Canon 5Dc as an entry for FF? yay or nay?
- Thread starter Synomis192
- Start date
- Status
sagittariansrock said:
It's not that they're sharper, every lens only resolves so many line-pairs per mm and that's it, it's that on FF they appear sharper.
Take an 18MP sensor, it's got 3456 pixels high.
On aps-c (7D etc), that's 3456 pixels in 16mm, pixels are 4.6 microns apart, 216 pixels per mm
On FF (ie 1DX), that's 3456 pixels in 24mm, pixels are 6.9 microns apart, 144 pixels per mm
Maximum (theoretical) resolution should be 1 line-pair in 2 pixels (read here as to why this is unrealistic in the real world).
Anyway, take a lens that can resolve 72 lppmm, and put it on a 1DX. Take an image of a test chart that has 72lppmm. In a perfect world, that would give you an image that contains 72lppmm.
Take that same lens, and put it on a 7D. The lens can only resolve 72lppmm, but the sensor can see up to 108lppmm.
Blow both of those images up to the same size. The 1DX image contains 72*24 = 1728 line pairs. The 7D image only contains 72*16 = 1152 line pairs (and probably some aliasing and artefacts too). So the same lens on the 1DX looks 'sharper', as it were, it's resolving the maximum that the sensor can handle, whereas on the 7D it's only resolving a lower number.
All of that is theoretical, of course, and a lot of things make those numbers impossible (like Bayer and AA filters, read the above link). Counteracting this, there's also the fact that most lenses get softer near the FF corners, which just doesn't show up on APS-C sensors, so take that into consideration too...
Upvote
0
RLPhoto said:
I think I did... infact I was looking at some of my older shots and I have visible grain in the well exposed areas (100% views ofcourse) at ISO 640... I deleted a bunch of older stuff yesterday and I saw one that showed this phenomenon. I don't think I had a defective body... it took amazing shots at below 400 ISO.
I just expected it to trounce the T2i in 1600-3200, and it did not seem to do so...
I did love the Viewfinder though compared to the T2i. I like the Auto ISO on the T2i, makes shooting on the go so much easier.
Upvote
0
I've only taken my 5D out in low light a few times since I bought it a few weeks ago. My camera shows banding at 3200, and some noise (with no obvious patterning) at 1600 and 800. The 800 and 1600 noise is pretty easily correctable in DPP (I always shoot raw), but the 3200 requires the slider to move further than I'm accustommed to and results in blurring of details easily visible at 50%. Overall, I'm very happy with my 5Dc. I did miss the extra 'reach' of my previous cameras (XT, XTi, 30D) when I went to a baseball game last week (front row, right field line, ~50 ft beyond 1st base), but I can always buy longer lenses in the future, or crop when necessary.
Upvote
0
Actually Ramon, I would not call it excessive. Overall it was not bad, many of the 3200 shots i took were usable after NR albeit at the cost of some sharpness. I think it was a fine Camera.... its just unfair to compare it to the 5diii... which I sometimes mentally do.
I have not seen banding unless I lift dark/ under-exposed areas even at 3200 and if I shot to the right, it was better ...
I have not seen banding unless I lift dark/ under-exposed areas even at 3200 and if I shot to the right, it was better ...
Upvote
0
KyleSTL said:
Glad to know that RAW files are handled well using PP. I still don't know how to use NR setting correctly though, is there a certain value that you use when you use NR levels?
Interestingly enough, I was reading your gear list on your sig, you have the same lenses. On a side note, how well does the 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6 work on a 5Dc. I think that's my go to EF lens for now once I upgrade that is.
Upvote
0
- Status