dtaylor said:señor Steve said:This thread seems surreal. Unless shooting in the studio under carefully conceived lighting, good post production and printing small, how can so many people say the iq difference between a rebel and a mkiii is similar, not to mention indiscernible?
Because we've taken a wide range of shots under a wide range of lighting conditions, and printed them to large sizes. And at ISO 100-800 the differences just aren't there.
Above 800? Absolutely. Though I would say the 18 MP sensor is good through 3200, the FF sensor shows a greater and greater advantage with each stop past 800. I consider the 5D3 probably the best low light DSLR made. (Haven't tried a 6D.) But if you're not shooting at those ISOs, it just doesn't show an IQ advantage over the many other sensors out there. (Canon's 18 MP APS-C; 5D2 sensor; several Nikon / Sony sensors).
I don't think that once you shoot the mkiii in the real world, you would ever choose to shoot the rebel.
He just told you he observed the opposite. Should he believe you, or his lying eyes?
Again I'll say that, given the trip, he should keep the 5D3 unless he is short a critical lens and trading the 5D3 for a 7D gets him the lens. It sounds like that's probably not the case, though his kit is weak on the telephoto end. At the bare minimum he's going to need a 1.4x for the 70-200. And I lean towards the comment that even that won't be enough, and a 100-400 will be the bare minimum for wildlife in this scenario.
A couple of days shooting who knows what (the house cat and such) does not constitute the real world to which I was referring. Especially not something as challenging and exciting as his upcoming trip. I agree on all other points, especially lenses.
Upvote
0