November 28, 2014, 01:33:10 PM

Author Topic: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?  (Read 18340 times)

philmoz

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #75 on: February 22, 2014, 06:49:48 AM »
...
I say it is substantial...to the point that I'm wondering if all of this difference is solely due to the AA filter and slightly higher pixel density (and newer processing)?  Or is it more due to sample variation of lenses, or a bit of human inaccuracy with focusing?  I guess there are a number of factors in play...but assuming these are two different samples of the 200 f/2L, that would be the biggest factor in the difference, by far...in my opinion.  Because like it or not, there is sample variation, even among the best, most expensive lenses.

Oh no! Weaker AA filter! What shall we do sir? Run for the hills!

As decided by in earlier threads where it was determined that no AA filer is REALLY BAD (and by extension, a strong one is better than a weak one). this is going to ruin everyone's photos because they'll have moire and aliasing throughout all of the detail.

You picked the wrong username for this forum.

You should have used http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dilbert_characters#Topper

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #75 on: February 22, 2014, 06:49:48 AM »

Snaps

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #76 on: February 24, 2014, 12:50:25 AM »
The 70D gives sharper images SOOC, due to a weaker AA filter.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=458&Camera=673&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=458&CameraComp=845&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

This is substantial. Are these jpegs or RAW's? If they are RAW files, I'm putting my 7D on Craigslist tonight.

Personally, it's not THAT substantial. Yes, there's a difference, but it's not the difference between using cheap glass versus expensive glass. Just my opinion, anyway.

I say it is substantial...to the point that I'm wondering if all of this difference is solely due to the AA filter and slightly higher pixel density (and newer processing)?  Or is it more due to sample variation of lenses, or a bit of human inaccuracy with focusing?  I guess there are a number of factors in play...but assuming these are two different samples of the 200 f/2L, that would be the biggest factor in the difference, by far...in my opinion.  Because like it or not, there is sample variation, even among the best, most expensive lenses.

I know there are differences. I guess what I'm getting at is the differences are only really noticeable at the pixel level and by comparing side by side. Don't get me wrong, overall I would consider the 70D a better camera than the 7D (and I own a 7D), but for myself, it's not enough to warrant an upgrade. But one thing I will add is this is perhaps encouraging for the 7D Mark II, as if the 70D is a starting point to what the former will become.

Like I said, just my thoughts.

I see what you mean.  The problem is though, that the 7D2 will possibly cost almost as much as a 5D3 (recently got down to a hair over $2500).  The 7D2 will only be valuable for use with extremely sharp telephoto lenses, and not much else...in my opinion.  Why?  Its pixels at 24 MP on a 1.6x sensor, will be very critical of a lens, and of focus accuracy.  It will be a waste to use it on most EF-S lenses.  So, they should just make it a 1.3x, or 1.2x crop sensor instead...with larger pixels...but still with a total of 24 MP or more.  Why won't they do that?  Because then it would cut into the overall performance a bit of the 1DX and 5D3, and would necessarily cost more than the 5D3 to boot.  Oh well...perhaps the 1DX ii will have an in camera crop feature to accomplish something similar.  It just won't have enough MP to make as much use of it.

Do we even know for sure the 7D MK2 will have a 24MP sensor though? I understand some of the rumors say that, but I'm skeptical it'll be 24MP. I actually think it'll simply be an upgraded 70D sensor with either Dual DIGIC 5+ or maybe the DIGIC 6 even. But we'll out for sure in the coming months.
7D | Rebel XSi | Fujifilm X20 | EF-S 10-22mm | EF-S 60mm Macro | Sigma 30mm F1.4 | EF 70-300mm L | Helios 44-2

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #77 on: February 24, 2014, 06:12:56 PM »
The 70D gives sharper images SOOC, due to a weaker AA filter.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=458&Camera=673&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=458&CameraComp=845&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

This is substantial. Are these jpegs or RAW's? If they are RAW files, I'm putting my 7D on Craigslist tonight.

Personally, it's not THAT substantial. Yes, there's a difference, but it's not the difference between using cheap glass versus expensive glass. Just my opinion, anyway.

