Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Discover the ZEISS Digital Nature Hub

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

A strange move by Canon

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Thursday 16th April 2009, 18:41   #76
macshark
Electron Chaser

 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by davem View Post
40D - lacklustre?? Compared with what that had gone before it from Canon?

Agreed the 30D was anything but exciting as an upgrade compared with the 20D, but having used a 20D for 3+ years, I cannot wait for the 40D to go EOL and when it does I am definitely going to be in line for one.
Agreed, 40D was the first non-pro Canon DSLR to actually improve the image quality since 20D. At the time it was introduced, the 40D had much lower noise, much better dynamic range and colors and a better AF system and faster burst rate compared to any previous non-pro Canon camera. All of these were fundamental improvements IMHO.
macshark is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th April 2009, 20:38   #77
iporali
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tannin View Post
At any given aperture, a higher resolution sensor records the image more accurately than a low resolution sensor.
Accurately recorded softness is still just softness, not more detail. More pixels & equal details = empty magnification.

Ilkka
iporali is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 18th April 2009, 06:30   #78
Jaff
Registered Member
 
Jaff's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wigan
Posts: 12,362
Forgive me if this has been said somewhere but I'm too lazy to read through the thread. I don't mind Canon releasing the 500D as a standalone camera or some future models with movies just so long as they still make DSLR's without it. I do not want movies in all future DSLR's, please god no!!!

Reason: DSLR's are expensive enough without adding a feature like that. Look at the latest offerings from both Canon and Nikon, price is nasty. We buy DSLR's to take photographs not movies. If movies are your thing then get a good video camera, it's really that simple. If the 60D comes out with a movie mode and it's SRP is something riduculous I think there will be many a face, only time and Canon will tell. I pray I'm wrong!
__________________
The views and opinions expressed by me on this Forum are not necessarily those of my brain.
Jaff is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 19th April 2009, 00:21   #79
macshark
Electron Chaser

 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaff View Post
Forgive me if this has been said somewhere but I'm too lazy to read through the thread. I don't mind Canon releasing the 500D as a standalone camera or some future models with movies just so long as they still make DSLR's without it. I do not want movies in all future DSLR's, please god no!!!

Reason: DSLR's are expensive enough without adding a feature like that. Look at the latest offerings from both Canon and Nikon, price is nasty. We buy DSLR's to take photographs not movies. If movies are your thing then get a good video camera, it's really that simple. If the 60D comes out with a movie mode and it's SRP is something riduculous I think there will be many a face, only time and Canon will tell. I pray I'm wrong!
The movie mode does not add much cost to the DSLR. In order to support live view, camera manufacturers had to build sensors capable of transferring image data at high rate. DSLRs also need to have a powerful image processing chip to do real time JPEG creation and noise processing at high frame rates for very high pixel density (e.g. 15 or 21MP) images. Writing firmware for the same processing chip to do video compression is incremental hardware and software development effort, especially for companies like Canon that already has both HW and SW for real time HD video compression.
macshark is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th April 2009, 16:05   #80
Overread
Hunting birds with a canon
 
Overread's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 650
I agree - remember the prices stated at launch (Especaily from Canon) are never what we end up paying on the highstreet - infact I know shop owners who really can't work out why Canon overprices the relaese price on almost every single release they do. Even if you check the website the suggested prices are often way above what you pay.
As for the more recent prices remember everything is in price rise because of the currently weak . So things are generally looking more expensive all round.

As for video I would be sad to not see it in DSLRs which have liveview as a standard - simply as whilst not everyone will use it, its there if you want it -- just like AP, TV and M modes - or mirror lockup - its not really a case about using all the features of a DSLR as they are not specific tools - they are generalist used from the studio to the wilderness - thus the more we get in them the better it is for us all. I would far rather carry 1 DSLR setup and a good tripod with a fluid video head into the field than a DSLR and a video camera setup (as well as that tripod and head) because space carrying capacity will be even more taxed.
__________________
Canon 400D Canon 7D, Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro, Sigma 70mm f2.8 macro, Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS M2, Canon MPE65mm f2.8 macro, sigma 8-16mm, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS, Tokina 35mm f2.8 macro
my flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
Overread is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 28th April 2009, 12:57   #81
Tannin
Common; sedentary.
 
Tannin's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ballarat, Australia
Posts: 1,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by macshark View Post
40D was the first non-pro Canon DSLR to actually improve the image quality since 20D. At the time it was introduced, the 40D had much lower noise, much better dynamic range and colors and a better AF system and faster burst rate compared to any previous non-pro Canon camera. All of these were fundamental improvements IMHO.
Compared to what? A 300D? Any image quality improvement the 40D provided over the 20D/30D was marginal. Not much difference in the AF system, inferior colour, not a lot in it for noise, but about 1/3rd to 2/3rds of a stop behind the 20D. All in all, a lack-lustre camera, considering the superb standard set by the 20D. The biggest differences between the 20D and 40D were the self-cleaning sensor (at last!) and the bigger raw buffer (but I understand that the 30D already had provided this, though I've never owned a 30D to try it for myself).

The 50D, some would argue, continues this trend of ever-smaller image quality improvements. If the 15MP sensor was all there was to it, that woiuld be a fair enough point. Nevertheless, the 50D does provide noticable IQ improvements over the 40D, and is the first mid-range Canon to be clearly superior to the old benchmark model (as opposed to the 40D, which may or may not have been superior to the 20D - opinions differ - but certainly wasn't clearly and unambiguously superior.)

The 50D, however, combines this gain with an across-the-board refinement of almost every feature, even the things that stay essentially the same (like the menu system) have been fine-tuned. Taken as a whole, it is a much more satisfying camera than the 40D. And where the light is decent and your lens is better than poor, it provides more detail.

