high iso - 6d vs. 70d

Started Jul 3, 2013 | Discussions
crazee928
Junior MemberPosts: 34
Like?
high iso - 6d vs. 70d
Jul 3, 2013

the new 70d claims to have better high iso performance - how do you guys think it'll compare to the 6d?  i got a chance to use the 6d and even at iso12800 i was blown away by how little noise there was (relative to my 20d at iso1600).  the sample images only go up to iso 3200, so i'm curious how higher iso images will look like.

i've been waiting for the 6d prices to dip a bit before i bite the bullet, and i love the range of the 24-105mm lens.  i currently have the 16-35mm lens which i'd keep if i got the 70d, but after getting a chance to use the 24-105mm lens i feel like the 16-35mm range is limiting, and it's unfortunate that there're no L lens with a comparable range for crop sensors.

Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 70D
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
inasir1971
Senior MemberPosts: 3,323Gear list
Like?
Re: high iso - 6d vs. 70d
In reply to crazee928, Jul 3, 2013

crazee928 wrote:

the new 70d claims to have better high iso performance

Where is this? The only claims I've seen are 'comparable to 60D'?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bhollis
Senior MemberPosts: 2,679Gear list
Like?
Re: high iso - 6d vs. 70d
In reply to crazee928, Jul 3, 2013

crazee928 wrote:

the new 70d claims to have better high iso performance - how do you guys think it'll compare to the 6d? i got a chance to use the 6d and even at iso12800 i was blown away by how little noise there was (relative to my 20d at iso1600). the sample images only go up to iso 3200, so i'm curious how higher iso images will look like.

i've been waiting for the 6d prices to dip a bit before i bite the bullet, and i love the range of the 24-105mm lens. i currently have the 16-35mm lens which i'd keep if i got the 70d, but after getting a chance to use the 24-105mm lens i feel like the 16-35mm range is limiting, and it's unfortunate that there're no L lens with a comparable range for crop sensors.

From what I've read, the 70D's high ISO performance will be about equal to the 60D's in raw, but better in jpeg (presumably due to better in-camera jpeg processing with the Digic 5 chip).  I doubt it will come close to the 6D.

If you want an equivalent to the 24-105L on a crop, you should be looking at the EF-S 15-85.

 bhollis's gear list:bhollis's gear list
Sony RX1R Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Sigma 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
crazee928
Junior MemberPosts: 34
Like?
Re: high iso - 6d vs. 70d
In reply to bhollis, Jul 3, 2013

ahh, maybe i missed the part about it only being better in jpeg. i've never tried the 60d, but i guess i'll just stick to FF for my next upgrade for the high iso performance. would've been nice to have AF in movie mode though

btw, i'd like to stick to L lens - i had the 17-85mm IS once and it was so much slower to focus.  ended up selling that for the 16-35mm and never looked back - until i tried the 24-105mm and realized how much i missed the extra reach

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
inasir1971
Senior MemberPosts: 3,323Gear list
Like?
Re: high iso - 6d vs. 70d
In reply to crazee928, Jul 3, 2013

There are no EF-S 'L' lenses - being a full frame EF lens seems to be a requirement for the red stripe.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Petsku
New MemberPosts: 4Gear list
Like?
Re: high iso - 6d vs. 70d
In reply to crazee928, Jul 3, 2013

crazee928 wrote:

the new 70d claims to have better high iso performance - how do you guys think it'll compare to the 6d? i got a chance to use the 6d and even at iso12800 i was blown away by how little noise there was (relative to my 20d at iso1600). the sample images only go up to iso 3200, so i'm curious how higher iso images will look like.

i've been waiting for the 6d prices to dip a bit before i bite the bullet, and i love the range of the 24-105mm lens. i currently have the 16-35mm lens which i'd keep if i got the 70d, but after getting a chance to use the 24-105mm lens i feel like the 16-35mm range is limiting, and it's unfortunate that there're no L lens with a comparable range for crop sensors.