I say it is substantial...to the point that I'm wondering if all of this difference is solely due to the AA filter and slightly higher pixel density (and newer processing)?  Or is it more due to sample variation of lenses, or a bit of human inaccuracy with focusing?  I guess there are a number of factors in play...but assuming these are two different samples of the 200 f/2L, that would be the biggest factor in the difference, by far...in my opinion.  Because like it or not, there is sample variation, even among the best, most expensive lenses.

I know there are differences. I guess what I'm getting at is the differences are only really noticeable at the pixel level and by comparing side by side. Don't get me wrong, overall I would consider the 70D a better camera than the 7D (and I own a 7D), but for myself, it's not enough to warrant an upgrade. But one thing I will add is this is perhaps encouraging for the 7D Mark II, as if the 70D is a starting point to what the former will become.

Like I said, just my thoughts.

I see what you mean.  The problem is though, that the 7D2 will possibly cost almost as much as a 5D3 (recently got down to a hair over $2500).  The 7D2 will only be valuable for use with extremely sharp telephoto lenses, and not much else...in my opinion.  Why?  Its pixels at 24 MP on a 1.6x sensor, will be very critical of a lens, and of focus accuracy.  It will be a waste to use it on most EF-S lenses.  So, they should just make it a 1.3x, or 1.2x crop sensor instead...with larger pixels...but still with a total of 24 MP or more.  Why won't they do that?  Because then it would cut into the overall performance a bit of the 1DX and 5D3, and would necessarily cost more than the 5D3 to boot.  Oh well...perhaps the 1DX ii will have an in camera crop feature to accomplish something similar.  It just won't have enough MP to make as much use of it.

Do we even know for sure the 7D MK2 will have a 24MP sensor though? I understand some of the rumors say that, but I'm skeptical it'll be 24MP. I actually think it'll simply be an upgraded 70D sensor with either Dual DIGIC 5+ or maybe the DIGIC 6 even. But we'll out for sure in the coming months.

That's possible.  But if that's the case, the 70D is going to be seen as even more of a bargain, in my opinion.

TheJock

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 148
  • Learning one day at a time...thanks to CR :)
    • View Profile
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #78 on: February 25, 2014, 03:18:58 AM »
I hope you all don’t mind me asking a question relating to the 70D here.

The image quality at the zoom end of my Sigma 150-500 is poor on my current 550D, but once I buy a 70D next month do you think the 70D will provide slightly better IQ with this lens than my 550D???  Just wondering if the very knowledgeable folks on here think that the new technology in the 70D would improve the lenses capabilities.

As always, grateful for any comments/opinions  ;)

Stewart
70D - 100-400L - 24-105L - 50 f1.8 II - 100 f2.8 USM Macro - Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 - Sigma 610 ST.
Next on the hit list -  2xTCIII + 2x 430 EX-II
My Flickr - https://www.flickr.com/photos/126853167@N07/

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5126
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #79 on: February 25, 2014, 03:39:07 AM »
Just wondering if the very knowledgeable folks on here think that the new technology in the 70D would improve the lenses capabilities.

Yes, a bit, the 70d has a bit more resolution, a bit less weaker aa filter (= more sharpness) and a bit less iso noise (= more detail after noise reduction). But make no mistake, basically it's a wash, the 18mp sensor of your 550d isn't much different from Canon's latest incarnation... the worth of the 70d is elsewhere (better usability than Rebel, phase & lv af system, more fps).

TheJock

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 148
  • Learning one day at a time...thanks to CR :)
    • View Profile
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #80 on: February 25, 2014, 03:46:39 AM »
Thanks Marsu42,  I'm just wondering if I should sell the Sigma to fund other lenses, but if IQ will improve it may serve my purposes better on the 70D, I don’t want to jump the gun and sell a lens which may noticeably improve to my untrained eye!!  8)
70D - 100-400L - 24-105L - 50 f1.8 II - 100 f2.8 USM Macro - Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 - Sigma 610 ST.
Next on the hit list -  2xTCIII + 2x 430 EX-II
My Flickr - https://www.flickr.com/photos/126853167@N07/

