robert_adams8 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I'm looking to upgrade to a 40d. I can't completely rule out a 5d. I mostly shoot landscape with prime lenses on a 20d. I have to say I am not a fan on ultrawide perspectives. I am happy with the 20mm even with the crop factor. I also don't like to make prints greater than 11x14. Would the 5d be a wise choice given my prefrences? Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 What's wrong with your 20D? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_adams8 Posted September 26, 2007 Author Share Posted September 26, 2007 I believe that an increase in megapixels is a wise move at this time. Not that it would be earth shattering, but in comparing other people's results, I think there is a slight edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronald_moravec1 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 There is a significant edge at > 8x10. Sensor size is more important than MP count Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_hall4 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 You just said that you were happy with the perspective you got with the 40D @ 20mm despite the crop factor. While I would say the 5D lends its self better to landscape. If you are happy with the 20mm on a 1.6X camera, why question it? The 40D is more than able to produce print of the size you mentioned. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdanmitchell Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I shoot a 5D. Two advantages - in my view - are that it stands up well to larger prints and it is great for wide angle. You aren't going to do either of those, apparently, so you might be just as happy with a 40D. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinsouthern Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I'd be surprised if you could see any difference in terms of print resolution between the two as the sizes that you're mentioning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 As would I, Colin. I think any new camera would be a waste of money, but hey, it's not my money to worry about... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eos 10 fan Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 1) User reports that the 40D is a least equal to the 5D in regards to IQ. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/canon-40D-handson.shtml 2) The 'sweat spot' factor... you are only using the best part of the lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eos 10 fan Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 two typos: 1) should be 'AT least equal'. 2) should be 'sweet spot' Perhaps I should wake up before posting ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillbound Posted September 27, 2007 Share Posted September 27, 2007 i thought you were talking about the sweaty spot...oh well = that was more enticing. JC www.pbase.com/josephwcarey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now