5D Real

[Stumpy 284]

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=11933

mmmmm 12.8 Megapixel FF..... drool.....


.... wonder how much?

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[psw097 0]

$3300 - eek.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/canoneos5d/

[newshooter12 0]

and only 3fps despite a nice sized buffer... for the small price of over $3k. I'll go nikon first.

[windinmyface 0]

...except that the extra 2fps will cost you a total of $5k!

-----
I am Dyslexia of Borg, futility is resistant, your ass will be laminated.

[LouDiamond 1]

3.0 fps for up to 60 consecutive JPEG or 17 RAW frames in a burst.

Not bad for a burst IMO. Of course if your the type that just holds the bite switch down from the minute you exit until you land it may not be your bag. I'm curious to see how long until the price comes down on this one seeing how it has a full 35mm sized sensor.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Deuce 1]

Quote

3.0 fps for up to 60 consecutive JPEG or 17 RAW frames in a burst.

Not bad for a burst IMO. Of course if your the type that just holds the bite switch down from the minute you exit until you land it may not be your bag. I'm curious to see how long until the price comes down on this one seeing how it has a full 35mm sized sensor.

Soon as they put that sensor in a Rebel body, I'm on it. I'm just tired of how heavy the 10D is. I am really interested in the XT, but will make the jump when the next generation Rebel comes out. I bet the price on that one will really drop around Christmas present buying time.

[newshooter12 0]

not really... i've got a D70 already so i've got all the fps i need. I'm mostly excited to see the full frame sensor in hopes that nikon jumps on that sometime soon. the jump from the XT to the 5D's specs only equate to a 16% gain in res from what i've been told. unless someone gives me one i won't buy a $3k camera for jumping.
I like nikon.
matt

[windinmyface 0]

Of course, the more fps, the better. But I think that, whether you're getting 3 or 5 fps, it's more important to capture a longer segment of the action -- and so burst rate is really key. And that 5D is pretty impressive there!

Going from 8 to 12 MP is more like a 50% gain in resolution if you go strictly by numbers. But if you look at the attached FOV comparison, you can see in real terms what it means. The downside though, is that this full frame sensor will demand a high quality lens since you are no longer capturing just the "sweet spot".

Yeah, by the time you put a good lens on that thing, you'll be into it for around $4k or better. Myself, the reason I shoot stills is to come away with the most spectacular images possible. If I got the bones, I'll ante up.

I like Nikon too -- that's all I shot when I was doing film. Nikon has historically made some of the finest optics, still does. But Canon, historically an electronics company, got the jump on digital photography, and pretty much leads that market. I'm not brand loyal, just go with what does the best job for me.

-----
I am Dyslexia of Borg, futility is resistant, your ass will be laminated.

[newshooter12 0]

I'd really like to get Quade in on this conversation to tap his knowledge base...
the one thing i take issue with is that the FOV comparison you are refering to that i saw on dpreview.com has nothing to do with resolution, but everything to do with field of view. i've read that the number of megapixels doesn't necessarily relate directly to the end image size or resolution because a number of pixels are used for operations other than just capturing the RGB's. of course the way the clusters of individual sensors are arranged & utilized is a factor.

good glass is good glass i definitely agree there... i'd rather invest there with a line of lenses that i know will work with a camera i buy a few years down the road. canon seems to change that too often for my liking.
matt