I've already sold my 30D in anticipation of these bodies coming to market soon, so I might actually have to shoot film for a while

Or, I could also just use our other 30D...

In the mean time, my scanner creates 24MP files from 35mm negs and slides, so if the 5D replacement isn't 20+ MP, I might feel inadequate when I move back to digital. LOL!

 

i still want to pick up an EOS 3.

 

I only use center focus and move around after "half-shutter" so if it's simply number of points, it's useless. But I'm guessing there is more to having more AF points. i.e. reducing the focus area for each point?

 

The EOS 3 is a nice camera, but I'll let you in on a secret...














The images from an Elan 7 look the same!

 

Dan can you give some insight on what yohan is asking. I'd be interested to learn more as well.

 

The added focus points help with AI-Servo to assist the tracking of moving subjects. It's pretty unlikely that you'll specifically choose focus point #27 for a still shot, but when you're in AI-Servo, all the points are used to help track the subject, even if you're only using the center point for the final focus decision.

 

There may also be other advantages but my main reasoning is more accurate AF. There are also more AF points to choose from in manual mode, giving you more control over that - but I guess that could be good or bad, not sure I'd want to fiddle through 45 points lol.. but I wouldn't have to at that point since the AF would be so good.

 

and it's also about the D300 and 700 having 51 points..

 

Dan, are you looking at getting the new 5D? If so, have you sold your EF-S lenses as well?

 

AF points are the new megapixels.

I just wish the full frame bodies would push more of the sensors to the outer edge of the frame. Right now they are all crammed into the middle third of the image, so if you actually wanted to autofocus on something on the edge of the frame, you'd have to focus and recompose.

Take the D300 vs the D3. Both have 51 point AF systems, but the reduced frame of the D300 means the AF points are more spread out.


D3:

Link: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD3/page4.asp

D300:

Link: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond300/page4.asp

Don't get me wrong, I'd still take the D3 for it's other strengths, but I just wish they utilized the AF points better.

 

Nope, they'll be staying so long as I still have a body they'll work on. The only two EF-S lenses I use regularly are the 10-22 and the 17-55. Both of those are sharper than their full-frame equivalents, so I would prefer to use them as long as possible.

I've owned the 16-35, 17-40, and 24-70 before, and I'm really not looking forward to returning to them if I make the move back to full frame. I haven't tried the new 16-35 II yet, but it's supposed to be much better. However, for some reason they've decided to bump up the filter size to 82mm which means my $800 collection of 77mm filters would be useless on that lens.

If I move to the 5D replacement, I'd mostly use my primes and the 70-200. I'd probably eventually get the new 14/2.8 for the wide stuff since when I use the 10-22, it's almost always on the 10mm side for the dramatic angle.

 

obviously it's not the only rationale.. it's just a "factor". But really though, it's a valid concern for someone who takes quick, spontaneous people shots (i.e. me). With more AF points, I think you will get a greater frequency of accurate shots, assuming you know the basics. If you are on a calculated shoot and have the time and opportunity to set up each and every shot, it's not nearly as big a factor. I mean like, taking 10 minutes to setup one shot. Hell, use manual. You have all the time you need.

I do too, maybe we'll see that in 10 years or so.

dang, the D300 must be better!!

 

I don't think anyone is going to tell the difference between 45 points and 51 points, that's all. For what it's worth, with all the bashing the 1-series receives, it's still far more accurate than the 40D and 5D bodies. If you've been following the Rob Galbraith article, he mentioned that the 40D is completely unusable for sports when compared to the 1-series. I've found the 30D is more than capable for any of the sports stuff I've shot, and the 40D is supposed to have a better AF system than the 30D, so if the 40D is unusuable, I guess I would be completely blown away by a 1-series.

What's also interesting is this test that compares the AF performance of the 1D3 to the D3: http://www.prophotohome.com/forum/pr...-showdown.html

I'm not sure if the 51 points is really better than the 45 after all...

If you're using all AF points, then yes, there will be more of a chance that something in that area will be in focus. Be careful for what you wish, because that something might be a hand or an ear when you really wanted the eyes to be in focus. You still need to make the decision of what you want in focus, which usually means selecting one of the points and letting the surrounding points help out with the tracking.

So yes, the more points you have to support the focus decision for that are, the more likely you're going to get that spot in focus.

 

The AF points pick up the section of what you're shooting that has the most contrast, most of the time that's not what I want to be in focus, no matter how many FP's are in the body I'm shooting.

 

 

i just want the EOS 3 because it has the 45 point AF system and is cheaper than getting a 1v

 

it makes perfect sense that the AF in the 40D isnt as great as the 1-series, for one thing the 1series has a dedicated chip for focusing where the 40D has a chip for focusing and image capturing.

Ive noticed that when using my camera in sports, the keeper rate isnt so high and the ones that are keepers aren't fantastically sharp. now the photos ive seen with my friends 1DIII, those are amazing!.

 

actually my point in bringing up the 51 points of the Nikon was not that 51 is "better" than 45 or anything like that. 'Zouse said about people wanting the 1D's 45-point system - being a 5D1 owner, that is NOT what I am concerned about - I know the 5D is not a 1D and I don't expect it's successor to be either. I was saying that the thing that particularly makes 11 points seem "weak" is the existence of the D300 and the D700.

how much sense that makes... 5D2 ftw! hehe.

 

thats assuming that you are using auto AF point selection thou right? i dont know anyone that uses that.

 

IMO 11 points is weak when nikon put its 51 pro AF system into its lower level cameras.

but if those 11 points could focus just as well as canons 45 point, then i dont really care.

 

I use it more often than I would think - especially when shooting at night with a tripod. Since its on a tripod it's not convenient to half-press and reframe - much easier (for me) to compose the shot, set the (off-center) AF point, and then take the shots - which I'll usually have the AF re-focus. (Not talking about the club work, I don't think I've ever used the manual AF at the clubs).

 

agreed

 

heh.. that's when my Live-view come in handy.. they have 10x digital zoom so I can manual focus very easily

 

sorry i meant to quote dan martin.

but what i was talking about is the camera auto selecting the AF point for you, which is how you might get a hand in focus instead of the eyes.

 

Center AF point FTW.

 

oh.. that must be why you said "auto"...

 

http://www.canon.com/moon/en/index.html

http://www.canon.co.uk/

"Destined Evolution"... hmmm.. I'm seeing rumors of a movie mode and 21mp..

 

I knew there was a thread.

I'll close the other one.

 

didn't see your thread.

yeah it's pretty weird.. I wish them the best.

 

And I can't see them doing something like this without being very confident about what they're releasing.

 

you know, well-followed companies like these never had it so good, with regard to consumers. All they have to do is post up a little 1-page micro-site, and they know it's going to explode all over the intarweb. Thanks to.. people like us.

 

I see a left handed DSLR

 

Although we don't know it's a 5D replacement.

Maybe it's a camera that actually has a real movie codec!

 

 

pretty proud of this. I did a screenshot and then blew up the details. now.. WHAT'S UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What are we supposed to see?

 

I just shit bricks.

 

The future, this is either going to be a 1Dmk IV or it's going to be a camera in the likes of a EOS3. EOS3 was Canon's baby 1D when filmed was used. I say this because of Canon's UK website, it shows the top of the camera w/o a knob.

http://www.canon.co.uk/

 

im tempted to pick up a EOS 3 from someone that is selling one, but i know that i am rarely going to use it

 

don't you see the gigantic camera-width LCD panel at the bottom???

it was supposed to be a mockery of all the 'rumor' type stuff...