5dIII vs 7D shoot out for bird photography at 600mm and cropping
- Thread starter AlanF
- Start date
The 5D III is a model generation newer...
Also, on the 7D examples, you have focus issues in the first one of the great blue heron, and motion blur in the second, it appears....
Also, on the 7D examples, you have focus issues in the first one of the great blue heron, and motion blur in the second, it appears....
Upvote
0
Misunderstandings always build up in threads because people come in at the end without reading the earlier posts. All of these images are for quick comparisons done under the normal conditions I, and many others, would use for amateur bird photography. The results are of use to me and for some others who may be similarly wondering whether to keep their 7D now they have a 5DIII or whether they should sell their old 7D to buy a new camera. The conditions are not what the perfect ones that TDP etc use for a scientific comparisons, but sub-optimal conditions used in every day life.
1. The title says exactly what is going on – cropped images for bird photography at 600mm for a 5DIII vs 7D. It is not a scientific survey of FF vs crop under all conditions for all lenses and all bodies. The 7D is not a representative of all crop cameras. Its sharpness will depend on the sensor’s characteristics - for example its AA filter. The comparison is done for heavy crops from both systems to the same size, not for landscapes etc.
2. I said at the beginning that the photos were not very good. These photos are for comparison purposes under the same set of conditions, not choosing the best photos taken on a particular camera under optimal conditions. They are not the highly selected best ones taken, of which one is proud - I have plenty of fine keepers from both cameras. So no snide comments please about how you would have discarded them immediately.
3. Regarding focus problems. The lenses have all been AFMA-ed with the bodies using both Focal and sloping ruler tests. There are issues with the AF of the 7D – many posters find that it is erratic. Motion blur is unlikely – the one of the grey (not blue) heron is representative of a group of shots that were all similar, taken at 1/1250 s and 4 stops of IS, with the camera still and resting on a ledge.
If I want to take a photo of the moon, then my 600mm on my 7D with a good tripod etc will out-resolve the same lens on my 5DIII. But, what I wanted to know the answer for is how much of the advantage of crop on the 7D is realised in 90% of what I take. The answer is that the 5DIII is better. But, the situation might change with a 7DII. And then a 5DIIII might reverse it.
1. The title says exactly what is going on – cropped images for bird photography at 600mm for a 5DIII vs 7D. It is not a scientific survey of FF vs crop under all conditions for all lenses and all bodies. The 7D is not a representative of all crop cameras. Its sharpness will depend on the sensor’s characteristics - for example its AA filter. The comparison is done for heavy crops from both systems to the same size, not for landscapes etc.
2. I said at the beginning that the photos were not very good. These photos are for comparison purposes under the same set of conditions, not choosing the best photos taken on a particular camera under optimal conditions. They are not the highly selected best ones taken, of which one is proud - I have plenty of fine keepers from both cameras. So no snide comments please about how you would have discarded them immediately.
3. Regarding focus problems. The lenses have all been AFMA-ed with the bodies using both Focal and sloping ruler tests. There are issues with the AF of the 7D – many posters find that it is erratic. Motion blur is unlikely – the one of the grey (not blue) heron is representative of a group of shots that were all similar, taken at 1/1250 s and 4 stops of IS, with the camera still and resting on a ledge.
If I want to take a photo of the moon, then my 600mm on my 7D with a good tripod etc will out-resolve the same lens on my 5DIII. But, what I wanted to know the answer for is how much of the advantage of crop on the 7D is realised in 90% of what I take. The answer is that the 5DIII is better. But, the situation might change with a 7DII. And then a 5DIIII might reverse it.
Upvote
0
AlanF said:
That exactly is the point ... isn't it? To see the IQ differences in both cameras, you need to test the limits to see which one does better.
Shoot the same subject in good light at ISO 100 and I very much doubt whether you will see much difference between FF and an
APS-C. It's only when the lighting gets a bit murky that the 5D3 pulls away.
Upvote
0
Thanks for posting Alan. I am one of the people in a similar boat. I ran my own tests, not quite as good as yours and ultimately concluded that cropping the 5DIII was good enough compared to the 7D.
Both are excellent cameras. But as a hobbyist, I haven't yet found justification for keeping two dSLRs. I am in the process of selling my 7D. My "body kit" will be the 5DIII and EOS-M.
Both are excellent cameras. But as a hobbyist, I haven't yet found justification for keeping two dSLRs. I am in the process of selling my 7D. My "body kit" will be the 5DIII and EOS-M.
Upvote
0
AlanF said:
Hi Alan,
First and foremost, thank you for the images and comparisons. Many (hopefully) of us understand that it is a quick test and as such, the images will not be perfect.... but then, that's kind of the purpose of the test.... if you had posted perfect images taken with both cameras the comparison would have been worthless.
I do not believe in absolute statements about this camera against that camera as there will always be specific cases to the contrary, but no matter how hard people argue those specific cases the generalities remain.
In general, the bigger the sensor the better the camera performs in low light.
In general, FF outperforms APS-C for wide angle photography.
In general, on distant object photography UNDER GOOD LIGHT APS-C will outperform FF
In general, FF is more tolerant of lens resolution limitations than APS-C
How it comes together for any individual is a mix of all those factors and a lot more.... but from what I can gather of your pictures they seem within what those rules of thumb would suggest.
