So it sounds like this translucent mirror change happened even in AF-capable film SLR cameras, correct?
Upvote
0
Which Canon DSLR works best for manually-focused EF lenses through the optical viewfinder?
- Thread starter jasonrohrer
- Start date
Correct.
Not to be confused with pellicle cameras, which have been around longer than AF.
PELLIX - Canon Camera Museum
Here, you can find out about Canon's Film Cameras > F > PELLIX.
global.canon
Upvote
0
Neuro has answered all your questions. The 6D is smaller and lighter than the 5DII and the top plate is plastic. You could probably consider it to be a step up in construction compared with the R6, so I found it to be robust enough.
The AF marks are etched onto the screen and I seem to remember that it could flash red exactly the same as the 5DII.
Also I thought that if you took the battery out of both the 5DII & 6D the screen went dark, but I may be remembering this wrong; it’s a long time since I used them. Maybe someone else can confirm.
Indeed all AF SLRS have the translucent mirror, so you can’t escape that on a dslr.
I have never been able to understand why Canon added interchangeable screens option to the transmissible lcd equipped 7DII, when the original 7D didn’t have interchangeable screens, and then removed the interchangeable screen feature from the 6DII when the 6D did have them. The logic is quite baffling.
To be honest I thing the real benefit of the ‘s’ screen was to see a truer dof picture, rather than focus manual lenses. For the latter you’re much better off using live view.
Upvote
0
On a transmissive lcd equipped dslr you have that aid in the viewfinder too, if the option is on.
However you are quite right; when it comes to accurate focusing nothing beats magnification.
Upvote
0
This thread has been amazing, and I really appreciate all the in-depth answers.
One more question, if you'll humor me: why do you recommend the 6d over the 5d Mark II? Seems like the sensor is slightly better, as seen here:
So... better sensor (better high-iso noise, better dynamic range, better color rendition), slight faster frame rate, which we trade for slightly lower resolution, lower max shutter speed, and less robust construction. I'm guessing that with the 4-years-newer chip, you also get more responsiveness when scrolling through photos, etc. I am seeing reduced noise in the 6D at higher ISO in this comparison tool:
www.dpreview.com
Am I missing anything else?
One more question, if you'll humor me: why do you recommend the 6d over the 5d Mark II? Seems like the sensor is slightly better, as seen here:
So... better sensor (better high-iso noise, better dynamic range, better color rendition), slight faster frame rate, which we trade for slightly lower resolution, lower max shutter speed, and less robust construction. I'm guessing that with the 4-years-newer chip, you also get more responsiveness when scrolling through photos, etc. I am seeing reduced noise in the 6D at higher ISO in this comparison tool:
Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
www.dpreview.com
Am I missing anything else?
Upvote
0
I had both 5DII and 6D for a while.
I wouldn’t read too much into the construction of them both. Canon use a polymer top plate as marketing differentiation between 5 and 6 series. I think it might be easier to find a really good, low mileage 6D than a 5DII, with less age on it. Many 5DIIs had a hard life !
The chip in the 6D is slightly better than the 5DII in that you can abuse it more (exposure-wise) without running into banding and fixed pattern noise, but if you exposure even only moderately accurately that’s not a problem with the 5DII.
There’s no meaningful difference in resolution.
But another reason I’d choose the 6D may not be applicable to you if you’re only using manual lenses: the AF on the 6D is more precise and reliable than the 5DII because the former utilises a closed loop feedback communication with EF lenses produced from 2012 onwards.
If you get bored of using manual lenses then you’ll have a better AF camera in the 6D
Upvote
0
Ah, interesting... so you really need 2012 and newer cameras to take advantage of this? Does Canon have an official name for this newer feedback system? Something that might be listed in a spec sheet?
Upvote
0
Not from what I've seen. The info on this that I've seen comes from Roger Cicala (owner of LensRentals and self-professed tech geek who loves to tear down and test lenses).
Upvote
0
No, Canon never mentioned this, and it’s not official. As Neuro stated in his reply, it was Lens Rentals that tested this and came to this conclusion. However in my own experiences with Canon FF cameras since 2005 (previously being a Nikon guy and Pentax medium format film) I have definitely seen an improvement in AF reliability in both accuracy and precision from the 2012 6D onwards when using lenses from 2012 onwards, with the exception of the 70-300 L from 2010, which is also very accurate and reliable, and Lens Rentals did state they found this in their testing too.
So as an example of reduced AF reliability that I personally experienced I could quote 5D & 5DII with lenses such as 24-105 L (mk1) 100/2, 85/1.8, 50/1.4, 35/1.4 (mk1)135/2, 200/2.8, 300/4, and probably a few more.