If you read e.g. the specs of 70D, you notice that it cannot reach the level of 6D. And the difference might be large, since it indeed is more complicated to damp down noise with a smaller sensor.

 Petsku's gear list:Petsku's gear list
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
technic
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,660Gear list
Like?
Re: high iso - 6d vs. 70d
In reply to crazee928, Jul 3, 2013

6D should be about a stop better, maybe less in jpeg because of newer noise processing in 70D. I'm considering 6D instead of my current 450D, but the 70D makes me think again. It seems to have a lot of nice technology that is missing in the 6D (e.g. AF, swivel-LCD, much better Liveview), despite lower price.

Will be interesting to see 70D sensor benchmarked in DXO etc. for noise, DR and resolution given the change in pixel architecture.

 technic's gear list:technic's gear list
Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Rick Knepper
Forum ProPosts: 10,552Gear list
Like?
Samples
In reply to crazee928, Jul 3, 2013

http://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/70d/info/premier/index.html

I have no idea what ISO values were used in these samples (or if they were even made with the 70D though they do appear on Canon's 70D site) since the Japanese is quite thick here and I do not read Japanese but well...here you go.

IMO, the only reason to consider the 70D over the 6D for still photography with the shooting propensities alluded to below is money and a few splashy bells and whistles (basically faster AF in LV and an articulating screen). With today's improved resolution and sensor performance, the reach factor of APS-C is minimized for many types of photography by the ability to crop FF images liberally and retain acceptable amounts of resolution. No, cropping will not put the same resolution onto a given target as the 70D will but...we'll have to actually see some additional 70D examples to determine definitively what or if other factors may or may not conspire to reduce effective resolution.

As a landscaper, I do occasionally want reach eg the Grand Canyon, but without optical degradation eg TCs. I have given a lot of thought to the EOS M and the available adapter for EF lenses for those occasional situations which do not warrant the $1000+ expenditure for a 70D/D7100. Some of the pics with the EOS M and the 70-200 on Flickr are really quite nice. And light? and small? and much cheaper than the 70D/D7100. I'd rather pack the EOS M and the adapter than two flavors of TC.

I am not trying to compare the EOS M's overall performance with that of the 70D by any means. I am only suggesting to a FF user who might want the APS-C reach only occasionally and doesn't want to use a TC or spend $1000+ for all the features that may never get used that the EOS M is a viable 3rd option to making the decision - 6D vs 70D. For your actual situation, it appears that you already own a cropper, so you don't have to buy anything new, just don't sell your current camera when you buy the 6D. For example, you'll be able to extend the 24-105 to 168mm when you need it.

crazee928 wrote:

the new 70d claims to have better high iso performance - how do you guys think it'll compare to the 6d? i got a chance to use the 6d and even at iso12800 i was blown away by how little noise there was (relative to my 20d at iso1600). the sample images only go up to iso 3200, so i'm curious how higher iso images will look like.

i've been waiting for the 6d prices to dip a bit before i bite the bullet, and i love the range of the 24-105mm lens. i currently have the 16-35mm lens which i'd keep if i got the 70d, but after getting a chance to use the 24-105mm lens i feel like the 16-35mm range is limiting, and it's unfortunate that there're no L lens with a comparable range for crop sensors.

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy. TJ said, "Every generation needs a new revolution".

 Rick Knepper's gear list:Rick Knepper's gear list
Nikon D800E Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 6D Nikon D3X Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TTMartin
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,670Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to Rick Knepper, Jul 3, 2013

Rick Knepper wrote:

http://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/70d/info/premier/index.html

I have no idea what ISO values were used in these samples (or if they were even made with the 70D though they do appear on Canon's 70D site) since the Japanese is quite thick here and I do not read Japanese but well...here you go.

IMO, the only reason to consider the 70D over the 6D for still photography with the shooting propensities alluded to below is money and a few splashy bells and whistles (basically faster AF in LV and an articulating screen). With today's improved resolution and sensor performance, the reach factor of APS-C is minimized for many types of photography by the ability to crop FF images liberally and retain acceptable amounts of resolution. No, cropping will not put the same resolution onto a given target as the 70D will but...we'll have to actually see some additional 70D examples to determine definitively what or if other factors may or may not conspire to reduce effective resolution.

