Canon EOS D5 SLR

  Wilham 11:06 05 Feb 2006

I'm pleased to read Gordon Laing (See Reviews) on this camera, the first available model of many full-frame digital SLR's to follow.

I've no grumbles with the review but my curiosity makes me seek answers to the following questions about this particular camera:

(i) Does it have a focal plane shutter? If so, is it horizontal motion with short slot (Lieca style), or vertical movement of the two blinds (as Contax)? Each has its characteristic distortion in a fast action shot.

(ii) At one point Gordon Laing writes "'s a joy to use ultra-wide lenses without compromise. "

All wide angle lenses used with film SLR's were compromised by having to be retrofocus in design to allow space for the moving mirror. (An exception was where the mirror was fixed back,-and camera not used SLR). So does the Canon have a different mirror geometry?

(iii) Swapping lenses in a 35mm SLR invariably allows entry of dust. It's not usually a problem because the only location where the intrusive particles are in focus is the sensitive surface of the film, which is refreshed every shot. So what happens about dust when this surface is permanent?

(iv) Is the pentaprism plastic, so saving weight?

Glad to have any comments.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 11:40 05 Feb 2006

click here should give a greater insight.


  Wilham 11:57 05 Feb 2006

GANDALF <|:-)> Thank you. Hadn't seen this but it's like others, and I can't see answers to my queries. Maybe it's early and I'll only be lucky when someone takes the camera apart. I do note the weight suggests quartz pentaprism. W

  Forum Editor 11:59 05 Feb 2006

to Digital World.

  Forum Editor 12:02 05 Feb 2006

click here you might get some answers.

  anskyber 12:10 05 Feb 2006

This may assist in part click here

  anskyber 12:13 05 Feb 2006

Link not working, try this and follow help/support downloads and camera name click here

  Wilham 13:04 05 Feb 2006

FE...Great! (i) Shutter query Fully answered by your link.

(ii) Answer re wide angle lens compromise: Guess the review was only in context film v. digital.

(iii) Dust: The vulnerability of optical glass to surface damage and the solution came (as a by-product) with hard metallic fluoride coating. Perhaps something like this will solve the dust problem, so the sensor can be cleaned. Camera not around long enough to evaluate this Q?

(iv) FE, GANDAlF links give camera weight,... it suggests pentaprism is still quartz glass. I asked because quartz has to be precision ground. If plasics used the price could drop like a stone. As the pentaprism works by internal reflections I'm stumped why plastic doesn't rule.

I'll leave the door open for the moment. I'm very grateful for the help. W

  Wilham 13:07 05 Feb 2006

As soon as I posted this I realised even internal reflections need high reflective index. Baaa..

  ade.h 14:22 05 Feb 2006

Interesting that you should post about the 5D; I'm in the market now for a (probably) second-hand 1DS Mark II, but then I saw the 5D, and I'm tempted. It certainly looks better than the more compromised 20D.

I have not yet had a chance to actually get my hands on one and spend some time testing it thoroughly, but I'm hoping to do so soon when a pal of mine gets one at his shop.

One of the things that I want to find out is how big I could go with 12.8Meg pixels, compared to the blown-up images that I got from a 1DS last year, which were very big but still super sharp.

If I can test it soon, I'll let you know what I think of it.

  Wilham 15:22 05 Feb 2006

ade.h: I think we all have been too obsessed with pixel count, maybe less so now when 5Meg pixel cameras can come under a hundred pounds.

I bought my Spotmatic film SLR back in 1964 when high resolution was the keyword. Soon after I found a macro lens necessary when rectilinearity needed, in my case to duplicate transparences.

I bought an Olympus digital SLR C2500L about six years ago,- great to no longer need a darkroom. Still a good camera, but I shall upgrade to full frame digital SLR when way is clear.

I've been utterly wrong on some things. For instance I thought the 6x6 SLR people (Hassleblad, Bronica,..) were over the top wanting brighter viewfinder than 35mm. Not at all! The larger format with larger lenses gave higher quality images.

Present digital SLR generation haven't yet reached that stage.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

HTC U12 Plus review: Hands-on

Brilliant (and Weird) World Cup 2018 Art and Design Projects

Best Android emulators for Mac

TV & Streaming : comment regarder Roland Garros ?