HG: On 10/2/05, HG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A lot yes! ... but I'm not sure where I see that in these cameras.
I haven't compared the two directly, but I would suspect faster image review, faster storage of the images, faster turn-on time. The turn-on time is the time from you flip the switch to the camera is ready for shooting. If the camera turns itself off, you can depress the shutter half way and it'll turn back on - but it'll take the same long turn-on time to do so. But there are options for setting the auto-off time so you might be able to turn it into a non-issue. I'm not terribly bothered by the turn-on time of my 10D. It's just one of those things I wish were faster. One thing the 1Ds does not support (if I recall correctly) is zoom during image review. So you can only review the entire image, not parts of it. At least that was the original functionality. I believe there is an updated firmware or firmware hack out there that'll allow you to zoom about 4x (not much but better than nothing). This is used quite a bit to check for sharpness. > Old image processor... or the other way around, EOS 5D has a new image > processor. So what? What is the difference? The trend in previous upgrades has been: Lower noise, better performance at high ISO (due to lower noise), faster image processing. Just better image quality in general. I would think the guys at dpreview.com or Reichmann of Luminous Landscape will present reviews of the 5D with test shots. One of those two sources (I think it's dpreview) has a standard setup they use for all their tests. That'll make it easy to compare the images from a 5D and 1Ds. > The 45-point system is great (I have EOS 3). And actually the 9-point > system in EOS 5D seems a little stupid... That I agree with. > > Even with the 45 points in the 1Ds, the system is very center biased. > But there are those points closer to the corners. True. And for 90 % of my photography that'll probably be fine. But for the remaining 10 % I'm stuck with manual focus - which I'm fine with. I just don't want to pay extra for an AF system that doesn't really help me much. > So far, all I got is that it is lighter and has newer technology - > which is unclear what difference it makes. Take it with you on a backpacking trip. It'll make a difference... ;-) The reason nobody knows what difference it makes in the images is that there are no (to my knowledge) real reviews of the 5D. There are random snapshots, but not a serious test of the deast. > No, it's just one of the reasons. The film cameras (I still have) have > not gone down in features during all these years. But these digital > ones will seem to do so. That I doubt. We're pushing the limits of the technology as far as the sensor goes. I think you'll see some new features. Maybe those will be hidden "under the hood" but they'll result in better image quality or higher creativity. > One serious choise is to buy the least expensive digital EOS and > consider that to be lost money and then buy another camera in 2 > years... but I'd hate the 350D. Although, I can not see any reason why > to buy 20D over that... That definitely is an option. Personally, I strongly dislike the user interface of the Rebels (300D, 350D), but the camera is a fine camera. The 10D, 20D are great tools as well. You can get really good deals on used 10D about now... ;-) > > time. It's my impression that the prices drop to 50 % of original > > value at the first follow-up model release. I don't have enough > > That is probably true in this digital age. My statement above referred specifically to my observations of the price of a 1Ds. > That's what I'm also thinking. As in 2-3 years they both will seem > quite dated, but with very similar features... (except that 1Ds will > have better features and 5D will still be lighter) The 1Ds will also have "PRO" written all over it. That usually pulls the price up. At least I would think so. > That is probably true also. Except that I think the street price for > EOS 5D is already so low, that they do not need to drop the price at > all until they really get any competition. With all the other bodies (300D, 350D, 10D, 20D), the camera was introduced at a certain price point. A few months later it would be a few hundred bucks less... You can argue that there was competition from Nikon, but I honestly don't think that's what drives the prices. Tom * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
