| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/14/2005 02:38:50 PM · #1 |
Hey everyone,
A friend of mine (actually my boss's boss) currently uses a 35mm Canon EOS film camera to make 8X10 and 11X14(?) prints that are displayed in art galleries. For Christmas, he wants to get either the Canon 5D or the Canon 20D. He's aware that the 5D is full frame and will therefore allow him to use all his existing lenses without any crop factor.
His question is this: Will prints made from these two cameras both be as good as or better than the prints he's been making with his 35mm film camera?
Any other points of difference between the 5D and the 20D that might help him sway his decision one way or the other?
Thanks for your help.
-Chris |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 02:47:50 PM · #2 |
I don't think he;ll have any issues with 8x10 prints from either camera, or that he'll even notice the difference unless he crops severely or something.
The 5D would be less confusing for him as the lenses he has would work the same. with a 20D he'd have to re-think and re-learn his angle of view. And if he does lots of wide angle stuff he'll want a new lens. If he likes telephoto thought he might prefer the 20D.
I have just ordered my first 10x13 print..and the DPI is well below what i would like, but when the customer makes a request, you try and comply. (hey, crop this here and make me a 10x13) If it comes back acceptable (and i think it will) then there is no print size limit to worry about with any of canon's dSLRs. I have done 8x10s at 180DPI and they look great. (1440x1800 image)
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 03:29:11 PM · #3 |
| At an 11x14 either camera will beat teh 35mm film. Unless he's scanning it in and getting digital prints. Then the 5D will be the one that beats it. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 04:01:53 PM · #4 |
In my studio, I have a 20x30 print from an image that I took with my 20D. I don't know how many times I have had other photographers come in and say "Wow! Now you can't get something like that with digital!" and I have to let them know that I've never shot film.
Large format prints are not a problem with either camera. :) |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 04:11:04 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
At an 11x14 either camera will beat teh 35mm film. Unless he's scanning it in and getting digital prints. Then the 5D will be the one that beats it. |
So are you saying that a scanned, digitally printed 35mm film print will beat a print from a 20D? |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 04:15:57 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
At an 11x14 either camera will beat teh 35mm film. Unless he's scanning it in and getting digital prints. Then the 5D will be the one that beats it. |
So are you saying that a scanned, digitally printed 35mm film print will beat a print from a 20D? |
Yes. A drum scanned (@5000 dpi) 35mm velvia slide would be better than an 8.2 MP camera when printed very large. I bet you could see a major difference @ 30x40. I've read that 35mm film loses to digital at the 11mp-12mp range.
If he's only printing upto 11x14 or 16x20, I'd be shocked if he saw a difference.
If he's getting traditional prints off of 35mm, the digital should blow it away at that size.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 04:18:43 PM · #7 |
I have 16x20" prints from both my Rebel (original, not XT) as well as my 20D hanging on my wall. Neither of them look digital, even up close.
I also had a customer request an 11x14 horizontal crop out of an image that I had shot vertically with my 20D (i.e. severely cropping the photo). We printed up 70+ copies of that image because it turned out so well all of his extended family wanted one.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 04:35:30 PM · #8 |
I agree with Brent, it would take an extremely high quality scan of a very high quality 35mm slide to equal even the 20D's output. The 5D will perceptibly exceed the quality of the 35mm film-based system, regardless of whether the film is printed "analog" or scanned.
Bottom line, there are other aspects of the decision process that may be more important...
- The 5D will of course be a "drop in" with his current lenses, no change in FoV.
- The 5D has a lower frame rate (3fps vs. 5fps) if that's important
- The 5D is a somewhat larger, heavier body, with no built-in flash. The 5D body balances well with the heavier "L" lenses, however, and fits a larger hand very well. Build is excellent.
- AF on the 5D is superior to the 20D, wwith respect to low light performance, precision in general, and tracking performance
- The 5D uses the entire image circle, which is both good and bad, he may well learn things about his lenses that he might wish he hadn't learned, LOL
- The 5D will output images that require very litttle in the way of post-processing, the AA filter is less aggressive and the pixel pitch larger. Results seem to need less sharpening.
- The 5D demands a fast computer with a lot of RAM and hard drive space, especially shooting RAW. A fast card reader, and large CF cards (at least two 2GB cards would be optimal) are also a necessity.
- The 5D really begs to be shot in RAW mode to gain all the advantage of dynamic range. If shot in JPEG mode, it really needs to have the "Picture Style" set to Neutral or Faithful, the default option results in oversaturated reds.
If price is not a big concern, and image quality is the primary decision point, the 5D is really hard to beat, it is one heck of a machine.
Message edited by author 2005-12-14 16:37:20. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 04:46:42 PM · #9 |
Ditto to Brent and others.
11-12 megapixel seems to be the "beats 35mm anyway you cut it" size. Three of our photographers use Canon...2 - 20 d's and a 1d Mark 2
8 megapixel is awful damn good for 99% of what everyone normally gets their 35mm printed at (8x10 and smaller you wont see any difference regardless of how good the velvia slide is). We have a 4 foot wide x 3 foot high print in our lobby from our 6mp Nikon D70s our owner took while he was in Italy and printed on our lightjet...absolutely incredible
This is such a great time to buy Digital. So many good cameras. Digital has finally begun to fulfill its promise of replacing 35mm film at multiple pricepoints..not just the high end.
