Nikon equivalent of Canon EOS-5D

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: DBL
People that claim digital needs 50mp to touch 35mm film are fooling themselves.

Well, 50MP is a bit much, but 30MP is around what most people have suggested.

A 5D and 20D are great cameras, no doubt about it. The digital images they produce are great too. But If we're talking resolution here, you are fooling yourself if you think a 12MP 5D can match 35mm film. Will you notice the difference at 4x6 or even 8x10? Probably not. Will you notice the difference for gallery prints, or large crops? Yes.

Pretty blatant examples here.

lol that guy just totally 0wn3d the luminous landscape article between MF film and digital.

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: DBL
People that claim digital needs 50mp to touch 35mm film are fooling themselves.

Well, 50MP is a bit much, but 30MP is around what most people have suggested.

A 5D and 20D are great cameras, no doubt about it. The digital images they produce are great too. But If we're talking resolution here, you are fooling yourself if you think a 12MP 5D can match 35mm film. Will you notice the difference at 4x6 or even 8x10? Probably not. Will you notice the difference for gallery prints, or large crops? Yes.

Pretty blatant examples here.

rockwell is a complete donkey.

besides, much of what he said in that article dates to 2003. eternity for a digital vs. film comparison.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Lucky
rockwell is a complete donkey.

And you're qualified to make that statement because...you parked the cameraguy.net domain?

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: Lucky
rockwell is a complete donkey.

And you're qualified to make that statement because...you parked the cameraguy.net domain?

Rockwells own link

He is vague about what he uses for those comparisons. One thing we can tell is that he is comparing medium format (not 35mm) to an old digital camera. However, I followed his provided link. If you scroll down the page, you can see some 35mm comparisons showing booth the Canon 20D and the Nikon D70 both easily providing comparable (better IMO) to 35mm.

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: Lucky
rockwell is a complete donkey.

And you're qualified to make that statement because...you parked the cameraguy.net domain?

Because I'm a professional photographer who's read enough 'net discussions on rockwell to determine that the guy is a donkey. After reading much of the page , I believe many of his "testing" methods used are shoddy at best. He writes reviews of equipment before he even has them in his hand. I don't claim to be a photography know-it-all. There are many of this board who possess much more technical knowledge when it comes to this, and I've seen more than one who take better pictures. But IMO rockwell is a tool.

edit: good lord, after seeing that second page (the one linked in the post above) I've lost all respect for the guy. Despite the loads of pictures and hours I'm sure he put into it, I just can't respect the testing methods.

Focusing a superwide zoom on an object hundreds of feet away, then performing a brutal crop? With no reference to what settings he used? Using waaaay too much unsharp masking? Comparing the images when they've obviously been shot under different lighting conditions, no matter how subtle? Blowing up a 35mm digital file to 60x80" to compare to 4x5 without any note of how he interpolated the file?

Besides, all this blather, and on another page the guy says:

Your equipment DOES NOT affect the quality of your image. The right equipment just makes it easier, faster or more convenient.

It took me decades to realize this.

 

[Rubycon]

Well this will be waiting for me upon arrival at NY this Thursday!

Got a couple of stabilized lenses, sunpacks, and battery grips too! Woohoo!

Prepare to see some SEXY photos soon.



p.s. Are the stablized lenses really effective at reducing the effects of shake?

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
Well this will be waiting for me upon arrival at NY this Thursday!

Got a couple of stabilized lenses, sunpacks, and battery grips too! Woohoo!

Prepare to see some SEXY photos soon.



p.s. Are the stablized lenses really effective at reducing the effects of shake?

battery grips?

 

[Doggiedog]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
Well this will be waiting for me upon arrival at NY this Thursday!

Got a couple of stabilized lenses, sunpacks, and battery grips too! Woohoo!

Prepare to see some SEXY photos soon.



p.s. Are the stablized lenses really effective at reducing the effects of shake?

Yes. I've got a Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS that stabilizes about 3 f-stops and it is very effective. I can zoom in at 85mm at 1/10 and not see any shake. Its completely useless with a moving target though.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

battery grips?

Yes there is only one. My bad.

Originally posted by: Doggiedog


Yes. I've got a Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS that stabilizes about 3 f-stops and it is very effective. I can zoom in at 85mm at 1/10 and not see any shake. Its completely useless with a moving target though.

How fast a target we talkin' about?

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
p.s. Are the stablized lenses really effective at reducing the effects of shake?

Yes. A stabilized lens will enable you to get sharp handheld photos at up to several stops slower than you could without the assistance of stabilization. However, bear in mind that IS does nothing for subject movement, so it isn't a universal cure-all or replacement for fast glass in all situations.

