I am sure I will be corrected if I am wrong, but the way the lens mounts to the camera does not change between your 35 mm Canon film lenses and this lens. The diffrence is that the lens is designed for the X 1.6 sensor size of many of the Canon digital cameras. I would expect that the lens would mount to your Canon film camera but it produces a diffrent size image circle which will not cover the 35 mm film or a 35 mm full frame sensor.
Making the lens/sensor full frame for the X 1.6 sensor size it was designed for.
Regarding cost, the angle of view releates most closely to a 100 mm in in the 35 mm format. Because of this I think, right or wrong that equipment makers fell these lenses should be priced closer to the 100 mm macro cost than to the 50 mm 1:2 macro cost. Any thoughts?

Phil

Because EF-S lenses use less glass (making them smaller and lighter) and project a smaller image circle...retrofitting them with an EF mount would be an exercise in futility, since the captured image would hardly fill the frame of a 35mm sensor...

While we're at it, let's start using DX lenses on full frame Nikon cameras (guess those would be film though, no?). See my point?

~Matt Segal

Yes. I think Canon choose this trade off because there really is not much of a market of people shooting 1:1 with a 60mm lens and FF sensors, only strange underwater types which does not even register on their radar.

from the naked specs it's hard to imagine how big the viewfinder is.

Here is a funny video where you can see the difference between the 5D's uncropped full frame finder and the 20D's cropped APS-C finder.

http://www.clubcapa.net/capa/movie/eos5d/eos5d_01.html
or
google translated (just the headline)

1st: 20D
2nd: 5D

Julian

This is a bit off topic (non-technical), but I got to hold and snap photos with a 5D with the new 24-105 f4L lens last week, while I was in the highlands of Papua New Guinea. The camera feels good! It's fast, the LCD is big, and the new 24-105 lens looks like it will be extremely useful. I hope it's sharp -- it's about time we had a smaller, lighter alternative with a useful focal range. I'm tired of lugging around my 24-70 for outdoor, daytime use, and I've found the non L zooms to be vastly inferior. The photographer there also had the new 1D Mk II, but I didn't get to play with it. He said it was basically the same, which conforms to everything I've read so far.

Re: reproduction ratios

I've argued this point with lots of people, and I'm sick of it. Those with whom I've talked (who disagreed with the definition as projected size of image on sensor/film:real life size) finally conceded to the definition as stated. We further agreed to refer to the other way as (for example) 1:1, 35mm-equivalent.

To get them to see my point, I argued that I could just tape stuff around the outer areas of my sensor and magically have a 1,000,000:1 reproduction ratio (or whatever).

Hi Eric, hope you had a great Trip,



Now we know where those Canon Guys keep all theire secret stuff...

;-)

Care to share which lenses you've found that do work well with your camera? Topside, underwater, and underwater lens/port combinations?

Eric-

What did you think of the 5d viewfinder?

Thanks,
Mike

My Canon tech rep was in the studio yesterday with both 5D and 1DIIN. First impressions:

The 5D looks quite nice in terms of navigation and ergonomics. Relatively few buttons to accomplish most tasks, and those are accessed by logical navigation. The oversized LCD and larger menu font will make it nice to use UW.

I was impressed with the potential and will borrow one to get used to it. I don't see it replacing my 1DsMKII for now, but if I were starting out to build a high res UW system, and if we had a housing for it , I'd buy 2 in order to have redundant cameras for the field.

BTW ... the 1DMKIIN fits seamlessly in existing Seacam MKII housing. No difference in any button positioning, but obviously part of the oversized LCD is not visible. You can see it all by looking in at an angle, but at a glance straight from the back, some is obscured by the housing.

This is great news, Steve! I'm impressed with Canon's efforts to keep the button positions the same. The 1D series housings have had a long life so far. Let's hope Canon continues to prolong the body style.

Eric: All of us Seacam owners heartily concur..:-) I have a feeling my hopes are going to be shattered though.

On the other hand, at this point, I'd be happy with a 1DsmkII, but it would be nice to have something smaller w/o the vertical grip.

Cheers
James

The problem for me is that unless a camera is MUCH smaller, I'd just rather lug around a 1D. Chances are that I have a huge lens attached, anyway.

I do have a Digital Rebel XT, which I like a lot, but I always have to work hard to get white balance to not look "dirty" (tan cast, or something weird). I carry it around with a Canon 24/2.8, which is small, light, and sharp.

The full-frame 5D with the 24-105 IS L lens would be a tempting combination, though. But is the 5D really that much smaller than a 1D? It certainly is significantly lighter, but it's not enough for me to carry it instead of a 1D style body. Plus, I use a Canon hand grip, and have gotten so used to the combination that I can carry around a camera for a day and not be tired (with the hand grip, I mean).

However, if I were starting from scratch at this point, I'd be tempted to get two 5D bodies and whatever housing comes out for it...

We'll have to get you to do a Monterey beach dive. I think you may come away with a new appriciation for smallness.

Yeah, after he hits that cold water you mean...;-)

No. It's easy after you get in the water. I mean walking down the beach in a dry suit with 20 more lbs of lead than a tropical dive will make one appriciate that small is beautiful. The only thing more difficult is walking back UP the beach with the added weight of the water when everything is wet.

Herb, you're a little slow...Remember that Seinfeld episode with George and his "cold water" problem....

I'm afraid that went right over my head. I hardly ever watch television and have only ever watched one episode of Seinfeld from start to end. I guess it was not the "cold water" episode.

Herb herb herb, I'm smacking my forehead here

Cold water shrinkage. [Warner Brother's Pseudolatin] Lossus maculinus memberium [/Warner Brother's Pseudolatin]

I guess I should have quit while I was behind.

I prefer the bigger size too when the camera is in my hands. But I do topside photos in certain situations where the smaller size is important. Everybody who has used a 10D knows the 5D size already. The 5D is just a few millimeters wider and due to the uncropped full size viewfinder about 10mm taller in the middle.
For me the 5D is perfect in terms of size. Small if it is important and with grip the right size if I want it (long telelens, vertical shooting, etc.).

There is a size comparison in the white paper between 5D (without grip) and 1D series (pic attachement).

Click to view attachment

Julian

Regarding my comments above, I was referring to my topside preferences, by the way. Underwater, smaller is just fine.

We're not talking about Seinfeld and Herb again are we?

I'm still waiting to hear if the 5D will work in the Subal C10 housing.

I don't know as far as other housings go, but I'd be willing to bet that it'll work in the Sea & Sea D60 housing with minor modifications. I have been succesfully using my 20D in a Sea & Sea D60 housing with no problems - the housing has so much extra space, I'm sure the 5D will fit also. From quick measurements it looks like it may also fit in the Aquatica 20D housing, but it's a little hard to say.

If this is going to be true I'll order two 5D the moment they hit the Market.