If your name is Phate, you might want to look away now :p

ScarySquirrel · 5 Jul 2010 at 08:26

Phate said:
SS - What's the best email address to contact you on dude?

Or can I just give you a call this evening?

Work email is probably best as I hardly check my personal one. nick dot benson at lightmaker dot com

Raymond Lin · 5 Jul 2010 at 10:17

albert said:
...so you take photos at weddings and you bought 2 identical cameras .. is this what this thread is all about or am i missing something ....

SS explained most of it.

ScarySquirrel said:
He had a 5DMkII and a 30D backup camera. His business has picked up a lot in the last 6 months so now his 'backup' camera is another 5DMkII.

The main reason is back up. The other is I don't need to change lenses anymore in midshoot when i want something different. As versatile as the 24-70 is, if I jump into a car it is not wide enough, and it is too short for above the shoulder portraits. Every second count when you are doing a wedding, you get 1 shot at most things in it and having 2 cameras gives me a better chance at capturing those moments.

Another reason for getting 2 identical cameras (more the reason of 2 Full Frame cameras) and the focal length for my lenses stays the same. I could have got a 7D, save myself a few hundred pounds, with better AF and almost as good low light performance. I didn't because I would then have to think about which camera I was holding and keep thinking the focal length when switching between them, plus i will have to get some EF-S lenses like a 17-55 or a 10-22. As if i LIKE the 24-70 to be on the 5D (where most of the shots are taken), if i put my 16-35 on the 7D then it just becomes a replica of the focal length of the 5D....which is pointless. So getting the 7D might seem cheaper but in reality it is not.

86JR · 5 Jul 2010 at 10:22

I am seriously considering the 5dmk2 now after seeing this video, even on 360p its so clear and fresh looking.

Janesy B · 5 Jul 2010 at 10:50

I'll do a sample with my 550D, it's as good, if not better. 1080p @ 30FPS and 720p @ 60FPS

FreeStream · 5 Jul 2010 at 11:20

Janesy B said:
I'll do a sample with my 550D, it's as good, if not better. 1080p @ 30FPS and 720p @ 60FPS

It's still not full frame tho, 5DII video beats my 7D hands down

Also DAMN YOU.

I want one now... need a job first (Or the 7D to start paying for itself)

Janesy B · 5 Jul 2010 at 11:29

Concorde Rules said:
It's still not full frame tho, 5DII video beats my 7D hands down

What effect would that have on the quality? It's a genuine question as I've never really been able to work out what the advantage of FF is apart from sensor size.

tbs · 5 Jul 2010 at 11:43

Janesy B said:
I'll do a sample with my 550D, it's as good, if not better. 1080p @ 30FPS and 720p @ 60FPS

Am not sure if its "better" as a crop sensor wont have the high level detail that a (any) FF sensor can take in. More pixels means more light and detail can be captured.

Also 1080 @ 24fps > *

Phate · 5 Jul 2010 at 11:44

ScarySquirrel said:
Work email is probably best as I hardly check my personal one. nick dot benson at lightmaker dot com

Cheers, I'll email you shortly.

You have email

Raymond Lin · 5 Jul 2010 at 12:02

Janesy B said:
What effect would that have on the quality? It's a genuine question as I've never really been able to work out what the advantage of FF is apart from sensor size.

shallower DOF is the main thing.

It used to be that the 7D wins purely because of the 24p, but now the 5Dii can do it too.

FF in 24p is just amazing.

p0ss3s3d · 5 Jul 2010 at 12:10

Raymond Lin said:
shallower DOF is the main thing.

I'm bored not working today so let's do some maths!!!

If I shot 70mm f/2.8 on full frame....

...on 1.27x crop it would be a 55mm f/2.2...

...on 1.6x crop it would be a 45mm f/1.8

These would all look identical. So full frame has a 2/3rd stop advantage over the 1D's and a 1 & 1/3rd over the 1.6x crops...

MATHS ***!!! (maybe

)

Janesy B · 5 Jul 2010 at 12:24

Surely 70mm on a 1.6x crop is 112mm and f/4.5?

Rojin · 5 Jul 2010 at 12:28

Janesy B said:
Surely 70mm on a 1.6x crop is 112mm and f/4.5?

You're matching the 70mm on FF not using the 70mm on the crop.

Janesy B · 5 Jul 2010 at 12:36

I get it now

ScarySquirrel · 5 Jul 2010 at 12:58

p0ss3s3d said:
I'm bored not working today so let's do some maths!!!

If I shot 70mm f/2.8 on full frame....

...on 1.27x crop it would be a 55mm f/2.2...

...on 1.6x crop it would be a 45mm f/1.8

These would all look identical. So full frame has a 2/3rd stop advantage over the 1D's and a 1 & 1/3rd over the 1.6x crops...

MATHS ***!!! (maybe )

Would they look identical? Surely the 45mm would have more distortion, even if the field of view was the same/similar?

p0ss3s3d · 5 Jul 2010 at 13:04

ScarySquirrel said:
Would they look identical? Surely the 45mm would have more distortion, even if the field of view was the same/similar?

Nope. Provided the lens wasn't distorted there would be no other difference. Otherwise imagine compact cameras at 6mm!!

Raymond Lin · 5 Jul 2010 at 13:06

a 50mm on crop is not 85mm on FF. No technically, hence "Cropped". People say that because the field of view is similar but in all other aspect it is not.

Raymond Lin · 5 Jul 2010 at 13:07

p0ss3s3d said:
Nope. Provided the lens wasn't distorted there would be no other difference. Otherwise imagine compact cameras at 6mm!!

But that lens is DESIGNED to go on that.

Using a 17-55EF has no distortion because it is EF. But a 16-35 will have some distortion, put that on the crop and the distortion will be there too.

p0ss3s3d · 5 Jul 2010 at 13:11

Raymond Lin said:
a 50mm on crop is not 85mm on FF. No technically, hence "Cropped". People say that because the field of view is similar but in all other aspect it is not.

Well, in terms of FOV & DOF they are the same (provided the aperture differences are catered for...), they are obviously not the same - but if you used an 85mm f/2.8 on FF it would look the same as a 50mm f/1.8 on crop.

If you shot a 50 1.8 on both the crop body would show the centre portion of the full frame.

If you shot a 50mm f/1.8 on the crop and an 85mm f/1.8 on the full-frame. BAM!! Theres the difference!

Raymond Lin said:
But that lens is DESIGNED to go on that.

Using a 17-55EF has no distortion because it is EF. But a 16-35 will have some distortion, put that on the crop and the distortion will be there too.

Thats not the point really. You can correct a lenses distortion in software. Assume that the lenses we talk about are perfect primes and therefore there is no distortion. These lenses would therefore have the same appearance.

Unless your on about perspective distortion in which case the 16-35 @ 17mm will look identical to the 17-55 @ 17mm. It will also look the same as a 35mm on medium format.

p0ss3s3d · 5 Jul 2010 at 13:17

Another example:
1Ds - 300 f/2.8
7D - 200 f/2

Both lenses have identical bokeh [100mm apertures]... both have the same focus rack... on this set of cameras both will frame the subject more or less the same. Images from these set-ups will look more or less identical.

Raymond Lin · 5 Jul 2010 at 13:23

p0ss3s3d said:
Another example:
1Ds - 300 f/2.8
7D - 200 f/2

Both lenses have identical bokeh [100mm apertures]... both have the same focus rack... on this set of cameras both will frame the subject more or less the same. Images from these set-ups will look more or less identical.

Thats the thing...you need a shallower lens, faster lens to achieve the same look.