As a landscaper, I do occasionally want reach eg the Grand Canyon, but without optical degradation eg TCs. I have given a lot of thought to the EOS M and the available adapter for EF lenses for those occasional situations which do not warrant the $1000+ expenditure for a 70D/D7100. Some of the pics with the EOS M and the 70-200 on Flickr are really quite nice. And light? and small? and much cheaper than the 70D/D7100. I'd rather pack the EOS M and the adapter than two flavors of TC.

I am not trying to compare the EOS M's overall performance with that of the 70D by any means. I am only suggesting to a FF user who might want the APS-C reach only occasionally and doesn't want to use a TC or spend $1000+ for all the features that may never get used that the EOS M is a viable 3rd option to making the decision - 6D vs 70D. For your actual situation, it appears that you already own a cropper, so you don't have to buy anything new, just don't sell your current camera when you buy the 6D. For example, you'll be able to extend the 24-105 to 168mm when you need it.

There is no inherent optical degradation because of a TC. The lower apparent sharpness comes from the fact that a TC takes the image coming from the center portion of the lens and spreads it out.

When using a TC on the same lens and camera combination, the spreading out of the image makes it appear softer.

But, when using a TC on a lens with a full frame camera, instead of that lens on an APS-C camera, there is practically no difference in quality.

The TC takes that image that would have fallen on the APS-C sensor and spreads it out over the full frame sensor. It is then captured by the same number of megapixels (or more) of the full frame camera, resulting in NO practical image quality difference.

What does come into play, it that the TC also impacts the available light for the AF system, reducing its performance.

So while using an f/5.6 lens with a reporting TC on a 6D you would need to use LiveView focus, but, in that case you are really no worse off than using an EOS M.

Of course the EOS M has advantages of its own. It's small so you can take it with you when you wouldn't take your larger camera. It also acts as a backup camera in the event of failure of you primary camera, something a TC can't do.

Given the now lower price of the EOS M it does seem to be a good choice for your intended use.

 TTMartin's gear list:TTMartin's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) Canon PowerShot SD1000 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 400D Canon EOS 6D +24 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Beachcomber Joe
Contributing MemberPosts: 530Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to TTMartin, Jul 3, 2013

TTMartin wrote:

There is no inherent optical degradation because of a TC. The lower apparent sharpness comes from the fact that a TC takes the image coming from the center portion of the lens and spreads it out.

No piece of glass is perfectly transparent.  Every time you add another lens element you effect the optical quality.  There is no way around it.

But, when using a TC on a lens with a full frame camera, instead of that lens on an APS-C camera, there is practically no difference in quality.

The TC takes that image that would have fallen on the APS-C sensor and spreads it out over the full frame sensor. It is then captured by the same number of megapixels (or more) of the full frame camera, resulting in NO practical image quality difference.

My experience with my 70-200mm 2.8 II, my series III 2X converter, 7D and 6D is that there is a difference.  The significance of that difference depends on final cropping and image size.

What does come into play, it that the TC also impacts the available light for the AF system, reducing its performance.

I can't comment on this statement since the 7D and 6D are so dissimilar in AF capabilities.  What makes a huge difference with my 2X extender is the need to bump the ISO by two stops because of the light reduction.  That two stop bump negates the lower noise advantage of the FF 6D.  More noise results in less perceived sharpness.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TTMartin
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,670Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to Beachcomber Joe, Jul 3, 2013

Beachcomber Joe wrote:

TTMartin wrote:
But, when using a TC on a lens with a full frame camera, instead of that lens on an APS-C camera, there is practically no difference in quality.
The TC takes that image that would have fallen on the APS-C sensor and spreads it out over the full frame sensor. It is then captured by the same number of megapixels (or more) of the full frame camera, resulting in NO practical image quality difference.

