of you 70-200 112-320) will be longer than your 300/f4. It's a no-brainer.

It's not either/or... it's BOTH.

It's actually 3 stops on the 17-55