Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 02:25:35 +0000
From: editor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Question for lea - was good lens gone bad?
To: photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
One way to evaluate the DxO results is to compare Canon's prosumer *D line over the years:
- 55.3 = Canon 300d
- 56.6 = Canon 10d
- 59.5 = Canon 30d
- 59.9 = Canon 350d
- 60.6 = Canon 450d
- 62.1 = Canon 400d
- 62.2 = Canon 20d
- 62.9 = Canon 50d
- 63.5 = Canon 40d
- 70.9 = Canon 5d
- 79.0 = Canon 5d MkII
As you can see, the 20d is still a pretty damn good camera!!!
You don't start getting seriously "better" until you get into the 5d or 5dMkII models.
In other words, I wouldn't bother "upgrading" to a 40d or 50d -- why bother?
Whereas the 5d or 5dMkII starts to make a big difference.
OTOH, the specs for the D90 are 72.6!! Which puts it slightly above the 5D and slightly below the 5D MKII.
Given the significant price difference between a D90 and 5*, I'm definitely in a quandary!! However, given also that my goal is to have a "carry anywhere" camera, the smaller sensor is a significant plus. YMMV of course.
Michael
I am by no means an expert, but I too have been in a quandry about whether to get the Nikon D90 or the CANON 5D MKII. One significant factor is price; $1200 vs. $3700. In the past I have been a Nikon person, now I am leaning toward Canon. Another factor is D90 has a plastic body whereas the 5D MKII has a metal body. Does it make a difference? I think so, but as I said I'm not an expert. The plastic body could be more fragile, but lighter. The metal body would be more durable, but heavier. I am told that Nikon is not as good as it used to be. Then there's the fact that, if you can afford it, the Canon is the industry standard. Also, I am told the Canon has more lens options than the Nikon.
Lara
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob [mailto:w8imo@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 07:56 PM
To: 'List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students'
Subject: Question for lea - was good lens gone bad?
Lea, I'm trying to decide on a replacement for my 20D with two under consideration: 50D, 5D MkII.
I read a recent review from B&H of the 5D MkII and it seemed to me that the big thing about it is the video.
My question to you as a user of both is how big a deal is the video capability of the MkII? I'm really not that interested in video. What do you like about the MkII vs the original?
Thanks,
Bob
Lea Murphy wrote:
I have a dedicated 5D and lens in my studio.
I removed the lens, put it on my 5DM2,
/////
( O O )
--------------------oOOO-----O----OOOo-----73 de w8imo@xxxxxxxx------
I plan to live forever. So far, so good......
|
Hotmail® goes where you go. On a PC, on the Web, on your phone.
See how. 