Upvote
0
J.R. said:AlanF said:
That exactly is the point ... isn't it? To see the IQ differences in both cameras, you need to test the limits to see which one does better.
Shoot the same subject in good light at ISO 100 and I very much doubt whether you will see much difference between FF and an
iso 100 with a 600mm telephoto lens is not often suitable for bird photography. iso 100 would mean restricting our photography to just when we had well sunlit, stationary birds. For birds in flight and much of the time we need fast speeds (near dawn and dusk, shade, rapidly moving subjects, camera shake when hand holding). The iso 640 that was used is not excessive for the 7D.
Upvote
0
candc said:
For wide there is no comparison, DSLR all the way... plus (for me anyway) as a canoist I find that water and polarizing filters go hand-in-hand.
Upvote
0
Don
I agree with you 100% about the SX50 as well as your comments about FF vs crop. There is a good review of the SX50 vs the Sony rival HX300, which the SX50 wins - http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Cyber-shot_HX300/index.shtml
When Canon introduces faster AF with a dual pixel sensor, the SX50 will be awesome.
Alan
I agree with you 100% about the SX50 as well as your comments about FF vs crop. There is a good review of the SX50 vs the Sony rival HX300, which the SX50 wins - http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Cyber-shot_HX300/index.shtml
When Canon introduces faster AF with a dual pixel sensor, the SX50 will be awesome.
Alan
Upvote
0
When all the gear heads were comparing the 7D to the 5D II a few years ago the end result found is that the 7D files and photo's could be PP to a point that you would have a slightly better photo than the 5D II when you were focal length limited.
The 7D had a superior AF system however, and this trumped the 5D II for shots that were moving and not focal length limited. (BIF)
With the 5D III the AF system advantage is gone, when and if a 7D II is released this debate will be open again.
Three to four years ago when everyone was making these comparisons you could have gotten a decent FF vs Crop debate going. It seems those days are past now.
The 7D had a superior AF system however, and this trumped the 5D II for shots that were moving and not focal length limited. (BIF)
With the 5D III the AF system advantage is gone, when and if a 7D II is released this debate will be open again.
Three to four years ago when everyone was making these comparisons you could have gotten a decent FF vs Crop debate going. It seems those days are past now.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
takesome1 said:
…and shooting in good light. At higher ISOs, the 5DII would win. Below are a two sets of 'real world' images shown at 100%. On the left is the 7D and on the right is the 1D X. The first set are both at ISO 1600, the second set is ISO 3200 for the 7D and ISO 25600 for the 1D X.
Attachments
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
The ISO and noise comparison wouldn't be as drastic an improvement with the 5D III.
With the new AF system in the 5D III I couldn't think of any reason to keep the 7D over it either.
Maybe we could get some debate on this thread if we were comparing the 7D vs the 6D.
Upvote
0
Hi
Interesting thread. I'm also wondering about IQ after cropping, which is essential for my wildlife photography.
And I really wonder if 5d3 can give me something that 1D4 can't vs 7D.
I started a similar thread at dpreview forum a few days ago in the 1d, 5d forum. The best answer I got was the link to this thread
I have a 7D and a 1D4. My findings: Without much cropping the IQ from 1D4 is better, of course. However, in reach limited situations where heavy cropping is needed, I find 7D to give better IQ up to about 3200 iso. After that 1D4 gives more details and less noise.
Here is a comparison I did:
Test setup:
7D+300mm+2xtc @ f6.3 vs 1D4+300mm+2xtc @f6.3
Distance to target about 30 feet, Live view AF, 10 sec time delay, Raw, ACR, No NR.
7D image resampled down to 1D4 resolution.
100% crops.
iso 1600. (Could'nt post iso 800 and iso 3200 due to size limit..., if anyone interested I can post separately)
1D4 left, 7D right
Interesting thread. I'm also wondering about IQ after cropping, which is essential for my wildlife photography.
And I really wonder if 5d3 can give me something that 1D4 can't vs 7D.
I started a similar thread at dpreview forum a few days ago in the 1d, 5d forum. The best answer I got was the link to this thread
I have a 7D and a 1D4. My findings: Without much cropping the IQ from 1D4 is better, of course. However, in reach limited situations where heavy cropping is needed, I find 7D to give better IQ up to about 3200 iso. After that 1D4 gives more details and less noise.
Here is a comparison I did:
Test setup:
7D+300mm+2xtc @ f6.3 vs 1D4+300mm+2xtc @f6.3
Distance to target about 30 feet, Live view AF, 10 sec time delay, Raw, ACR, No NR.
7D image resampled down to 1D4 resolution.
100% crops.
iso 1600. (Could'nt post iso 800 and iso 3200 due to size limit..., if anyone interested I can post separately)
1D4 left, 7D right
Attachments
Upvote
0
AlanF said:
I am going to get one for boundary waters trips where we take titanium sporks to save weight. An 8 lb tele is just not practical there and this camera looks like the best "all in one" solution, maybe I can get some nice moose pics then.
Thanks for the input
ps. its $349 at buydig, i just paid $180 for a b&w 105mm mrc clear filter. jeez margie!
Upvote
0
Similar threads
