October 22, 2014, 04:53:54 AM

Author Topic: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II  (Read 8257 times)

ishdakuteb

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 379
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #15 on: February 21, 2013, 07:50:35 PM »
Even at ISO3200 my 7D usually beat my 5D3 for birds.
How so?  I have a 60D and 5D2.  Never in a million years will ANY photo that I take with the 60D at ISO 3200 even come close to the 5D2 at ISO 3200.  Not even close.  The noise and breakdown of resolution is terrible.

here are some images with iso of 3200 on my canon 7d (might look much better as if someone knows well about photoshop):





« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 07:52:17 PM by ishdakuteb »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #15 on: February 21, 2013, 07:50:35 PM »

applecider

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #16 on: February 21, 2013, 08:15:11 PM »
For what it's worth, assuming your shooting at a low ISO, if you crop a 5d3 image into half or whatever to match the same perspective of a crop, then essentially you are getting a clean 11MP crop vs a 24MP.  So, just to get the same pixel count as the 24MP, you have to then interpolate that by 2x to get back to 22MP... and then depending on what size you want this puppy enlarged to on print, you will likely get a cleanish but slightly softer version of the 7D at native resolutions.  At low ISO's, I would bet the 7D2 would be cleaner if you then wanted to print at full 24MP native resolution (near 16x20)...  If you wanted to print larger, I would bet the 7d still wins but even more distinct.  NOW, if you are shooting lets say ISO 1600 or ISO 3200 or faster, then I would say it would be a toss up and say the 5d3 may win that battle, just because of how clean their files are.  You can always sharpen the files so the enlargements of the 5d3 in comparison to the crop perspective look as sharp, but then as you sharpen the details, you are sharpening the noise and round and round we go. 

Except that I was not forgetting enlargement as in my experience the 7d fails even with it's theoretical crop advantage at any but unreal wildlife low iso.   I meant that by saying "the 5diii beats the current 7d in image quality when cropped to the same subject size".  Guess that should also include when printed to show the same subject size.  Sorry but the ff sensor image is at least 1.6x better than current 7d crop images, IMO and experience.
AE-1, T90,EOS Elan 7e, EOS-M, 7D, 5D3, 1dx, ef40 2.8, ef 85 1.2ii, ef100 is 2.8 macro, ef300 2.8ii, ef400 2.8ii, ef600 is ii usm, ef8-15 f4, ef16-35 ii, ef24-70 ii, ef 24-105, ef 70-200, 2xext ii, 2xext iii, 1.4x ext iii.

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3928
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #17 on: February 21, 2013, 08:27:18 PM »
Even at ISO3200 my 7D usually beat my 5D3 for birds.
How so?  I have a 60D and 5D2.  Never in a million years will ANY photo that I take with the 60D at ISO 3200 even come close to the 5D2 at ISO 3200.  Not even close.  The noise and breakdown of resolution is terrible.

compare them at the same scale and not at 100%, don't just shoot two birds and compare, filter and scale the 7D bird down to 5D2 scale and then compare

the 7D sensor is a touch more efficient per sensor area than the 5D2 sensor, now if you are shooting landscapes and filling each frame the same way of course the 5D2 has less noise since the sensor is 2.6x bigger (although the 5D2 does band more in deep high iso shadows, so for particular scenes where very dark regions fill up much of the image the 7D image might look better even in this case, but that is a very special case)


« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 08:29:33 PM by LetTheRightLensIn »

ishdakuteb

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 379
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #18 on: February 21, 2013, 08:38:34 PM »
For what it's worth, assuming your shooting at a low ISO, if you crop a 5d3 image into half or whatever to match the same perspective of a crop, then essentially you are getting a clean 11MP crop vs a 24MP.  So, just to get the same pixel count as the 24MP, you have to then interpolate that by 2x to get back to 22MP... and then depending on what size you want this puppy enlarged to on print, you will likely get a cleanish but slightly softer version of the 7D at native resolutions.  At low ISO's, I would bet the 7D2 would be cleaner if you then wanted to print at full 24MP native resolution (near 16x20)...  If you wanted to print larger, I would bet the 7d still wins but even more distinct.  NOW, if you are shooting lets say ISO 1600 or ISO 3200 or faster, then I would say it would be a toss up and say the 5d3 may win that battle, just because of how clean their files are.  You can always sharpen the files so the enlargements of the 5d3 in comparison to the crop perspective look as sharp, but then as you sharpen the details, you are sharpening the noise and round and round we go. 