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5126
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #81 on: February 25, 2014, 04:46:08 AM »
I'm just wondering if I should sell the Sigma to fund other lenses

Right, as you were talking of the long end (just read your post again) I have to correct myself: it doesn't look like the wide end is outresolved if stopped down to f8 and could be a *slight* improvement on 70d.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=683&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=683&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

But tbh the long end at 500m is extremely ultra-crappy, and an upgrade to 70d won't benefit you at all - so if you actually use it for tele shooting, do yourself a favor and buy a 70-300L, keeping your 550d.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=683&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=1&FLIComp=4&APIComp=2
« Last Edit: February 25, 2014, 04:47:54 AM by Marsu42 »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #81 on: February 25, 2014, 04:46:08 AM »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #82 on: February 25, 2014, 05:58:17 AM »
I hope you all don’t mind me asking a question relating to the 70D here.

The image quality at the zoom end of my Sigma 150-500 is poor on my current 550D, but once I buy a 70D next month do you think the 70D will provide slightly better IQ with this lens than my 550D???  Just wondering if the very knowledgeable folks on here think that the new technology in the 70D would improve the lenses capabilities.

As always, grateful for any comments/opinions  ;)

Stewart

I haven't tried that lens, but I feel comfortable my Sigma 120-400 would not run out of resolution at 400mm with a 70D mounted, based on just my experience with the 50D on it in the past.  Of course, this lens at 400mm is extremely sharp, at least for everything closer than 200 feet or so.  If the subject is half a mile away, then it's possible the lens might not make full use of the 70D's resolution.

TheJock

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 148
  • Learning one day at a time...thanks to CR :)
    • View Profile
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #83 on: February 25, 2014, 11:04:00 PM »
Thanks for the comments guys, I like the Digital Picture comparison charts, but they just don’t drum in “real life” comparisons that I can draw from.
Do you think that keeping my Sigma back a little at the 400mm level and increasing the ISO ( like 400-800) and aperture to f8 or narrower will offer me better clarity on the 70D body?  Just a thought as I think I’ll be able to get away with those settings in most cases as it’s full on sunshine here 365 days a year!  8)  Ultimately I’d love to own a 300mmL prime with a 1.4X and a 2X convertor, but that’ll be next years challenge.  I think you’ve answered my question regarding the 70D's IQ, I’ve set my heart on it and will be buying one next month, hopefully before I go to Berlin!!  I’ve also managed to bag myself a mint condition 24-105L so I’ll be in a good place in a couple of months ;)
70D - 100-400L - 24-105L - 50 f1.8 II - 100 f2.8 USM Macro - Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 - Sigma 610 ST.
Next on the hit list -  2xTCIII + 2x 430 EX-II
My Flickr - https://www.flickr.com/photos/126853167@N07/

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5126
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #84 on: February 26, 2014, 01:17:08 AM »
Do you think that keeping my Sigma back a little at the 400mm level and increasing the ISO ( like 400-800) and aperture to f8 or narrower will offer me better clarity on the 70D body?

Nope, the lens is already outresolved esp. on crop, the tiny sensor difference will be lost. You'll get 2mp more of blur though :-p ... face it - there are no good and inexpensive 400-500mm tele zooms, it's better to crop a good 300mm. Btw all I can look at are the charts, and I don't see any reasons why the conclusion shouldn't be valid.

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4663
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #85 on: February 26, 2014, 02:57:45 PM »
Do you think that keeping my Sigma back a little at the 400mm level and increasing the ISO ( like 400-800) and aperture to f8 or narrower will offer me better clarity on the 70D body?

Nope, the lens is already outresolved esp. on crop, the tiny sensor difference will be lost. You'll get 2mp more of blur though :-p ... face it - there are no good and inexpensive 400-500mm tele zooms, it's better to crop a good 300mm. Btw all I can look at are the charts, and I don't see any reasons why the conclusion shouldn't be valid.

Sigh. The message just doesn't seem to sink in.