 

[Rubycon]

Please forgive my ignorance but the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L telephoto lens is white! Is there any reason why this is white and not black?

Ok you can stop laughing now!

 

[Doggiedog]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn

Originally posted by: tfinch2

battery grips?

Yes there is only one. My bad.

Originally posted by: Doggiedog


Yes. I've got a Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS that stabilizes about 3 f-stops and it is very effective. I can zoom in at 85mm at 1/10 and not see any shake. Its completely useless with a moving target though.

How fast a target we talkin' about?

How about completely still? Any movement and you'll get a blur at that shutter speed. The IS is only for shake of the hand.

 

[Doggiedog]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
Please forgive my ignorance but the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L telephoto lens is white! Is there any reason why this is white and not black?

Ok you can stop laughing now!

It's white because the lenses are supposedly made of some fragile material and heat transfer from a black coating can potentially cause problems.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Doggiedog

It's white because the lenses are supposedly made of some fragile material and heat transfer from a black coating can potentially cause problems.

Holy cow that's insane! :Q

Tripod use is obviously mandatory but most of the time there is going to be movement even with a tripod unfortunately.

 

[jiwq]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn

Originally posted by: Doggiedog

It's white because the lenses are supposedly made of some fragile material and heat transfer from a black coating can potentially cause problems.

Holy cow that's insane! :Q

Tripod use is obviously mandatory but most of the time there is going to be movement even with a tripod unfortunately.

yep, you're gonna need to buy a tripod too! the folks on this board should know what to recommend...

 

[Crazee]

A good monopod might be even more useful

 

[Lucky]

forgive me for asking but what are you going to use a 300 2.8 for?

 

[Rubycon]

Blend of landmarks and wildlife. Particularly the latter is near impossible to reach given the amount of time it takes to reach the hotspots and that's even if they're reachable.

Example

That's from the original Rebel kit.

 

[jiwq]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
Blend of landmarks and wildlife. Particularly the latter is near impossible to reach given the amount of time it takes to reach the hotspots and that's even if they're reachable.

Example

That's from the original Rebel kit.

aaaaaah lens flare

 

[PHiuR]

long lenses + monopod = FTW!

 

[Rubycon]

I haven't had much luck with monopods.

Of course you have to take into consideration where I am shooting from.

Taking long shots from the deck of a ship is difficult even when docked. I have access to O'connor fluid heads and self leveling mounts too.

Going on land is always an adventure too due to something known as mal de ebarquement syndrome. I've got a steady hand as verified with a laser pointer over a decent distance - however standing still is really hard to do.

I can't wait to see some results. I know I'm in over my head but that's ok. Stay tuned.

 

[JinLien]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
I haven't had much luck with monopods.

Of course you have to take into consideration where I am shooting from.

Taking long shots from the deck of a ship is difficult even when docked. I have access to O'connor fluid heads and self leveling mounts too.

Going on land is always an adventure too due to something known as mal de ebarquement syndrome. I've got a steady hand as verified with a laser pointer over a decent distance - however standing still is really hard to do.

I can't wait to see some results. I know I'm in over my head but that's ok. Stay tuned.

Monopods/Tripods are nice tools to have but combersome, however you can learn to keep your arms tight against your body as a more steady way to shoot hand held. Also, shoot at the bottom of exhale breath is a common way to get steady shots.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: DBL
People that claim digital needs 50mp to touch 35mm film are fooling themselves.

Well, 50MP is a bit much, but 30MP is around what most people have suggested.

A 5D and 20D are great cameras, no doubt about it. The digital images they produce are great too. But If we're talking resolution here, you are fooling yourself if you think a 12MP 5D can match 35mm film. Will you notice the difference at 4x6 or even 8x10? Probably not. Will you notice the difference for gallery prints, or large crops? Yes.

Pretty blatant examples here.

Why isn't he comparing medium format film to a medium format digital back? I'm most certainly an amateur photographer, but I am a professional analyst. Idiotic comparison, since medium format digital does exist and is used for landscapes (don't they have 36MP digital backs or something crazy??).

I probably have to wait a little longer before I can buy my D200, but I'll get one eventually.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Doggiedog

Originally posted by: MS Dawn
Please forgive my ignorance but the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L telephoto lens is white! Is there any reason why this is white and not black?

Ok you can stop laughing now!

It's white because the lenses are supposedly made of some fragile material and heat transfer from a black coating can potentially cause problems.

Maybe they should talk to Nikon's material engineers; they have been making black lenses for decades without a problem, amateur and professional alike.

 

[Czar]

screw tripods or monopods... get IS