ChrisMak
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Canon 90D results | |
With the 1.4 extender at 560mm f5.6, IQ is very good, but at 800mm f8 I also see loss of fine detail. F8 is no longer really reliable AF wise with any DSLR, although on my Sony A7RII, it is still very accurate. But IQ even with accurate AF never reaches 1.4TC level. Diffraction will only make that more obvious on the 90D or M6II, when using the 2.0TC, but f5.6 should do very well. FWIW, I prefer the IQ of the 7DII with 400DOII+1.4TC to the IQ of the Sony A7RII. Colors are more natural, but that will be because lens and sensor are better matched.
To get RobAmy's results with the 2.0ex at 800mm on the 90D, one will has to upgrade from the 400DOII to the 400/2.8, which will add some weight and size, but will seriously lighten your wallet...!
palombian1 wrote:
ChrisMak wrote:
RobAmy wrote:
ilkka_nissila wrote:
> BTW regarding those who plan to use the 90D instead of a TC I wonder if they understand that the 90D is basically just a 1.14x TC and NOT a 1.4x one.
Well, it depends on what you compare to. Comparing the 90D with the 1DX II, the 90D gives a similar number of pixels per subject as the 1DX II with a 2X teleconverter. So, when evaluating AF, image quality and high ISO performance, the question to ask might be: how do the pixel-level results (detail, noise, focus) of the 90D (without TC) compare to 1D X II with 2X?
You said it perfectly, my files with the 1dx Mark II hold up better with the 2x in my opinion. The 90D is a nice little camera at the price point vs the 1dxII but I prefer the 1dxII for the overall look.
These large FF sensors are as yet unbeatable. I use to be an Olympus shooter with 4/3 and what I took away from that, is that although theoretically, a high density small sensor with a lighter, shorter lens can replace a lower density large sensor with a larger, heavier lens, in practice this does not hold.
That is why I feel less urgency to get the higher mp bodies at each release, and am more inclined to save up for a longer and brighter lens, and speaking of such:
The real star here seems to be the 400mm f2.8. Is it possibly the best lens Canon ever made?
I have plans to save up for a Canon 500/4II to add to the super agile, fast and portable 400DOII, but would I possibly be even better off getting this newest 400/2.8? I already have 1.4 and 2.0 extenders, and would get to 800mm f5.6.
800mm f8 with the DOII just loses too much light i.m.o. and especially with the 1.6 crop sensor, loses clarity. 560mm f5.6 with the 1.4TC is perfect for me though, but reach is just a bit too short for many situations.
Any thoughts on that?
The image quality of the 400DOII on the 7DII is very good with the 1.4, but I seldom have good shots with the 2.0 extender, while I see many photos made with FF bodies having no problem with the 2.0.
I suppose the resolution becomes too low for the smaller pixels of the 7DII. Or is diffraction at work ?
If this is true I am afraid it will be worse on a 32 mpx sensor with still smaller pixels and diffraction starting at f:5.2.
|
