So for proper comparisons you'd want to compare a 1.4x R3 to an R5 and it would be interesting to see how IQ hit from the TC compares to the hit in quality from smaller pixels. If they end up being similar quality then the R5 has the framing advantage, but I'd argue the R3 has the AF advantage because the part of the image you're trying to use for focus is twice as large making it easier to detect contrast. I would definitely also point out if you're an R3 user and you fear going to an R5 would be like taking the 2x TC hit, it's not as dramatic of a change as that. You'd want to compare R3 + 2x TC versus R5 + 1.4. That's where things would become really interesting.
Thank you! You cannot really compare them like this as they are both FF cameras and you frame your subjects the same way with them. If I need a 2x extender to fill the frame on the R5, I'll use it, and if I want to shoot wider to show more of a scene, I'll shoot the same way with a lower MP camera.
Prior to shooting with an R5, I shot birds with a 7D2. In theory, it puts slightly more pixels on a bird than an R5. In practice, however, I shoot with a 600 on my R5 where I used a 400 on the 7D2. For distant birds, 7D2 never worked well with a 2x and R5 is totally fine with it so I end up with more pixels per duck in all shooting scenarios. My framing is the same but R5 has more MP.
EDIT: I would add that comparing the R5 @ 600 to the 7D2 @ 400 isn't a fair fight. The reason is that regardless of the type of camera it's on, the EF lens image circle is the same. So when you mount it on a crop body, a bunch of the light being captured by the sensor is just hitting dead space in the camera body. On full frame there are sensors there to pick up that light and do something with it. That said, if you used the 600 on both bodies, the amount of light per pixel would be roughly the same since the pixels are around the same size. Then when you crop in post, you're just dis guarding all of those unused pixels on your R5 that aren't present on the 7D2. So in reality if they were the same generation sensor they would have almost the same output, but the hat tip goes to the full frame body because of the wider FOV which makes subject acquisition a lot easier. Obviously the R5 being newer the sensor is better per pixel and is still going to win.
If you can fill the frame, yes the R5 will put more pixels on the subject than the R3 does. But any time you crop in post you are lowering the resolution of the final image. The point isn't so much that you can't get a higher output from the R5, you always can. The point is that if you deemed the R5 output satisfactory enough to crop versus using another extender, with the same frame on the R3 you might not feel the same way. So to make up for that you can use more zoom which means the final output should still be the same, it just requires more effort to get the shot.
Don't get me wrong I'm advocating there is a reason for going for additional MP, but the argument can be made that if you're cropping the sensor then someone will state you should have used more lens because you're throwing away light. There is always a balance to that equation. I could capture the same final output with 100MP camera on 400mm and have the same frame with the same MP, and have an easier time doing it. But you certainly could argue I'm throwing away some image quality compared to your setup because I discarded a huge portion of the light that was captured. You'd be right, but it would also be accurate for a comparison of R5 vs R3.
So for proper comparisons you'd want to compare a 1.4x R3 to an R5 and it would be interesting to see how IQ hit from the TC compares to the hit in quality from smaller pixels. If they end up being similar quality then the R5 has the framing advantage, but I'd argue the R3 has the AF advantage because the part of the image you're trying to use for focus is twice as large making it easier to detect contrast. I would definitely also point out if you're an R3 user and you fear going to an R5 would be like taking the 2x TC hit, it's not as dramatic of a change as that. You'd want to compare R3 + 2x TC versus R5 + 1.4. That's where things would become really interesting.
Thank you! You cannot really compare them like this as they are both FF cameras and you frame your subjects the same way with them. If I need a 2x extender to fill the frame on the R5, I'll use it, and if I want to shoot wider to show more of a scene, I'll shoot the same way with a lower MP camera.
Prior to shooting with an R5, I shot birds with a 7D2. In theory, it puts slightly more pixels on a bird than an R5. In practice, however, I shoot with a 600 on my R5 where I used a 400 on the 7D2. For distant birds, 7D2 never worked well with a 2x and R5 is totally fine with it so I end up with more pixels per duck in all shooting scenarios. My framing is the same but R5 has more MP.
If you can fill the frame, yes the R5 will put more pixels on the subject than the R3 does. But any time you crop in post you are lowering the resolution of the final image. The point isn't so much that you can't get a higher output from the R5, you always can. The point is that if you deemed the R5 output satisfactory enough to crop versus using another extender, with the same frame on the R3 you might not feel the same way. So to make up for that you can use more zoom which means the final output should still be the same, it just requires more effort to get the shot.
Don't get me wrong I'm advocating there is a reason for going for additional MP, but the argument can be made that if you're cropping the sensor then someone will state you should have used more lens because you're throwing away light. There is always a balance to that equation. I could capture the same final output with 100MP camera on 400mm and have the same frame with the same MP, and have an easier time doing it. But you certainly could argue I'm throwing away some image quality compared to your setup because I discarded a huge portion of the light that was captured. You'd be right, but it would also be accurate for a comparison of R5 vs R3.
Apr 11, 2022 at 11:00 AM
Previous versions of bman212121's message #15914659 « Red-winged Blackbirds in Flight (Mostly) »