My experience with my 70-200mm 2.8 II, my series III 2X converter, 7D and 6D is that there is a difference. The significance of that difference depends on final cropping and image size.

I tested the 6D with a 1.4X TC and the 7D without a TC and found no difference in the IQ.

Please post pictures (including the RAW files) that show the difference you say you are seeing.

I shot consecutive photos from a tripod at the same subject the 7D at ISO 100 and f/4, and the 6D at ISO 200 and f/5.6 so the actual lens aperture opening would be the same for both shots.

 TTMartin's gear list:TTMartin's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) Canon PowerShot SD1000 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 400D Canon EOS 6D +24 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Beachcomber Joe
Contributing MemberPosts: 530Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to TTMartin, Jul 3, 2013

TTMartin wrote:

I shot consecutive photos from a tripod at the same subject the 7D at ISO 100 and f/4, and the 6D at ISO 200 and f/5.6 so the actual lens aperture opening would be the same for both shots.

That is a testing methodology worthy of DXO labs.  A meaningful comparison would be done at the same ISO, shutter speed and aperture since they would be the real world limitations.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TTMartin
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,670Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to Beachcomber Joe, Jul 3, 2013

Beachcomber Joe wrote:

TTMartin wrote:

I shot consecutive photos from a tripod at the same subject the 7D at ISO 100 and f/4, and the 6D at ISO 200 and f/5.6 so the actual lens aperture opening would be the same for both shots.

That is a testing methodology worthy of DXO labs. A meaningful comparison would be done at the same ISO, shutter speed and aperture since they would be the real world limitations.

Fine that would not impact the results significantly one way or the other, please post up pictures (including a link to the RAW files) using your testing parameters.

 TTMartin's gear list:TTMartin's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) Canon PowerShot SD1000 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 400D Canon EOS 6D +24 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Rick Knepper
Forum ProPosts: 10,552Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to TTMartin, Jul 3, 2013

TTMartin wrote:

Rick Knepper wrote:

http://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/70d/info/premier/index.html

I have no idea what ISO values were used in these samples (or if they were even made with the 70D though they do appear on Canon's 70D site) since the Japanese is quite thick here and I do not read Japanese but well...here you go.

IMO, the only reason to consider the 70D over the 6D for still photography with the shooting propensities alluded to below is money and a few splashy bells and whistles (basically faster AF in LV and an articulating screen). With today's improved resolution and sensor performance, the reach factor of APS-C is minimized for many types of photography by the ability to crop FF images liberally and retain acceptable amounts of resolution. No, cropping will not put the same resolution onto a given target as the 70D will but...we'll have to actually see some additional 70D examples to determine definitively what or if other factors may or may not conspire to reduce effective resolution.

As a landscaper, I do occasionally want reach eg the Grand Canyon, but without optical degradation eg TCs. I have given a lot of thought to the EOS M and the available adapter for EF lenses for those occasional situations which do not warrant the $1000+ expenditure for a 70D/D7100. Some of the pics with the EOS M and the 70-200 on Flickr are really quite nice. And light? and small? and much cheaper than the 70D/D7100. I'd rather pack the EOS M and the adapter than two flavors of TC.

I am not trying to compare the EOS M's overall performance with that of the 70D by any means. I am only suggesting to a FF user who might want the APS-C reach only occasionally and doesn't want to use a TC or spend $1000+ for all the features that may never get used that the EOS M is a viable 3rd option to making the decision - 6D vs 70D. For your actual situation, it appears that you already own a cropper, so you don't have to buy anything new, just don't sell your current camera when you buy the 6D. For example, you'll be able to extend the 24-105 to 168mm when you need it.

There is no inherent optical degradation because of a TC. The lower apparent sharpness comes from the fact that a TC takes the image coming from the center portion of the lens and spreads it out.

When using a TC on the same lens and camera combination, the spreading out of the image makes it appear softer.

But, when using a TC on a lens with a full frame camera, instead of that lens on an APS-C camera, there is practically no difference in quality.