I believe @neuroanatomist may be a non-believer !
Upvote
0
I’m confident that ‘Uncle Rog’ knows what he’s doing. I’ve never used a 6-series body. I certainly noticed an increase in AF reliability when going from the 5DII to the 1D X, but that’s an unfair comparison on many levels. By that point, I was using mostly newer lenses anyway, except the 85/1.2L II which had always seemed to have pretty accurate AF, probably because it took ages to achieve focus.
Upvote
0
One last thing...
I originally started this process by looking at the 1DX Mark II, which can currently be had new from reputable sources for half its original price. I don't need video capabilities, at all, so the 1DX Mark III with it's 10-bit video doesn't help me.
Obviously, I'd be saving tons of money by going back to something like the 6D in the used market (the 1DX Mark II would cost close to 10x more).
My current digital camera is the Sony DSC-F707, which has served me well over the past 18 years (I just used it last week, in fact.) I bought it used back in 2005 for something like $300. The main things that are starting to irk me about it are the lack of lens selection (one built-in lens), not very big max aperture on the built-in lens (f 2.0), slow response time (even in manual mode, there's a delay from shutter button until when the picture is taken), and sluggish picture review. It also has an EVF. And I have all these EF lenses for my cinema camera, which would be nice to use with a still camera too.
So I'm not looking to save money, necessarily, but instead find the very best camera that will last me another 18 years (of occasional but mission-critical use---I do take pictures as part of my work).
The 1DX Mark II first started hanging me up when I found that the focus screens are back-ordered. Then I read about the annoying way the AF points behave when trying to do manual focus. At least the AF points light up red again.
I was led to the older cameras like the 5d2 and 6d specifically because the focus screens are still available from B&H, and because the AF point behavior was better in manual focus mode.
But, given that it sounds like the AF points aren't accurate enough for manual focus anyway (so the annoying behavior of the 1dx2's points in manual focus is a non-issue), I could just pray that I somehow scrounge up a split-prism focus screen on the secondary market (sometime over the next year, just keep combing ebay) and go with the original idea of a new 1DX Mark II.
Comparing the images, I like the colors on the 6D and 5d2 better than the 1DX Mark II, but I do see that the 1Dx2 does better at higher ISO.
Do you think it still has some kind of "look through LCD" viewfinder? Or did they go back to etched when they returned to "light up red" AF points?
It definitely has the biggest viewfinder of any Canon DSLR...
I originally started this process by looking at the 1DX Mark II, which can currently be had new from reputable sources for half its original price. I don't need video capabilities, at all, so the 1DX Mark III with it's 10-bit video doesn't help me.
Obviously, I'd be saving tons of money by going back to something like the 6D in the used market (the 1DX Mark II would cost close to 10x more).
My current digital camera is the Sony DSC-F707, which has served me well over the past 18 years (I just used it last week, in fact.) I bought it used back in 2005 for something like $300. The main things that are starting to irk me about it are the lack of lens selection (one built-in lens), not very big max aperture on the built-in lens (f 2.0), slow response time (even in manual mode, there's a delay from shutter button until when the picture is taken), and sluggish picture review. It also has an EVF. And I have all these EF lenses for my cinema camera, which would be nice to use with a still camera too.
So I'm not looking to save money, necessarily, but instead find the very best camera that will last me another 18 years (of occasional but mission-critical use---I do take pictures as part of my work).
The 1DX Mark II first started hanging me up when I found that the focus screens are back-ordered. Then I read about the annoying way the AF points behave when trying to do manual focus. At least the AF points light up red again.
I was led to the older cameras like the 5d2 and 6d specifically because the focus screens are still available from B&H, and because the AF point behavior was better in manual focus mode.
But, given that it sounds like the AF points aren't accurate enough for manual focus anyway (so the annoying behavior of the 1dx2's points in manual focus is a non-issue), I could just pray that I somehow scrounge up a split-prism focus screen on the secondary market (sometime over the next year, just keep combing ebay) and go with the original idea of a new 1DX Mark II.
Comparing the images, I like the colors on the 6D and 5d2 better than the 1DX Mark II, but I do see that the 1Dx2 does better at higher ISO.
Do you think it still has some kind of "look through LCD" viewfinder? Or did they go back to etched when they returned to "light up red" AF points?
It definitely has the biggest viewfinder of any Canon DSLR...
Upvote
0
The 1D X II has a transmissive LCD for AF point display inside the OVF. All of the 1D X bodies have that, and all of them can still light up individual AF points in red. It can also display other information as an LCD overlay on the scene.
Upvote
0
So you have to go down into the 1ds series to get away from the LCD viewfinder?
