#1  
Old 29-11-2012, 06:10 AM
dannat's Avatar
dannat (Daniel)
daniel

dannat is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Macedon shire, Australia
Posts: 3,380
Canon 5D mk1 vs newer aps-c for landscapes

Have been offered an orig 5D, would the larger sensor be an advantage for landscapes & night landscapes with slightly increased noise or woulda be better getting one of the newer aps-c cameras with a sensor that will produce less noise but give me less fov?
Any thoughts appreciated
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 29-11-2012, 07:00 AM
DavidTrap's Avatar
DavidTrap (David)
Really just a beginner

DavidTrap is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,828
Do you have the lenses to suit a full frame camera and take advantage of the larger field of view? Think about the total cost of the package you want to end up with. You're less likely to upgrade lenses vs a body, so don't buy lenses to just suit a smaller chip now if you plan on going full frame when you next upgrade your body.

It's not just noise, but also dynamic range that has improved in newer generation sensors.

Just my 2 cents worth,

DT
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 29-11-2012, 08:51 AM
rogerg's Avatar
rogerg (Roger)
Registered User

rogerg is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 4,542
As DT says you need to consider all the aspects other than APC vs full frame, I think more so than that choice. APC isn't necessarily a disadvantage in its self, and considering the age difference the comparison is very hard to make without stats like noise, bit depth, and more mundane aspects such as metering, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 29-11-2012, 10:07 AM
naskies's Avatar
naskies (Dave)
Registered User

naskies is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,865
A few other considerations:

* LiveView: I didn't miss it when I didn't have it on my 20D, but now that I have it on my 5DmkII I find it indispensable. Focusing on stars at night is much, much easier.

* Depth of field: given the same composition (e.g. 50 mm on crop vs 80 mm on full-frame with the same subject distance), the full-frame camera will have 1 1/3 stops less depth of field. For instance, f/1.4 on crop gives you the same DoF as f/2.2 on full-frame.

* Lens choices: since crop cameras only use the centre (best) part of the lens, it's easier to get cheaper/better lenses. If money isn't a consideration, then ultra wide angle lenses such as the Canon 14 mm or Nikon 14-24 are fantastic for full-frame.

* Telescopes: scopes and flatteners that can properly illuminate a full-frame chip are more expensive than ones that work for a smaller APS-C chip.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 29-11-2012, 11:28 AM
dannat's Avatar
dannat (Daniel)
daniel

dannat is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Macedon shire, Australia
Posts: 3,380
I won't be using the cam on scopes, just for widefield with a lens

I thought larger sensor had the greater dof, eg f2.8 on FF you needed f2.0 on ApS & f1.4 on a smaller sensor camera
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 29-11-2012, 11:42 AM
DavidTrap's Avatar
DavidTrap (David)
Really just a beginner

DavidTrap is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,828
FF definitely has shallower depth of field - better for portraits with a blurred background.

DT
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 29-11-2012, 12:23 PM
naskies's Avatar
naskies (Dave)
Registered User

naskies is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by dannat View Post
I thought larger sensor had the greater dof, eg f2.8 on FF you needed f2.0 on ApS & f1.4 on a smaller sensor camera
The large f number (smaller aperture) of the full-frame camera provides greater depth of field to compensate for its inherently smaller depth of field. Your f numbers are in the right direction, though.

This is why little handy cams and phone cameras don't give you a super blurry background with full body portraits even though they're often shooting at f/2.

Anyway, as for your original question - I personally wouldn't buy a DSLR now that doesn't have LiveView. It's just too useful for me. I recently passed on a 5D Classic for $650 - but just received a 5DmkII for $1050 (to complement my existing 5DmkII).
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 29-11-2012, 04:44 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15,471
Which APS sensors have better noise and dynamic range than 5D?

I am not sure that is correct. I could be wrong.

Basically astro images posted aroundn the place would show the 5D as one of the best ever.

It has larger pixels and larger pixels generally means better noise performance and sensitivity. APS would have much smaller pixels.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 29-11-2012, 05:48 PM
Octane's Avatar
Octane (Humayun)
IIS Member #671

Octane is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,158
Buy it, along with the 85mm f/1.8 USM.

Start taking head and shoulder portraits at f/1.8-f/4 and fall in love with photography all over again.

A magical combination, if ever one existed.

A little like the STL/FSQ marriage.

H
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 29-11-2012, 06:36 PM
dannat's Avatar
dannat (Daniel)
daniel

dannat is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Macedon shire, Australia
Posts: 3,380
Greg I'm with you, I thought the 5d sensor although old, still produced good quality img'd with its large pixels
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 29-11-2012, 08:00 PM
Octane's Avatar
Octane (Humayun)
IIS Member #671

Octane is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,158
Daniel,

It still takes just a beautiful image today, as it did the day it was released.

I still use mine for weddings.

H
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-12-2012, 09:29 PM
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 9,326
For me it's a Canon 5D MkII with an f/1.2 Nifty 50... gives me dream images!

The lens cost a good bit, but worth it! I still have 2 x USM f/1.4 50's, and they are great too, but...
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-12-2012, 09:51 PM
skysurfer's Avatar
skysurfer
Dark sky rules !

skysurfer is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: 52N 6E (EU)
Posts: 1,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidTrap View Post
FF definitely has shallower depth of field - better for portraits with a blurred background.

DT
This is not completely true: read here from Wikipedia

Quote:
Same focal length for both formats
Many small-format digital SLR camera systems allow using many of the same lenses on both full-frame and “cropped format” cameras. If, for the same focal length setting, the subject distance is adjusted to provide the same field of view at the subject, at the same f-number and final-image size, the smaller format has greater DOF, as with the “same picture” comparison above. If pictures are taken from the same distance using the same f-number, same focal length, and the final images are the same size, the smaller format has less DOF. If pictures taken from the same subject distance using the same focal length, are given the same enlargement, both final images will have the same DOF. The pictures from the two formats will differ because of the different angles of view. If the larger format is cropped to the captured area of the smaller format, the final images will have the same angle of view, have been given the same enlargement, and have the same DOF.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-12-2012, 10:40 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15,471
It is true. Its physics.
APS sensors have the crop factor (often 1.5 or 1.6). To get a blurred background with a crop camera you would need to shoot 1.6X faster glass ie F1.4 instead of something like F1.8 on full frame.

Take different cameras - micro 4/3rds, APSC and full frame at same focal length. Focus on an object close to camera to blur background. Full frame image will show the most blurred background.

Its one of its biggest appeals. A lovely blurred background is a truly magical photographic effect. Many photographers go to great lengths to obtain it with careful selection of lenses and fast f ratio (at greater cost).

Larger sensor also captures more light due to larger surface area.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-12-2012, 03:37 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
The full frame makes a big difference for nightscapes. Put on a Samyang 14mm! Lovely!

Like Dave, I really love live view. Not sure if the 5D has it?

The 7D is a fantastic crop camera - pretty much has everything the 5D Mk 2 does, but without the full frame. It's a tough choice.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-12-2012, 12:00 PM
Octane's Avatar
Octane (Humayun)
IIS Member #671

Octane is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,158
5D didn't have Live View.

I still love, love, love the quality of its output. It's just different to the Mark II and Mark III. I love them all, but, the original will have a special place for me.

H
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-12-2012, 01:06 PM
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 9,326
Never use Live View on the inbuilt screen, but sure use it ALL the time when attached to the monitor
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-12-2012, 05:50 PM
dannat's Avatar
dannat (Daniel)
daniel

dannat is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Macedon shire, Australia
Posts: 3,380
Thanks for the replies
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 01:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement