Canon EOS 20D, 30D, 5D or Nikon D200?

Personally......I'd buy all of them.

Never enough gadgets! :cuckoo:
 
Crazy talk - 5D all the way. How increased pixel density can possibly be any advantage i'd be keen for soemone to explain to me. Higher desnity + more noise, no???? 13mp over full frame = high quality & low noise, no??

confused of Guildford!
 
i like the jump from 300d to 20d, the feel is vastly better...i think the 20 will keep me happy for a long time to come
 
Jonnyreb said:
Crazy talk - 5D all the way. How increased pixel density can possibly be any advantage i'd be keen for soemone to explain to me. Higher desnity + more noise, no???? 13mp over full frame = high quality & low noise, no??

confused of Guildford!
Click to expand...

Don't forget though Jon that the goalposts are moving all the time. Pixel density and sensor size are indeed considerations at the moment, but who knows what's around the corner - 1 pixel full frame sensor? :D

The ideal camera for me would have the 1DS pixel count on a 1.3 crop sensor, but Canon aren't making it..... yet!
 
CT said:
Don't forget though Jon that the goalposts are moving all the time. Pixel density and sensor size are indeed considerations at the moment, but who knows what's around the corner - 1 pixel full frame sensor? :D

The ideal camera for me would have the 1DS pixel count on a 1.3 crop sensor, but Canon aren't making it..... yet!
Click to expand...

Fair point CT - but a 1 pixel FF would be the polar opposite of Munchkin Atkins argument for pixel density......

Now, a little switch on the 1Ds mkII to select between 4fps at 16.7 mp's and 8fps at 12mp's would seem to be ideal in a 1Ds mkIII :love: :love:
 
Jonnyreb said:
Fair point CT - but a 1 pixel FF would be the polar opposite of Munchkin Atkins argument for pixel density......

Now, a little switch on the 1Ds mkII to select between 4fps at 16.7 mp's and 8fps at 12mp's would seem to be ideal in a 1Ds mkIII :love: :love:
Click to expand...

LOL. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see it happen either except the top pixel count is likely to be around 22 mega pixels. :eek:
 
Slovensky said:
Why on a cropped sensor CT...?
Click to expand...

Because of my preoccupation with photographing tits. :D

Regardless of sensor size, you get the same size image on the sensor with any given lens focal length. Even with monster tele lenses, you end up cropping a lot of background away to get these tiny birds to fill the frame reasonably, if there's any distance involved, even with a crop sensor. If I used a full frame sensor I'd just be cropping away more background and losing a lot of that pixel advantage in the process. The actual gains would be negligable. If you can really fill that full frame sensor as with landscape, portraits etc. then there's obviously a huge advantage. :)

Trying to hit the 50mb standards of image libraries with tiny bird shots when you've done more than moderate cropping is very tough indeed. A lot of the bird shots I post here just don't reach the bar, so for me it's a crop sensor please and a gazillion more pixels - but no noise increase. :D
 
You are comparing two very different genres of camera. The 20d and 30d are mid range enthusiast bodies where the D200 and 5d are semi pro/pro cameras. Having handled and used both of the latter I decided to go for the D200. I personally found handling the D200 superior to the 5d. The 5d lens range is superior to Nikons but I would much prefer to be able use the camera comfortably, anyhow I use a full range of Sigma EX glass :drools:.

Really its down to personal preference.

As for the rest of the debate. Canons 20d,30d,400d,350d,300,d60,10d all use 1.6 crop sensors compared to Nikons 1.5. Dont really see why people argue about pixel density. Both systems have advantages and disadvantages.

King.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top