Ralph Conway wrote:
Interesting for me is that after going FF it is not possible to step back in IQ and become happy with a crop camera again. Sorry, but this is MY truth. If 7D II gets to the actual FF level in IQ it might be a competitor for some weeks or maybe month. After it the new sensor tech will be ported to FF and crop will stay back again. So 7D II will or might be a nice camera to play with, but it will not become a competitor to 6D II, 5D IV or 1D X MK II, except for those who need the 1.6 formfactor because they not can or do not want to pay for the large lenses....Show more →
Many of us started with FF and stayed with it for everything but reach. Over the years, I've had the 20, 30D ,450 Rebel, 50D, 7D and 70D. Other that a few shots of the GPS for clock sync, I've only used them with lenses 500mm+
Cost is not really the issue. After having a 600/4 (or perhaps a 800/5.6) the only practical option is smaller pixels, which just happen to be present in the crop bodies. If there were a 50+MP FF body I'd not need any 70D/7D II, etc.
Ralph Conway wrote:
Interesting for me is that after going FF it is not possible to step back in IQ and become happy with a crop camera again. Sorry, but this is MY truth. If 7D II gets to the actual FF level in IQ it might be a competitor for some weeks or maybe month. After it the new sensor tech will be ported to FF and crop will stay back again. So 7D II will or might be a nice camera to play with, but it will not become a competitor to 6D II, 5D IV or 1D X MK II, except for those who need the 1.6 formfactor because they not can or do not want to pay for the large lenses.
we all know that for you the 6D is the holy grail of Canon cameras...there is no need to point that any further
Still I am curious how do you measure IQ between bodies and how is a crop camera a step backwards, when compared to a full frame?
Just because the bokeh isn't that nice anymore, or the FL changes, that means that the crop camera is a big bad wolf? and the full frame camera is Little Red Riding Hood ?
I understand that for some people , photography (or image quality for that matter) is all about either sharpness, or pleasant bokeh....and I pity them...
I ve been shooting wildlife & birds for 1-2 years with a FF (5D) and a manual 300m f4.5 lens (Tair).
I was thinking of upgrading to either a 6D or 5D3 lately (and I might finally do so) and also get a 400 5.6L, but I cannot neglect the advantage of the crop factor 1.6x offers for this type of photography. And a 7D II might just do the trick. (not to mention speed/accuracy of the AF, as compared to 5D/5D2/6D)
I am disappointed that Canon dropped their APS-H line of cameras...
adrianb wrote:
...Still I am curious how do you measure IQ between bodies and how is a crop camera a step backwards, when compared to a full frame?...
One typical difference is the higher noise of the crop sensor camera, when viewing "full image" photos at a common display size, say 1500px x 1000px on a high res monitor, or 8" x 12" prints. This is partly because the crop body image requires more magnification to reach the common display size than does the full frame image, and partly because the higher density crop factor sensors invariably have higher 'per pixel' noise than their contemporary full frame sensors. This is even more apparent when comparing cropped images from different format-size sensor cameras.
That's not to say that crop factor cameras can't provide excellent images. They can be "the best" solution for some applications, but they do have some consistent disadvantages compared to contemporary cameras with larger sensors, not only deeper DOF (which can be an advantage).
EB-1 wrote:
If there were a 50+MP FF body I'd not need any 70D/7D II, etc.
I would agree if that FF body had an internal crop option. A big advantage to crop bodies is that you can get the high pixel density without the storage penalty of FF when you are FL limited. A potential 24MP APS-C sensor in a 7D2 will be about 60MP on a 1DX2. That's a big RAW file when you are ripping off 12FPS.
ggreene wrote:
I would agree if that FF body had an internal crop option. A big advantage to crop bodies is that you can get the high pixel density without the storage penalty of FF when you are FL limited. A potential 24MP APS-C sensor in a 7D2 will be about 60MP on a 1DX2. That's a big RAW file when you are ripping off 12FPS.
Yeah I hope is not too proud in a silly way to offer that sort of crop in addition to (or if it had to be, even instead of) the mRAW,sRAW stuff, just because Nikon offers a normal crop mode. That would be so ridiculous, but those companies are known for acting that way at times.
adrianb wrote:
we all know that for you the 6D is the holy grail of Canon cameras...there is no need to point that any further
For me there is no holy grail in (or in?) a camera. And 6D is just a tool like any body. That it gives me all I asked for (and some more I did not ask for) 2 years ago and it is affordable for me (after one year) does not mean, it is the best available solution for others.
My post did not belong to the 6D anyway. I used 5D II for 4.5 years. After I made my way thru a couple of Canon crop cameras (D60, 30D, 40D, 50D). They all where great. Next to the fact, that I do not need "reach" for my photography (I shoot portraits, street and events), it really became a problem (and still is) to step back in IQ after I went FF using a 5D and 5D II.
Still I am curious how do you measure IQ between bodies and how is a crop camera a step backwards, when compared to a full frame?
I see the difference in IQ in each shot I do. 50D was my last crop and it was a fantastic body. But comparing any image over ISO 800 (what is necessary for me very often) I can see the difference. There is no step backwards, if sharpness and cleanness are no matter for you.
Just because the bokeh isn't that nice anymore, or the FL changes, that means that the crop camera is a big bad wolf? and the full frame camera is Little Red Riding Hood ?
No big bad wolf. It is just that the bokeh isnīt that nice like it is with FF. "Little red riding hood"
I do not know that expression (- sorry, I am german). It just looks better for me.