There is no such thing as sensors outresolving lenses or lenses outresolving sensors. Output resolution, the measurable resolution of your images, is the RMS of the resolutions of the components involved in producing the  image. Lenses, additionally, are non-linear. At some apertures their intrinsic resolving power may be less than the sensor, and at other apertures, it may be more (sometimes MUCH more) than the sensor. By increasing sensor or lens resolution, regardless of which one is doing better, will still increase output resolution. (And we are still quite far away from diminishing returns yet, so increasing sensor resolution is still the cheapest way to increase output resolution.)

As for the comment about there not being any good inexpensive 400-500mm zooms, I beg to differ. The Tamron 150-600mm has been tested and demonstrated to be quite good for it's class. It's no EF 600mm f/4 L II, but it is the closest thing your going to get, and there is really no alternative for good optical reach. Even at f/8, a 600mm lens is going to increase subject area by 2.25x relative to a 400mm lens. It would increase subject area by a full factor of 4x relative to a 300mm lens. The fact that the lens is diffraction limited at that point is irrelevant. There is absolutely no way that an upsampled 300mm crop is ever going to compare to an uncropped, unscaled 600mm image. Simply not going to happen. You can't overcome four times as many pixels on subject.

Thanks for the comments guys, I like the Digital Picture comparison charts, but they just don’t drum in “real life” comparisons that I can draw from.
Do you think that keeping my Sigma back a little at the 400mm level and increasing the ISO ( like 400-800) and aperture to f8 or narrower will offer me better clarity on the 70D body?  Just a thought as I think I’ll be able to get away with those settings in most cases as it’s full on sunshine here 365 days a year!  8)  Ultimately I’d love to own a 300mmL prime with a 1.4X and a 2X convertor, but that’ll be next years challenge.  I think you’ve answered my question regarding the 70D's IQ, I’ve set my heart on it and will be buying one next month, hopefully before I go to Berlin!!  I’ve also managed to bag myself a mint condition 24-105L so I’ll be in a good place in a couple of months ;)

If you have the 300mm f/2.8 L, then you already have a superb lens. Using a 2x TC is easy, and at 600mm you have four times the detail on your subject. Regarding aperture, use the aperture you need to get the necessary DOF. Don't worry too much about ISO, especially at ISO 400-800. The 70D should do quite well up to ISO 1600. It is only when you get beyond ISO 1600 that your IQ may start to degrade enough that you might need to be concerned, however the 70D is sharper than the 7D, and sharpness eats noise for breakfast. (Background blur, on the otherhand, tends to be eaten by noise for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, but blurry backgrounds are super easy to clean up, so it really doesn't matter much.)

If you need reach (i.e. you shoot birds or wildlife), then there is really no substitute for optical magnification. Raw focal length is your best friend. Backing off your focal length from longer to shorter is actually a bad idea. Instead of thinking about upsampling a crop from a shorter lens, think about downsampling the full image from a longer lens. No matter how you slice it, a downsampled image from a longer focal length will have more detail and less or equivalent noise to any image shot at a shorter focal length.

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5126
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #86 on: February 26, 2014, 03:12:12 PM »
By increasing sensor or lens resolution, regardless of which one is doing better, will still increase output resolution. (And we are still quite far away from diminishing returns yet, so increasing sensor resolution is still the cheapest way to increase output resolution.)

I admit I don't understand what you're saying, paying €1100 for 2mp has to have big effect, or it sounds like diminishing return to me. But I understand you're saying this body upgrade will have make an actually visible difference on the long end of the said Sigma lens? Well, in that case I admit I have to take back my recommendation to get a better lens instead and the op should go ahead and confidently buy a 70d, sorry.

As for the comment about there not being any good inexpensive 400-500mm zooms, I beg to differ. The Tamron 150-600mm has been tested and demonstrated to be quite good for it's class.

Indeed, this lens is so recent I didn't even know it - thanks for the information, last time I looked everything above -400mm zooms was either not affordable or crappy.

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4663
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #87 on: February 26, 2014, 03:55:53 PM »
By increasing sensor or lens resolution, regardless of which one is doing better, will still increase output resolution. (And we are still quite far away from diminishing returns yet, so increasing sensor resolution is still the cheapest way to increase output resolution.)