I guess you can probably tell by looking at the manual, where it shows a diagram of the viewfinder display. If it has a bunch of symbols on there, like the above, then it's LCD. I mean, aside from the green symbols around the view. If there are symbols over the view itself...
I've still heard the 1Dx2's focus points described as "additive" where the 1Dx1 was opaque, like here:
So maybe the 1Dx2 is a hybrid system, with black LCD for some of the other symbols, but additive red for the focus points?
I've also seen a thing on the 5D3 or 5D4 where the focus points are black (subtractive) but then there's a kind of global red light that shines on the whole LCD right before taking a shot. Almost like a red flashlight shining in from the side. Ah, here's a demo of that:
It looks sub-par to me.
Seems like the 1Dx2 is better than this...
I guess you can probably tell by looking at the manual, where it shows a diagram of the viewfinder display. If it has a bunch of symbols on there, like the above, then it's LCD. I mean, aside from the green symbols around the view. If there are symbols over the view itself...
I've still heard the 1Dx2's focus points described as "additive" where the 1Dx1 was opaque, like here:
Canon 1DX Mark II Review & Sample Images by Ken Rockwell
Canon 1DX Mark II Review & Sample Images by Ken Rockwell
www.kenrockwell.com
So maybe the 1Dx2 is a hybrid system, with black LCD for some of the other symbols, but additive red for the focus points?
I've also seen a thing on the 5D3 or 5D4 where the focus points are black (subtractive) but then there's a kind of global red light that shines on the whole LCD right before taking a shot. Almost like a red flashlight shining in from the side. Ah, here's a demo of that:
It looks sub-par to me.
Seems like the 1Dx2 is better than this...
Upvote
0
Yes, looking at the manuals is telling.
Here's the 1ds3:
And here's the 5d2:
And the 6D looks the same:
But the 1dx introduces the grid and also the floating AF icon in the corner:
Obviously, the grid is something you can turn on and off, so it's LCD.
And the 5d3 looks similar (with a floating warning symbol in the lower right, and a grid):
The manuals on the two later models explain how you can toggle these features on and off (like the grid, or the outlines of the AF area).
In the older models, you can't turn the circle or oval off, so that must mean they are etched and not LCD.
Here's the 1ds3:
And here's the 5d2:
And the 6D looks the same:
But the 1dx introduces the grid and also the floating AF icon in the corner:
Obviously, the grid is something you can turn on and off, so it's LCD.
And the 5d3 looks similar (with a floating warning symbol in the lower right, and a grid):
The manuals on the two later models explain how you can toggle these features on and off (like the grid, or the outlines of the AF area).
In the older models, you can't turn the circle or oval off, so that must mean they are etched and not LCD.
Upvote
0
Just a follow-up here, after handing some of these in person.
While the 5D, 5Dm2, and 6d all have AF points that "light up red", they are actually solid black outlines that get red light kinda "shined on them". They are permanently there, and obscuring the subject as black lines, whether or not you are actively auto-focusing.
The 1DSm3, on the other hand, has truly additive red AF points. They completely disappear when not in use, and "glow into existence" when they become active. There are no black lines to obscure the subject. This is really something beautiful to behold in person, and definitely feels better than the red-and-black AF points on the other models.
While the 5D, 5Dm2, and 6d all have AF points that "light up red", they are actually solid black outlines that get red light kinda "shined on them". They are permanently there, and obscuring the subject as black lines, whether or not you are actively auto-focusing.
The 1DSm3, on the other hand, has truly additive red AF points. They completely disappear when not in use, and "glow into existence" when they become active. There are no black lines to obscure the subject. This is really something beautiful to behold in person, and definitely feels better than the red-and-black AF points on the other models.
Upvote
0
Another update:
By installing the Eg-S Super Precision Matte focusing screen in the 6d, my manual-focus lenses (including my Canon CN-E Cinema Primes) become perfectly usable wide-open. There is not focusing prism, but the viewfinder is good enough that I can find solid focus in most situations.
I haven't installed the Eg-S in the 5dM2 yet, but I'm expecting similar benefits there.
And my goodness, the 6d can take beautiful images with my 85mm CN-E Prime at T1.3 (f 1.2 equiv):
By installing the Eg-S Super Precision Matte focusing screen in the 6d, my manual-focus lenses (including my Canon CN-E Cinema Primes) become perfectly usable wide-open. There is not focusing prism, but the viewfinder is good enough that I can find solid focus in most situations.
I haven't installed the Eg-S in the 5dM2 yet, but I'm expecting similar benefits there.
And my goodness, the 6d can take beautiful images with my 85mm CN-E Prime at T1.3 (f 1.2 equiv):
Upvote
0
Similar threads