Do you think the 90D is superior to the 7DII?

Ah-Keong

EOS 80D
Dec 1, 2016
179
11
Other than IQ at low ISO settings, say below ISO 1000.
Don't think 90D is superior to the 7Dii.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,745
3,074
Other than IQ at low ISO settings, say below ISO 1000.
Don't think 90D is superior to the 7Dii.
Don't you think having a 32Mpx sensor rather than 20Mpx is an advantage? That gives 26% more reach and 60% more pixels on target, which is something most wild-life and bird photographers want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ah-Keong

Ah-Keong

EOS 80D
Dec 1, 2016
179
11
Don't you think having a 32Mpx sensor rather than 20Mpx is an advantage? That gives 26% more reach and 60% more pixels on target, which is something most wild-life and bird photographers want.
I agree to a certain extent but with the pixel density that comes along with the 32Mpx, I believe the IQ for the low light/ high ISO for the 20Mpx would be slightly higher unless the 90D 32-Mpx sensor is developed with some kind of new tech (super-BSI CMOS, etc) sensor ?

I was hoping that the 90D would come with the latest patented Quad-Pixel CMOS AF sensor instead of the Dual-Pixel CMOS AF....
Maybe the " 1DXiii " then....
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,347
741
I agree to a certain extent but with the pixel density that comes along with the 32Mpx, I believe the IQ for the low light/ high ISO for the 20Mpx would be slightly higher unless the 90D 32-Mpx sensor is developed with some kind of new tech (super-BSI CMOS, etc) sensor ?
For the same display size, the low-light IQ of a 20Mpx sensor should be slightly lower, because its shot noise occupies a slightly narrower spatial frequency band.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ah-Keong

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
990
484
For the same display size, the low-light IQ of a 20Mpx sensor should be slightly lower, because its shot noise occupies a slightly narrower spatial frequency band.
Not when you crop the 32 MP sensor to 20 MP, making the imaging area smaller than the APS-C area of the 20MP sensor.
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,347
741
Not when you crop the 32 MP sensor to 20 MP, making the imaging area smaller than the APS-C area of the 20MP sensor.
That assumes that you need to crop an image from a higher-resolution APS-C sensor, but for some magical reason wouldn't need to crop an image of the same scene from a lower-resolution APS-C sensor. Not a practical scenario.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
990
484
That assumes that you need to crop an image from a higher-resolution APS-C sensor, but for some magical reason wouldn't need to crop an image of the same scene from a lower-resolution APS-C sensor. Not a practical scenario.
That's exactly what AlanF's comment was talking about. The higher resolution APS-C gives the user the option to crop more and get the same final resolution. Ah-Keong responded to AlanF's comment. You then responded to Ah-keong's response to AlanF's comment. So yes, that assumption is a valid one in the context of this conversation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ah-Keong

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,347
741
That's exactly what AlanF's comment was talking about. The higher resolution APS-C gives the user the option to crop more and get the same final resolution.
...but for a different image, with more of the subject and less of the background in frame.

If you want to compare it to the same image of the lower-resolution sensor, you need to crop equally and then upsample/downsample both crops to the same final bitmap size.
 
May 1, 2018
5
2
Florida
While all of the technical speak of pixel size, sensor resolution etc. is helpful, for me? If the camera can't lock focus reliably in ovf, its a no-go. I've read a lot of talk on how wonderful the af is in the 90D with live view, I dont shoot in live view, never have and never will. For me it is not practical or possible. When I mount a 100-400 lens to the the front of a camera and am following BIF or other bird movement? Live view is not remotely possible. Im an 'old dog' and dont like new tricks that make the enjoyment of shooting BIF change into a physical endurance task....The 7Dii is still the camera for me at the end of the day. Maybe in the future they'll offer a 7Diii....
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,745
3,074
While all of the technical speak of pixel size, sensor resolution etc. is helpful, for me? If the camera can't lock focus reliably in ovf, its a no-go. I've read a lot of talk on how wonderful the af is in the 90D with live view, I dont shoot in live view, never have and never will. For me it is not practical or possible. When I mount a 100-400 lens to the the front of a camera and am following BIF or other bird movement? Live view is not remotely possible. Im an 'old dog' and dont like new tricks that make the enjoyment of shooting BIF change into a physical endurance task....The 7Dii is still the camera for me at the end of the day. Maybe in the future they'll offer a 7Diii....
The AF via the OVF of the 90D is good. I have posted examples of BIF using the 100-400mm II on the 90D in the thread https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/eos-90d-hands-on-review.37589/ and in the Birds in Flight thread. I used to use the7DII and found it excellent for BIF, it's difficult for me to recall precisely the performance of the 7DII relative to the 90D, but I am happy with the 90D.
Using mirrorless AF is often different from from the way we use AF for bird photography. Mirrorless can be much better at sticking to a large moving subject once it has locked on. But, for bird photography we need the AF to lock on fast and then we pan to keep the bird in the centre of the frame, and the OVF AF locks on faster than mirrorless. I don't think some of the so-called expert reviewers realise this.

