Canon 90D - A Bird Photographers Perspective

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,756
3,091
You say that the IQ is good only up to iso 800, which is contrary to my experience. What RAW converter and noise suppression are you using?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chaitanya

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,756
3,091
More on the claim that the 7DII has better noise at high iso. That well known lover of Canon DPR allows you to compare the noise - see: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-90d-review/5 and dial in the 7DII in the menus to compare the 2, preferably using the "COMP" setting to see at the same output size. And this is what DPR says on that page:

Image quality

The Canon EOS 90D has a new 32.5MP APS-C sensor - the highest-resolution chip in its class. Image quality is noticeably improved across the board compared its 24MP predecessor and Raw IQ is on par with the best of its APS-C competition, mirrorless or DSLR. JPEG color from the 90D continues to be a favorite, but high ISO noise reduction is sloppy, blurring away detail.

Key takeaways:


  • Excellent Raw detail capture and high ISO noise performance
jpeg output may have too aggressive noise reduction but most bird photographers use RAW.
 
Last edited:

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,635
449
Germany
... jpeg output may have too aggressive noise reduction but most bird photographers use RAW.
The German "fotomagazin" journal has tested the 90D, also against 7D2. IQ is always tested with OOC JPEGs.

Overall IQ (90D / 7D2):
82% / 78% - big advantage due to higher resolution

Noise (100/200/400/800/1600/3200/6400 ISO; "1" is best):
90D: 1,9/2,0/2,1/2,2/2,7/3,2/4,5
7D2: 1,8/1,8/1,9/2,2/2,7/3,0/4,5
almost pair, great result if you think about a 60% increase in resolution.

Nikon D7500 outperforms the noise at highest ISO (3200/6400: 2,9/3,4) but loses because of lower resolution (IQ: 77%)

Hope, these numbers help in argumentation.
 
Last edited:

Glenn Bartley

EOS 80D
Jul 2, 2014
108
58
www.glennbartley.com
I'd say to download the full rez jpg samples off my site and compare for yourself in a real world shot. To my eyes anyways the 90D looks about a stop worse.

My problem with the studio test images is they are shot in scenarios that you wouldnt actually need to use such a high ISO. So for example shooting their test image at ISO 3200 when it is plenty bright out that you could have used ISO 400. In the field you of course always use the lowest ISO to achieve the image you are after. For me and with birds you inevitably wind up flirting with slow shutter speeds to keep the ISO down. Thats why I did these tests at the very end of the day in dim light. What I believe to be a more real world scenario.

But everyone is free to make their own conclusions!

Cheers guys!

Glenn
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,756
3,091
I'd say to download the full rez jpg samples off my site and compare for yourself in a real world shot. To my eyes anyways the 90D looks about a stop worse.

My problem with the studio test images is they are shot in scenarios that you wouldnt actually need to use such a high ISO. So for example shooting their test image at ISO 3200 when it is plenty bright out that you could have used ISO 400. In the field you of course always use the lowest ISO to achieve the image you are after. For me and with birds you inevitably wind up flirting with slow shutter speeds to keep the ISO down. Thats why I did these tests at the very end of the day in dim light. What I believe to be a more real world scenario.

But everyone is free to make their own conclusions!

Cheers guys!

Glenn
Thanks for replying Glenn. I don't understand how a series of shots under carefully controlled conditions by dpr can be so wrong compared with yours. Here is a series from the dpr comparator at iso 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400 and 512,000 for the 90D on the left and 7DII on the right. The noise levels look pretty similar to me at each iso and you can see what a stop difference in iso makes
iso400_Raw.png
iso800_raw.png
iso1600_Raw.png
iso3200_Raw.png
iso6400_Raw.png
iso51200_Raw.png
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

Joules

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2017
323
248
Hamburg, Germany
for example shooting their test image at ISO 3200 when it is plenty bright out that you could have used ISO 400. In the field you of course always use the lowest ISO to achieve the image you are after.
A lower ISO value doesn't correspond to less noise. If you don't get the desired brightness straight out of the camera but have to increase it in post, you would be better off to use a higher ISO in camera and not adjust in post. So comparing it at the same, high brightness is a legitimate approach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

Glenn Bartley

EOS 80D
Jul 2, 2014
108
58
www.glennbartley.com
A lower ISO value doesn't correspond to less noise. If you don't get the desired brightness straight out of the camera but have to increase it in post, you would be better off to use a higher ISO in camera and not adjust in post. So comparing it at the same, high brightness is a legitimate approach.
As a professional wildlife photographer I just go by what I see and what my experiences are in the real world settings I encounter.

But I'm sure many will value your insights.

Cheers!
 

candc

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 22, 2013
1,264
6
Wautoma, WI USA.
i have been using the camera and i agree with most of your points. especially the disappointing interface. no 2 button backfocus, no using wheel to ev comp in manual, no drive, af, focus mode display in viewfinder. no stop on the mode dial.

so far i have been using it on perched birds and it is great for that.