I admit I don't understand what you're saying, paying €1100 for 2mp has to have big effect, or it sounds like diminishing return to me. But I understand you're saying this body upgrade will have make an actually visible difference on the long end of the said Sigma lens? Well, in that case I admit I have to take back my recommendation to get a better lens instead and the op should go ahead and confidently buy a 70d, sorry.

It sounded like the op already had the 300mm f/2.8 L and both TCs. Given that, there is really no reason to buy another lens...they already have one of the best lens setups they can get. Moving to a 70D from a 7D would indeed help IQ. It is more than just the 2mp. The FWC has been increased by a fairly considerable amount (30%!!), and because of the weaker AA filter (which could pose a problem for close up shots of birds where their feathers are super clear, but I get the feeling the OP won't be getting that close) the overall image will be sharper. Noise is at it's worst with soft detail. When detail is sharper, noise becomes harder to differentiate from real detail, so from a PERCEPTUAL standpoint, it doesn't appear as bad (even though in statistical terms, it may be just as bad or worse.)

So yes, I really do believe the OP could see an IQ improvement by moving to the 70D from the 7D. It doesn't sound like much, but there are several improvements with the 70D that should make it worth it.

As for the comment about there not being any good inexpensive 400-500mm zooms, I beg to differ. The Tamron 150-600mm has been tested and demonstrated to be quite good for it's class.

Indeed, this lens is so recent I didn't even know it - thanks for the information, last time I looked everything above -400mm zooms was either not affordable or crappy.

AlanF did a review here on the forums, and along with official testing elsewhere, it sounds like the lens is quite good for it's class: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19503.0

Still, if the OP already has the 300/2.8 L and TCs, then I see no reason to move to a different lens...he already has some of the best, period.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #87 on: February 26, 2014, 03:55:53 PM »

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5126
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #88 on: February 26, 2014, 05:11:38 PM »
It sounded like the op already had the 300mm f/2.8 L and both TCs.

Nope, the "op" I'm refering to is the one asking the question a few posts above, he's just got the Sigma: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19381.msg372844#msg372844


Given that, there is really no reason to buy another lens...they already have one of the best lens setups they can get. Moving to a 70D from a 7D would indeed help IQ. It is more than just the 2mp. The FWC has been increased by a fairly considerable amount (30%!!), and because of the weaker AA filter (which could pose a problem for close up shots of birds where their feathers are super clear, but I get the feeling the OP won't be getting that close) the overall image will be sharper.

That's about what I wrote, but only before I looked at the iso crop chart and saw how crappy the Sigma really is at 500mm :-o ... but I guess we cannot really say unless someone actually takes some sample shot on both 550d & 70d with this lens.

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4663
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #89 on: February 26, 2014, 07:16:01 PM »
It sounded like the op already had the 300mm f/2.8 L and both TCs.

Nope, the "op" I'm refering to is the one asking the question a few posts above, he's just got the Sigma: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19381.msg372844#msg372844

Oh. Well, that wouldn't be the "Original Post" then, as (at least as far as I know), that only refers to the "original" post that started the thread. :P

Given that, there is really no reason to buy another lens...they already have one of the best lens setups they can get. Moving to a 70D from a 7D would indeed help IQ. It is more than just the 2mp. The FWC has been increased by a fairly considerable amount (30%!!), and because of the weaker AA filter (which could pose a problem for close up shots of birds where their feathers are super clear, but I get the feeling the OP won't be getting that close) the overall image will be sharper.

That's about what I wrote, but only before I looked at the iso crop chart and saw how crappy the Sigma really is at 500mm :-o ... but I guess we cannot really say unless someone actually takes some sample shot on both 550d & 70d with this lens.

Oh, yeah. The 150-500 is definitely not great wide open. I'd sell that, and buy the Tamron 150-600 instead. FAR better results, although it still isn't going to be a 300/2.8 L + 2x TC.

If you have to shoot wide open with the 150-500, then it really doesn't matter what camera your using. The lens is so aberration limited at max aperture that your better off stopping down to f/8 for diffraction limited performance.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 7D vs. 70D: Which has better image quality?
« Reply #89 on: February 26, 2014, 07:16:01 PM »