By the way, there were lots of complaints posted in the early days about the AF on the 7DII being weak, but I was always very happy with it.
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
990
484
...but for a different image, with more of the subject and less of the background in frame.

If you want to compare it to the same image of the lower-resolution sensor, you need to crop equally and then upsample/downsample both crops to the same final bitmap size.
The entire point of more pixels occupying the same amount of sensor area for birders is to be able to get a different picture with the subject occupying more of the total frame in the final image. You're insisting on applying a standard that they don't want for that application. They want to be able to change the picture.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
990
484
The AF via the OVF of the 90D is good. I have posted examples of BIF using the 100-400mm II on the 90D in the thread https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/eos-90d-hands-on-review.37589/ and in the Birds in Flight thread. I used to use the7DII and found it excellent for BIF, it's difficult for me to recall precisely the performance of the 7DII relative to the 90D, but I am happy with the 90D.
Using mirrorless AF is often different from from the way we use AF for bird photography. Mirrorless can be much better at sticking to a large moving subject once it has locked on. But, for bird photography we need the AF to lock on fast and then we pan to keep the bird in the centre of the frame, and the OVF AF locks on faster than mirrorless. I don't think some of the so-called expert reviewers realise this.

By the way, there were lots of complaints posted in the early days about the AF on the 7DII being weak, but I was always very happy with it.
I think most of the complaints about the AF system in the 7D Mark II were due to users who didn't bother taking the time to learn how to tell it what you want it to do. It's a sophisticated tool, but it is also a tool that gives the user control without much in the way of preventing the user from messing up. It's kind of like a sports car with very stiff suspension and a non-synchronized manual transmission. In the right hands it can turn the fastest laps, but in the wrong hands it won't make it through the first curve.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
990
484
While all of the technical speak of pixel size, sensor resolution etc. is helpful, for me? If the camera can't lock focus reliably in ovf, its a no-go. I've read a lot of talk on how wonderful the af is in the 90D with live view, I dont shoot in live view, never have and never will. For me it is not practical or possible. When I mount a 100-400 lens to the the front of a camera and am following BIF or other bird movement? Live view is not remotely possible. Im an 'old dog' and dont like new tricks that make the enjoyment of shooting BIF change into a physical endurance task....The 7Dii is still the camera for me at the end of the day. Maybe in the future they'll offer a 7Diii....
The review at DP Review is a joke with regard to the 90D's OVF AF system. Most of it was written based on using the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM that is optimized more for video shooting than stills. From all reports I've seen by people who actually know their way around a Canon AF system, the 90D is a small improvement over the 80D using OVF AF. The big difference is that the 90D's LV AF is even better than OVF AF, which was definitely not the case with the 80D, 7D Mark II, and other upper tier Canon DSLRs.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,347
741
The entire point of more pixels occupying the same amount of sensor area for birders is to be able to get a different picture with the subject occupying more of the total frame in the final image.
No. It's to get a "picture with the subject occupying more of the total frame in the final image" with an acceptable image quality. You can get the same picture from a lower resolution sensor, but its image quality will be lower (in this case, worse than acceptable).
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,745
3,074
The review at DP Review is a joke with regard to the 90D's OVF AF system. Most of it was written based on using the EF 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM that is optimized more for video shooting than stills. From all reports I've seen by people who actually know their way around a Canon AF system, the 90D is a small improvement over the 80D using OVF AF. The big difference is that the 90D's LV AF is even better than OVF AF, which was definitely not the case with the 80D, 7D Mark II, and other upper tier Canon DSLRs.
I have been roped into taking some portraits and have been testing the 90D with a 50/1.8 STM. The eye AF works a treat in LV. The 90D seems so have some of the best of both worlds, combining excellent mirrorless AF with rather good PD via OVF. The 90D does have some very nice features that have been developed since its tougher older brother was born.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
990
484
No. It's to get a "picture with the subject occupying more of the total frame in the final image" with an acceptable image quality. You can get the same picture from a lower resolution sensor, but its image quality will be lower (in this case, worse than acceptable).
Which pretty much what you have previously been disagreeing with every time i said it. Gld to see you finally see it my way.