Our company along with 2 of the printing companies we work with just tossed our drum scanners. Not enough business to justify keeping it and the space. We have a 4000 DPI flatbed scanner that can provide even oil mount for any film scanning we do...(medium format etc)
Message edited by author 2005-12-14 16:49:12. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 05:07:31 PM · #10 |
| I print A3 size (297mm x 420mm) (11" x 16") regularly for competition purposes, these are from my 10D so he won't have any problem with either the 20d or the 5D |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 05:10:21 PM · #11 |
| 5D down to $2850.on ebay how low will it go ? |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 05:14:21 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by TLL061:
5D down to $2850.on ebay how low will it go ? |
I don't understand why a brand new camera would be discounted already?
Glut in the market? Desperation to get those last christmas shoppers?
Be careful this time of year of "Too good to be true pricing"...lots of scammers out there. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 05:45:23 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by hokie:
Originally posted by TLL061:
5D down to $2850.on ebay how low will it go ? |
I don't understand why a brand new camera would be discounted already?
Glut in the market? Desperation to get those last christmas shoppers?
Be careful this time of year of "Too good to be true pricing"...lots of scammers out there. |
Certainly Canon has not lowered the price. You are starting to see competition amongst merchants who have stock, they can no longer sell at full MSRP and expect no questions, they'll undercut each other till the margins are miniscule.
Yes, do beware the reputation of some of these merchants! |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 05:47:50 PM · #14 |
| you can also get a used 1Ds for less than a 5D at this point. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 05:49:02 PM · #15 |
| From what I've read, the 5d beats the 1ds for picture quality. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 05:56:22 PM · #16 |
A lot of good post here. The bottom line is that the 5D would be better for him. He is use to the 35mm and the 5D will have the same DOF. I don't remember what the MP is for the 5D, I think 12? If so then it has 35mm beat as far as resolution. The only thing it will loose on is Dynamic Range and of course he will be doing a lot of sensor cleaning.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 06:02:28 PM · #17 |
| Thanks for the help, everyone! I've e-mailed a link to this thread to my friend, and I'm sure he'll find this information very useful. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 06:05:32 PM · #18 |
One of the best articles on the debate over "Film VS Digital" is online and a must read. From the best teacher out there,Michael Reichman at "Luminous Landscape"
//www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/clumps.shtml
Originally posted by moswyn:
In my studio, I have a 20x30 print from an image that I took with my 20D. I don't know how many times I have had other photographers come in and say "Wow! Now you can't get something like that with digital!" and I have to let them know that I've never shot film.
Large format prints are not a problem with either camera. :) |
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 06:08:29 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by eslaydog:
From what I've read, the 5d beats the 1ds for picture quality. |
but not detailed rendered. The 1ds beats them all at this.
Message edited by author 2005-12-14 18:08:47.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 06:09:47 PM · #20 |
The more interesting question is..whats next?
The barrier to 35mm quality has been beaten, the full frame demand has been met..what now? I mean...for all intent and purpose..a dgital SLR today replaces the 35mm equal of yesteryear.
I believe that dynamic range and further noise supression at high ISO will a couple real technical hurdles to conquer next.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 06:10:41 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
One of the best articles on the debate over "Film VS Digital" is online and a must read. From the best teacher out there,Michael Reichman at "Luminous Landscape"
//www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/clumps.shtml
Originally posted by moswyn:
In my studio, I have a 20x30 print from an image that I took with my 20D. I don't know how many times I have had other photographers come in and say "Wow! Now you can't get something like that with digital!" and I have to let them know that I've never shot film.
Large format prints are not a problem with either camera. :) |
|
Just as ken rockwell is biased towards film, he's biased toward digital.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 06:13:18 PM · #22 |
Well read the logic first then talk to a prof who teaches in the field and see if you can find a flaw in the logic. I could not find the flaw personally.
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Originally posted by zxaar:
One of the best articles on the debate over "Film VS Digital" is online and a must read. From the best teacher out there,Michael Reichman at "Luminous Landscape"
//www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/clumps.shtml
Originally posted by moswyn:
In my studio, I have a 20x30 print from an image that I took with my 20D. I don't know how many times I have had other photographers come in and say "Wow! Now you can't get something like that with digital!" and I have to let them know that I've never shot film.
Large format prints are not a problem with either camera. :) |
|
Just as ken rockwell is biased towards film, he's biased toward digital. |
|
|
|
|
12/14/2005 06:14:17 PM · #23 |
I think all these online web pundents have agenda's, either for money or to get the latest digital toys to play with and keep favor with the manufacturers.
I pay attention to who actually uses the equipment to put bread on the table, not these high end hobby-ists who have more interest in the tech than the photo.
I mean..damn Brent..your stuff is better than 99% of what I see on these stupid tech sites :-D
Message edited by author 2005-12-14 18:15:05. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 06:15:56 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by hokie:
The more interesting question is..whats next?
The barrier to 35mm quality has been beaten, the full frame demand has been met..what now? I mean...for all intent and purpose..a dgital SLR today replaces the 35mm equal of yesteryear.
I believe that dynamic range and further noise supression at high ISO will a couple real technical hurdles to conquer next. |
Did you read this?
//www.dpreview.com/news/0512/05121201new_chips.asp
...very interesting prospects in the area of dynamic range, though very likely a ways out from production. |
|
|
|
12/14/2005 06:19:55 PM · #25 |
[quote=zxaar] Well read the logic first then talk to a prof who teaches in the field and see if you can find a flaw in the logic. I could not find the flaw personally.
I just meant to take these reviews with a grain of salt. ;o) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 05:04:40 AM EDT.