The TC takes that image that would have fallen on the APS-C sensor and spreads it out over the full frame sensor. It is then captured by the same number of megapixels (or more) of the full frame camera, resulting in NO practical image quality difference.

What does come into play, it that the TC also impacts the available light for the AF system, reducing its performance.

So while using an f/5.6 lens with a reporting TC on a 6D you would need to use LiveView focus, but, in that case you are really no worse off than using an EOS M.

Of course the EOS M has advantages of its own. It's small so you can take it with you when you wouldn't take your larger camera. It also acts as a backup camera in the event of failure of you primary camera, something a TC can't do.

Given the now lower price of the EOS M it does seem to be a good choice for your intended use.

Should I opt for the EOS M option, I would certainly test the various combinations before the return period expires.

The EOS M idea is on the back burner for the moment as I am absorbing the cost of a 5D3 I did not intend to buy until I happened upon a thread here on DPR last week about refurbished 5D3s and the Canon Loyalty Program. I bought a refurbished 5D3 through the Canon Loyalty Program that cost me $2375 (requires a trade-in of any old POC Canon camera one has laying around). The only downside to the sale being that I had to pay State sales tax of a couple of hundred bucks. Still put me below my Buy Signal for the 5D3 set by last years massive sell-offs during the holidays of $2599 by an eBay dealer. Twelve month warranty, free shipping and some kind of bulky-azz camera bag, also free, was thrown in.

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy. TJ said, "Every generation needs a new revolution".

 Rick Knepper's gear list:Rick Knepper's gear list
Nikon D800E Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 6D Nikon D3X Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Beachcomber Joe
Contributing MemberPosts: 530Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to TTMartin, Jul 3, 2013

TTMartin wrote:

Fine that would not impact the results significantly one way or the other, please post up pictures (including a link to the RAW files) using your testing parameters.

I seem to have misplaced my copy of the contract wherein I agreed to take test shots and supply you with the digital images.  Please forward me a copy.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TTMartin
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,670Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to Beachcomber Joe, Jul 3, 2013

Beachcomber Joe wrote:

TTMartin wrote:

Fine that would not impact the results significantly one way or the other, please post up pictures (including a link to the RAW files) using your testing parameters.

I seem to have misplaced my copy of the contract wherein I agreed to take test shots and supply you with the digital images. Please forward me a copy.

No contract, but, anyone who is doing more than making stuff up, should be able to provide some sort of evidence to backup their claim.

I've posted photos showing there is NOT a significant difference between the 6D with a 1.4X TC and a 7D without one. If you want to dispute that, then you need to post up.

 TTMartin's gear list:TTMartin's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) Canon PowerShot SD1000 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 400D Canon EOS 6D +24 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rwbaron
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,469Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to TTMartin, Jul 3, 2013

TTMartin wrote:

Rick Knepper wrote:

http://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/70d/info/premier/index.html

I have no idea what ISO values were used in these samples (or if they were even made with the 70D though they do appear on Canon's 70D site) since the Japanese is quite thick here and I do not read Japanese but well...here you go.

IMO, the only reason to consider the 70D over the 6D for still photography with the shooting propensities alluded to below is money and a few splashy bells and whistles (basically faster AF in LV and an articulating screen). With today's improved resolution and sensor performance, the reach factor of APS-C is minimized for many types of photography by the ability to crop FF images liberally and retain acceptable amounts of resolution. No, cropping will not put the same resolution onto a given target as the 70D will but...we'll have to actually see some additional 70D examples to determine definitively what or if other factors may or may not conspire to reduce effective resolution.

As a landscaper, I do occasionally want reach eg the Grand Canyon, but without optical degradation eg TCs. I have given a lot of thought to the EOS M and the available adapter for EF lenses for those occasional situations which do not warrant the $1000+ expenditure for a 70D/D7100. Some of the pics with the EOS M and the 70-200 on Flickr are really quite nice. And light? and small? and much cheaper than the 70D/D7100. I'd rather pack the EOS M and the adapter than two flavors of TC.