I understand that for some people , photography (or image quality for that matter) is all about either sharpness, or pleasant bokeh....and I pity them...
I ve been shooting wildlife & birds for 1-2 years with a FF (5D) and a manual 300m f4.5 lens (Tair).
I was thinking of upgrading to either a 6D or 5D3 lately (and I might finally do so) and also get a 400 5.6L, but I cannot neglect the advantage of the crop factor 1.6x offers for this type of photography. And a 7D II might just do the trick. (not to mention speed/accuracy of the AF, as compared to 5D/5D2/6D)
I hope it will do the trick, too. It will follow up in 5D IV, 6D II.
Maybe speed, but imo you can not compare accuracy of AF in 5D, 5D II and 6D. Those are big differences. I used a 5d for 4.5 years. And I loved it. After half a year I can say AF accuracy in 6d is far above 5D/5D II. And if you get along with centerpoint AF (which I use only), it is even more accurate than 5D III.
I am disappointed that Canon dropped their APS-H line of cameras...
Me too. They should have made 1.3 the consumer standard instead.
@ Ralph: that's an insult, to say the aps-h should have become the consumer standard
IQ aside, the functionality and the way APS-H were built........ the 5/6D series have a lot yet to learn....
I remember when I first got my 1d2, I already had a 5D2........and the 1d2 amazed me more than the 5D2 (of course, not in the IQ department). That being said, the 1D2 took wonderful images.
I'd go for a 6D in a heart beat, if it wasn't for my passion for animals/wildlife.... where AF (tracking, etc) is critical.
adrianb wrote:
@ Ralph: that's an insult, to say the aps-h should have become the consumer standard
IQ aside, the functionality and the way APS-H were built........ the 5/6D series have a lot yet to learn....
I remember when I first got my 1d2, I already had a 5D2........and the 1d2 amazed me more than the 5D2 (of course, not in the IQ department). That being said, the 1D2 took wonderful images.
I'd go for a 6D in a heart beat, if it wasn't for my passion for animals/wildlife.... where AF (tracking, etc) is critical.
We do not have the luck to live in the states (in this case), Adrianb. Else I would say spend 95 $ and test the 6D:
adrianb wrote:
@ Ralph: that's an insult, to say the aps-h should have become the consumer standard
IQ aside, the functionality and the way APS-H were built........ the 5/6D series have a lot yet to learn....
I remember when I first got my 1d2, I already had a 5D2........and the 1d2 amazed me more than the 5D2 (of course, not in the IQ department). That being said, the 1D2 took wonderful images.
I'd go for a 6D in a heart beat, if it wasn't for my passion for animals/wildlife.... where AF (tracking, etc) is critical.
The 1Dx felt great in my hands. And I am pretty sure, it would meet my needs very good. But I would purchase 2 5D IIs (I do not need the framerate) or even better (I do not need the AF system) a second 6D body and invest the remaining fund in traveling around and shoot.
that's not an issue. Everybody knows at least one guy who owns one and who can borrow it perhaps a few hours, but you're probably right. When you rent one, you have more time to play with it and test it ..
What I do like about the States is the prices for photogear @ BH, compared to Europe...
5D3 for example is 3940 $ here, and in US is 3400 $...
Ralph Conway wrote:
The 1Dx felt great in my hands. And I am pretty sure, it would meet my needs very good. But I would purchase 2 5D IIs (I do not need the framerate) or even better (I do not need the AF system) a second 6D body and invest the remaining fund in traveling around and shoot.
You're mixing apples... A good combo (if you don't want 1DX) would be a 5D3 + 6D. Similar IQ, one has very good low light capavility (-3 EV), and the other top notch focus.
If it were me, I'd get a 5d3 and 6D and a lens, for the price of a 1DX
In one year the 5D III will be offered at 6D start price I guess. That might be the point when it gets interesting for me as a second body. If I do not start to shoot more sports the next couple of months.
Ralph Conway wrote:
Interesting for me is that after going FF it is not possible to step back in IQ and become happy with a crop camera again. Sorry, but this is MY truth. If 7D II gets to the actual FF level in IQ it might be a competitor for some weeks or maybe month. After it the new sensor tech will be ported to FF and crop will stay back again. So 7D II will or might be a nice camera to play with, but it will not become a competitor to 6D II, 5D IV or 1D X MK II, except for those who need the 1.6 formfactor because they not can or do not want to pay for the large lenses.
Well the current crop line matches the IQ of the original 5d, and in some cases beats it based on copy variation, and are within 1stop of iso performance of the 5d2. I can totally see the crop side matching the 5d2 in the next round.
yet another random rumor, this one tends to think the amazing new sensor stuff for the 7D2 will be mostly about much more advanced dual pixel AF (with not a peep about improved image quality)
skibum5 wrote:
yet another random rumor, this one tends to think the amazing new sensor stuff for the 7D2 will be mostly about much more advanced dual pixel AF (with not a peep about improved image quality)
Yea...I've noticed the same. Hopefully this isn't the case. Guess we'll all find out...someday....
Is the 7DII a Canon equivalent to the D7100 or is Nikon going to release a new DX model? Is the d810 it for Nikon this year? Photokina is coming and time will tell.
mdbrown9999 wrote:
Is the 7DII a Canon equivalent to the D7100 or is Nikon going to release a new DX model? Is the d810 it for Nikon this year? Photokina is coming and time will tell.
The 70D is the Canon equivalent to the D7100; the discontinued D300s is the closest thing Nikon has to the 7D.