Except that I was not forgetting enlargement as in my experience the 7d fails even with it's theoretical crop advantage at any but unreal wildlife low iso.   I meant that by saying "the 5diii beats the current 7d in image quality when cropped to the same subject size".  Guess that should also include when printed to show the same subject size.  Sorry but the ff sensor image is at least 1.6x better than current 7d crop images, IMO and experience.

well, do not know what to say but i am loving both 7d and 5d iii.  my 30d also serve me pretty well in experimenting stuff so i am loving it too :)  here are some other images that i recently captured with 5d iii:

note:  link these images from my facebook; therefore quality of these images are not as good as previous since previous images were linked from flickr.







« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 08:42:04 PM by ishdakuteb »

Kerry B

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #19 on: February 22, 2013, 02:58:40 AM »
Thanks for all your comments, all appreciated. I will spend this weekend testing the 7d/300 lens combo, given i have only had the lens since early this week there must be something I am doing wrong.
Have to say that the image quality with a borrowed 5D mkii and new 300 lens was outstanding even with the new 1.4 extender. There was no difference even viewing at 100%. My old mk1 lens and extender was not able to reach these dizzy heights.
Anybody else had any experience with the 300mkii/1.4 mkiii extender?
Canon 5d mkiii, Canon 1d mk1v, Canon 300f2.8 IS mkii, 70-200f2.8 Mkii IS, 24-105f4, 1.4 mkiii extender and 2 x extender mkiii

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #20 on: February 22, 2013, 04:04:18 AM »
There is simply no way a new crop sensor is going to rival the full frame sensors.  Not happening.

Other than in this case where you may find even 800mm too short. It's not easy to get close to wildlife lots of times. In the highly reach limited cases the crop sensors can more than rival FF. And comparing 5D2 to 7D, closer generation cams than the 5D3, the 5D2 just about never did better, even at high ISO if you scaled the 7D down to # of pixels 5D2 put on the distant bird you actually got a touch LESS noise (plus less de-bayer errors and greater acutance).

Lettherightlensin, I was speaking in terms of framing the subject the same size with a longer lens on the FF, obviously.  I certainly was not factoring in the crop factor and the finer pixel pitch of the crop sensor.  I didn't realize that what Kerry B was referring to, was the problem of achieving sharpness.  I thought he was referring to noise.

I certainly do think a 24mp 1.6x crop sensor, is going to reveal limitations and flaws of the lens' quality, and will be very difficult to get sharply focused results at times, even at a distance...especially in servo AF mode.

Let's face it, at distances of greater than 100 meters (for any Europeans out there), autofocus can be a lot less accurate, especially on a crop camera...at least with all the lenses I've ever tried or owned (not tried the 800 f/5.6 yet.) 

Frankly, I have tried the 1.4x iii TC, but on an older version 1 500mm f/4L, on my 15mp 50D.  I was disappointed with the results.  That particular lens just wasn't all that sharp (even with no TC), so the TC made it worse.  It was tested, supposedly they found nothing wrong.  I'm sure it looked somewhat sharp on a 21 or 22mp full frame sensor.

Here's a 100% crop via 1.4x iii + 500 f/4L + 50D, see for yourself.  Attempted focus was on the taller sailboat on the left.  This was on a carbon fiber tripod, shutter speed 1/400 second, and no panning or movement of the lens/camera.  The boats were moving very slowly, especially the taller one.  ISO 250, closed to f/8...it was even softer when set wider than f/8, and also got softer going above f/8 as well.  I purposely didn't add much NR in Adobe Camera Raw, and used the "sharpness" slider at 75 (out of 150), the "radius" at 2.3 (a "sharp" picture requires a radius from .5 to 1.4), and "detail" at 10 (out of 100).