I am not trying to compare the EOS M's overall performance with that of the 70D by any means. I am only suggesting to a FF user who might want the APS-C reach only occasionally and doesn't want to use a TC or spend $1000+ for all the features that may never get used that the EOS M is a viable 3rd option to making the decision - 6D vs 70D. For your actual situation, it appears that you already own a cropper, so you don't have to buy anything new, just don't sell your current camera when you buy the 6D. For example, you'll be able to extend the 24-105 to 168mm when you need it.

There is no inherent optical degradation because of a TC. The lower apparent sharpness comes from the fact that a TC takes the image coming from the center portion of the lens and spreads it out.

When using a TC on the same lens and camera combination, the spreading out of the image makes it appear softer.

But, when using a TC on a lens with a full frame camera, instead of that lens on an APS-C camera, there is practically no difference in quality.

The TC takes that image that would have fallen on the APS-C sensor and spreads it out over the full frame sensor. It is then captured by the same number of megapixels (or more) of the full frame camera, resulting in NO practical image quality difference.

What does come into play, it that the TC also impacts the available light for the AF system, reducing its performance.

So while using an f/5.6 lens with a reporting TC on a 6D you would need to use LiveView focus, but, in that case you are really no worse off than using an EOS M.

Of course the EOS M has advantages of its own. It's small so you can take it with you when you wouldn't take your larger camera. It also acts as a backup camera in the event of failure of you primary camera, something a TC can't do.

Given the now lower price of the EOS M it does seem to be a good choice for your intended use.

I don't understand how you would believe a TC does not degrade the IQ.  More air to glass surfaces result in reduced light transmission affecting contrast and the aberrations of the lens are magnified.

Late in the film days Canon Explorer of Light George Lepp performed extensive tests on TC's with a variety of lenses.  His conclusion was a 1.4X reduced resolution by 12-15% of the lens and even the best 2X of that day degraded it by 20%.  Lepp was a big fan of the Canon 300f2.8L with matched 2X TC and used that lens extensively but acknowledged the penalty he suffered using the 2X even with film.

Sites such as Photozone and The Digital Picture demonstrate the loss of resolution and sharpness incurred by using a TC with a telephoto.

Bob

-- hide signature --
 rwbaron's gear list:rwbaron's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Canon PowerShot G9 Canon PowerShot S90 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 50D +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TTMartin
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,670Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to rwbaron, Jul 3, 2013

rwbaron wrote:

TTMartin wrote:

There is no inherent optical degradation because of a TC. The lower apparent sharpness comes from the fact that a TC takes the image coming from the center portion of the lens and spreads it out.

When using a TC on the same lens and camera combination, the spreading out of the image makes it appear softer.

But, when using a TC on a lens with a full frame camera, instead of that lens on an APS-C camera, there is practically no difference in quality.

The TC takes that image that would have fallen on the APS-C sensor and spreads it out over the full frame sensor. It is then captured by the same number of megapixels (or more) of the full frame camera, resulting in NO practical image quality difference.

What does come into play, it that the TC also impacts the available light for the AF system, reducing its performance.

So while using an f/5.6 lens with a reporting TC on a 6D you would need to use LiveView focus, but, in that case you are really no worse off than using an EOS M.

Of course the EOS M has advantages of its own. It's small so you can take it with you when you wouldn't take your larger camera. It also acts as a backup camera in the event of failure of you primary camera, something a TC can't do.

Given the now lower price of the EOS M it does seem to be a good choice for your intended use.

I don't understand how you would believe a TC does not degrade the IQ. More air to glass surfaces result in reduced light transmission affecting contrast and the aberrations of the lens are magnified.

Late in the film days Canon Explorer of Light George Lepp performed extensive tests on TC's with a variety of lenses. His conclusion was a 1.4X reduced resolution by 12-15% of the lens and even the best 2X of that day degraded it by 20%. Lepp was a big fan of the Canon 300f2.8L with matched 2X TC and used that lens extensively but acknowledged the penalty he suffered using the 2X even with film.

Sites such as Photozone and The Digital Picture demonstrate the loss of resolution and sharpness incurred by using a TC with a telephoto.