What's not to like?
Tannin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 28th April 2009, 22:49   #82
lmans66
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020
 
lmans66's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South Jersey, USA and Tucson AZ, USA
Posts: 2,297
Blog Entries: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaff View Post
We buy DSLR's to take photographs not movies.
Just don't take any movies...simple as that. The price of these things are not enhanced that much by the movie option so you are going to pay a chunk one way or another, with or without the option. Who knows, perhaps in a few years you will want to experiment with the movie option.
lmans66 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 28th April 2009, 23:08   #83
hollis_f
Registered User
 
hollis_f's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sussex
Posts: 1,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tannin View Post
Not much difference in the AF system
Well, apart from the addition of the cross-type sensors and the super-duper AF sensor for lenses of f2.8 and faster. From DPReview -

Quote:
The EOS 40D has the same nine focus points we first saw introduced on the EOS 20D however now all points are cross-type (meaning they are sensitive to both horizontal and vertical detail) with lenses of F5.6 or faster. Additionally the center point is now twice as sensitive as any other point with lenses of F2.8 or faster and has cross-type sensors set at forty-five degrees.
Now I thought that was quite an improvement and was one of the main reasons I went from 20D to 40D (having skipped the 20Dn, otherwise known as the 40D).
__________________
Frank Hollis

Photography Gear - Website
hollis_f is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 2008 2009 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 29th April 2009, 00:43   #84
Harold Stiver
Registered User
 
Harold Stiver's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaff View Post
We buy DSLR's to take photographs not movies. If movies are your thing then get a good video camera, it's really that simple.
That certainly is simple. I think you've overlooked the fact that previously you would need to spend very high amounts to get video with telephoto lens. The Red body costs $17,500US and a 300mm lens for it costs another $7,500. Add a computer screen, pull focus system, rods, specialty tripod etc,, and you're looking at over $30,000

I can get HD 1080 and use a lens I already have like my 500mm.

Or a 180mm macro, or a tilt/shift, or a fisheye.

You may buy a DSLR to take photographs but a lot of people are seeing the possibilities of taking photographs and a lot more.

I'm sure that when Autofocus or in camera metering first were offered there were people who insisted that "we" didn't need those things but a lot others saw the opportunities that these features offered.
__________________
Nature Notes ... Birding Guide to Orkney
Harold Stiver is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 29th April 2009, 00:54   #85
tjsimonsen
Registered User
 
tjsimonsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tannin View Post
Compared to what? A 300D? Any image quality improvement the 40D provided over the 20D/30D was marginal.
Well, I have never used a 20/30D. But I went from 350D to 40D, and from what I have read the 350D is very similar to the 20D in image quality. In my uninformed opinion the 40D is head and shoulders above the 350D in terms of IQ: the colors are much, much better, the pictures seems smoother, and the high ISO is much better on the 40D, with the noise levels of 800 ISO being comparable to 400 ISO on the 350D. Interestingly, when the 40D arrived and a lot of people went from 30D to 40D, I saw almost exactly the same comments here on BF - if you replace 350D with 30D in my comments above...

Thomas
tjsimonsen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 1st May 2009, 00:43   #86
Tannin
Common; sedentary.
 
Tannin's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ballarat, Australia
Posts: 1,559
Now you raise an interesting point, Thomas!

I've never owned a 350D (played with a friend's one a bit though) but I have owned a 400D, which by rights ought to be the same as the 40D (of which I still own two). But I don't think the 400D does as good a job as the 40Ds. (Or hte 20D for that matter.) I'm not talking detail and sharpness here, obviously, I'm looking at the more subtle stuff: colour, exposure accuracy, just the overall impact that the image has. And while the 400D can produce a lovely image right out of the camera, it seems less likely to. My assumption is that Canon try harder with their imaging processing firmware, metering system, and so on, in the more expensive models.

I too thought the 40D was pretty good stuff when I first got one, but the longer I've owned them, the more I realise that they really don't achive anything much in the image quality department that the 20D doesn't do. I certainly wouldn't say that the 40D is a bad camera (it is excellent), simply that it didn't advance matters in any substantial way over the 20D. (Strictly from an IQ point of view, I mean. It added a lot of other useful features, such as the self-cleaning sensor and various other goodies that are useful.) The 50D isn't a huge IQ leap over the 40D either, but (to me) it is enough of a jump to finally start seeing a genuine IQ benefit over the old benchmark camera, the 20D.)

Moving along to Hollis' point about the AF systems, I have to say that I really don't notice much difference between 20D, 40D, and 50D. On paper there have been pretty major changes, but in actual practice they are much of a muchness. Bear it in mind that I also own a 1D III, so I'm unlikely to really notice any small differences between those three mid-range cameras because they all seem pretty ordinary after using the Mark III.

In any case, adding extra cross type AF points really makes very little difference to bird photography: most bird photographers are using the centre point only most of the time, and the abilities of an AF point you practically never use are irrelevant. I would jump at a 50D with no extra AF points at all (just the centre point) if, in return, that centre AF point was the same as the one in the Mark III. (Not that they will ever do that, of course.)
Tannin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Strange Birds, Strange Places Lichfield Birder Birds & Birding 3 Tuesday 1st July 2008 19:22
Strange Bird in a Strange Land - Video Spectate Swamp Birds & Birding 8 Saturday 17th March 2007 12:32
Strange noise artifacts (Canon 350D) gatafrancesca Cameras And Photography 5 Wednesday 31st January 2007 14:27
Strange problem of Canon A95 with connecting to computer via usb cable stchong Camera Settings 5 Tuesday 27th September 2005 16:09
On the move... helenol Garden Birds, Bird Feeding & Nestboxes 7 Friday 28th November 2003 21:11

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.12337899 seconds with 25 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 18:23.