So, it's not like I'm presenting it here without trying to optimize sharpness in post, because I did.   

It made no difference how I set the AFMA (it only got worse both directions), and also made no difference if I focused manually, with live view, at 10x magnification (which I did here, the shot is done with mirror up in live view mode, so there's no mirror shake).  What I saw on the LCD, even before I ever snapped a picture, was never all that sharp...the full motion video via the live view, barely looked sharper than this still image.

Sure, there is a bit of atmosphere between me and the sailboats (I was on shore)...but I feel that is only causing 15 to 20 percent of the softening you see here.  A faster shutter speed of 1/2000 would have maybe helped another 5 percent.  (As evidence of a faster shutter speed not making much difference...notice the American flag on the back of the larger boat.  It seems to be relatively sharp with no motion blur...yet it had to be flapping at least a bit faster than the boat was moving.)  So I say the rest of the problem, is the lens combo's softness. 

So...the sharpness is nothing like my 135 f/2, or the 200 f/2 I later rented.  I believe either of those (without any TC) would still be sharp enough for a 32 MP 1.6x crop sensor...and coupled to a 1.4xii or iii, would maybe still be sharp enough for a 26 to 28 MP 1.6x crop sensor.

What you see here, is barely sharp enough for an 18 MP full frame (1DX), in my opinion.  I mean, I'll admit it is the older 500mm + a TC, so it's 700mm (and full frame equivalent 1120mm)...but at the pixel level on my 50D, it's very soft.  White egrets at much closer range, looked similarly soft.  Can't fault the atmosphere with those.

The true resolution test for a truly sharp lens, would be on Sigma's SD1 crop sensor, in my opinion.  But of course, you can't mount Canon glass on Sigma bodies.  And of course their camera itself, is nothing like as useful as a 7D, yet costs more.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2013, 04:08:16 AM by CarlTN »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #21 on: February 22, 2013, 04:10:24 AM »
Ishdakuteb, those are some nice portrait shots!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #21 on: February 22, 2013, 04:10:24 AM »

ishdakuteb

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 379
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #22 on: February 23, 2013, 01:51:49 AM »
Ishdakuteb, those are some nice portrait shots!

thanks... i am still learning and trying my best to improve my knowledge about shooting techniques as much as i can everyday after work, ignoring everything but camera  :P

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3323
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #23 on: February 23, 2013, 04:18:10 AM »
If the 7D II comes out with 24.1 megapixels, would a similarly cropped shot with a 5D III (containing a smaller number of larger pixels) have less noise when enlarged?  Would it be sharper?  I am considering getting the canon 400mm 2.8 IS II and wondered whether there would be any benefit to shooting with the proposed 7D II versus my 5D III.  Any help would be appreciated.
When you crop an image from 5D MK III, to get the same FOV as 7D, your image will preserve less than 10 megapixels of detail ... whereas, even the current 7D will give you full 18 Megapixels of detail, so I'd safely assume that the 7D II images will be sharper than a cropped image (to match 7D II FOV) from 5D MK III.
If reach is what I am looking for, I always use my crop sensor DSLR.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2013, 04:28:52 AM by Rienzphotoz »
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

vbi

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #24 on: February 23, 2013, 05:25:09 AM »
Have to say that the image quality with a borrowed 5D mkii and new 300 lens was outstanding even with the new 1.4 extender. There was no difference even viewing at 100%. My old mk1 lens and extender was not able to reach these dizzy heights.
Anybody else had any experience with the 300mkii/1.4 mkiii extender?

I think there is your problem. The 7D with it's smaller photosites is far more demanding on lenses than anything else in the Canon range. In effect it's sensor is equivalent to a 46MP FF and as a result the 7D requires the very best lenses to really perform. Putting an extender on the 300 may just deteriorate the 300's IQ to the point where it simply isn't good enough for the 7D.

Of course, the 5D will be far less demanding on the IQ of the 300 plus extender as the photosites are so much larger.

Best solution...get the 500 F4 Mk2 for your 7D...fabulous reach and IQ combination. IMHO
« Last Edit: February 23, 2013, 05:27:23 AM by vbi »
All politicians are scum
5D3, 5D2, 7D and too many lenses

garyknrd

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 157
  • Birding
    • View Profile
    • Bird photography
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #25 on: February 23, 2013, 05:49:24 AM »
I have a similar dilemma, I want to know if the 5d mkiii will be a better option than the proposed 7d mkii. I am more concerned with image quality. Having just got the new canon 300f2.8 mkii my existing 7d is found wanting. Will I get a better image with full frame or should I wait for the new 7d mkii. My main photographic needs are wildlife.

I had the exact same thing happen to me. I bought the new 300 II and it just was a night mare on the 7D. I am not sure what to do. Very frustrating and expensive. I finally bought an old mark IV and it helped some. But it is just not that good a lens on the 7D. People think I am crazy. Maybe I am, but the new one is not working for me.
Live between Thailand and Texas, USA

Kernuak

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1108
    • View Profile
    • Avalon Light Photoart
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #26 on: February 23, 2013, 06:54:06 AM »
Someone I know was having similar problems with the 300 f/2.8 MkII and extender on the 7D. After spending quite a bit of time doing AFMA (which he hadn't heard of) though, he managed to get it to perform well. There are quite a few variables when performing AFMA and you need to get those variables right for what you mainly shoot. Choose the wrong distance for AFMA and it could actually make it worse.
Canon 5D MkIII, 7D, 300mm L IS f/2.8 and a few other L's

garyknrd

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 157
  • Birding
    • View Profile
    • Bird photography
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #27 on: February 23, 2013, 08:04:41 AM »
Thanks, Kernuak

You know I actually loved the 7D and used it until I had problems with the 300 II and T.C. That thing will resolve fine detail. It is actually amazing. I changed to a IV about two weeks ago. And it is a very good camera also. The AF makes it great IMO. The 7D took me about 3 months to get used too. Before I really started to get the results I thought it should give. Kinda hard for me to learn how to shoot with it.
I personally cannot wait until the 7D II comes out. If it has a good AF system I will be in heaven.
I am a birder. And crop heavily most of the time.
www.flickr.com/photos/avianphotos
Live between Thailand and Texas, USA

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #27 on: February 23, 2013, 08:04:41 AM »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #28 on: February 26, 2013, 06:51:43 AM »
Gary, nice work, I especially like the White bellied Redstart.  "Birdsthatfart.com"?  Hahahah  ;D

What do you think of the sharpness I got on this top one, center cropped to 100%, ISO 1000, on a digital crop camera built by the ancient Sumerians before the last ice age ended.

I know the focus is a bit off on the eye, but the tail and wings are sharper.  I just snapped this handheld on a zoom lens at 200mm with no IS, wide open at f/4.

Please do not criticize the composition of the finch, I know it's lame to shoot birds on feeders!  I'm the opposite of a bird expert!!  And obviously I don't know when to go outside, it's always getting dark!  I'm just showing this one because I recently shot it and tweaked it this evening.

Below it is a heron image I submitted to a magazine's website about two years ago.  It's also handheld with no IS, with a 135 f/2 + 2.0x ii TC, scaled down a bit.

The bottom was shot with a 1D4 and 300 mm f/4 IS, at ISO 6400, fall 2012.


CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #29 on: February 26, 2013, 07:00:22 AM »
Ishdakuteb, those are some nice portrait shots!

thanks... i am still learning and trying my best to improve my knowledge about shooting techniques as much as i can everyday after work, ignoring everything but camera  :P

Hahaha @ "ignoring everything but camera"...sometimes not so easy to do!

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Wildlife shooting 5DIII vs. proposed 7D II
« Reply #29 on: February 26, 2013, 07:00:22 AM »