I fully agree that when using the same size medium, be it 35mm film or a digital camera if the sensor or film size remains the same, then the IQ loss you talk about is a given.

What I am talking about is when there is a difference in the size of the sensor, then the difference is minimal.

Had George Lepp been comparing the Canon f/2.8L on an EOS IX camera using APS film and the Canon f/2.8L with a 1.4X TC on his EOS 35mm film camera I suspect his results would have been similar to what we have today when comparing a APS-C camera without a TC, to a full frame camera with a TC.

And The Digital Picture does show just what I am saying.

60D vs 1Ds MkIII with 1.4X TC

 TTMartin's gear list:TTMartin's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) Canon PowerShot SD1000 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 400D Canon EOS 6D +24 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rwbaron
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,469Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to TTMartin, Jul 3, 2013

TTMartin wrote:

rwbaron wrote:

TTMartin wrote:

There is no inherent optical degradation because of a TC. The lower apparent sharpness comes from the fact that a TC takes the image coming from the center portion of the lens and spreads it out.

When using a TC on the same lens and camera combination, the spreading out of the image makes it appear softer.

But, when using a TC on a lens with a full frame camera, instead of that lens on an APS-C camera, there is practically no difference in quality.

The TC takes that image that would have fallen on the APS-C sensor and spreads it out over the full frame sensor. It is then captured by the same number of megapixels (or more) of the full frame camera, resulting in NO practical image quality difference.

What does come into play, it that the TC also impacts the available light for the AF system, reducing its performance.

So while using an f/5.6 lens with a reporting TC on a 6D you would need to use LiveView focus, but, in that case you are really no worse off than using an EOS M.

Of course the EOS M has advantages of its own. It's small so you can take it with you when you wouldn't take your larger camera. It also acts as a backup camera in the event of failure of you primary camera, something a TC can't do.

Given the now lower price of the EOS M it does seem to be a good choice for your intended use.

I don't understand how you would believe a TC does not degrade the IQ. More air to glass surfaces result in reduced light transmission affecting contrast and the aberrations of the lens are magnified.

Late in the film days Canon Explorer of Light George Lepp performed extensive tests on TC's with a variety of lenses. His conclusion was a 1.4X reduced resolution by 12-15% of the lens and even the best 2X of that day degraded it by 20%. Lepp was a big fan of the Canon 300f2.8L with matched 2X TC and used that lens extensively but acknowledged the penalty he suffered using the 2X even with film.

Sites such as Photozone and The Digital Picture demonstrate the loss of resolution and sharpness incurred by using a TC with a telephoto.

I fully agree that when using the same size medium, be it 35mm film or a digital camera if the sensor or film size remains the same, then the IQ loss you talk about is a given.

What I am talking about is when there is a difference in the size of the sensor, then the difference is minimal.

Had George Lepp been comparing the Canon f/2.8L on an EOS IX camera using APS film and the Canon f/2.8L with a 1.4X TC on his EOS 35mm film camera I suspect his results would have been similar to what we have today when comparing a APS-C camera without a TC, to a full frame camera with a TC.

And The Digital Picture does show just what I am saying.

60D vs 1Ds MkIII with 1.4X TC

I misunderstood your position and thanks for the clarification.  Yes I agree that comparing between formats does complicate the issue and provides some advantage to the larger format.

Bob

-- hide signature --
 rwbaron's gear list:rwbaron's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Canon PowerShot G9 Canon PowerShot S90 Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 50D +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Buchanan
Contributing MemberPosts: 854Gear list
Like?
Re: Samples
In reply to Rick Knepper, Jul 3, 2013

Congrats on the good deal Rick.  I remember checking into the loyalty program a couple years ago regarding a 5DII and it didn't apply to 5D and 1D cameras at that time.  I saw a 1DX refurb in stock yesterday at the Canon Store, out of curiousity do you know if you can get the loyalty discount trade on it also?

 Buchanan's gear list:Buchanan's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Canon EOS 60D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 100D Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads