70D vs 7D vs 6D

Started 10 months ago | Discussions
asad137
Contributing MemberPosts: 686
Like?
Re: 70D vs 7D vs 6D
In reply to howardroark, 10 months ago

howardroark wrote:

asad137 wrote:

howardroark wrote:

MarshallG wrote:

MarshallG wrote:

Wildlife or landscapes: Then the 6D's full frame sensor will provide better detail.

These are generalizations, however. Some wildlife photographers prefer the cropped sensor and higher durability of the 7D.

For wildlife, having 'reach' (i.e. as many pixels as possible on the subject) is best, so a crop sensor would be the way to go.

For landscape, FF offers no meaningful advantage in detail -- for equivalent framing, perspective, and DOF, a crop-sensor camera can, in fact, offer equivalent detail at equivalent pixel counts. Its true that at equivalent resolutions, a crop-sensor camera will suffer the softening effects of diffraction at wider apertures than FF, but this is counterbalanced by the FF camera needing to use a narrower aperture than the crop camera in order to obtain the same DOF. The deciding factor in detail reproduction will be the lens performance, not the sensor size.

And yet, many wildlife and landscape photographers use full frame cameras.

My point was not to start a debate, just to show him that there isn't an absolute "best" camera. I think the 7D, for instance, has a higher framerate than the 5D mIII.

I'm afraid asad is here for nothing but debate despite the fact that tests show full frame cameras like the 6D and 5DIII producing more detail (noticeably) than crop cameras like the 7D and 700D using the same lens. Oh, I guess there aren't twelve equivalencies in front of that,

To paraphrase Richard Feynman, "If you don't get your equivalencies right, you don't know nothin!"

Yes, well I'm afraid I disagree with what you consider equivalent.

My definition is one that will give you the as equivalent a photograph as possible: Same framing, same shooting position, same depth of field. That means a different lens (to maintain field of view and get the same perspective) and a different aperture (to maintain DOF).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
altair8800
Senior MemberPosts: 1,228
Like?
Re: 17x faster
In reply to Jim A, 10 months ago

Jim A wrote:

altair8800 wrote:

realtor wrote:

adam1612 wrote:

Digic 5+ is 17x faster than Digic 4 according to the-digital-picture.com

I don't understand. If the Digic 5 is 17x faster than the Digic 4, how does the 70D buffer less than 60D? Direct quote from the-digital-picture.com:

  • 7 fps for 40/15 images (JPEG/RAW) vs. 5.3 fps vs. 58/16 images
  • DIGIC 5+ vs. DIGIC 4 (17x faster)
  • Canon EOS 7D 8.0 fps 110/130 Images (JPEG/RAW)

Is't the Dual Digic4 In the old, outdated Canon 7D faster than both the 70D & 60D?

The output in fps is faster for 7D. However, the internal processing for the 70D "dual pixel" AF is nearly two times faster than 7D.

Dual pixel is live view only. Plus the single Digic 5 has to handle all tasks. Were the 7D Digic 4's are assign to do different tasks at the same time. Eg. 7D is focusing and processing at the same time two task handled separately.

The dual "pixels" (photodiodes) are combined into one pixel for 20 Mp output no matter if live view or OVF. The "dual pixel" AF only works in live view.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52114315

Dan

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
altair8800
Senior MemberPosts: 1,228
Like?
Re: 17x faster
In reply to rickyred, 10 months ago

rickyred wrote:

I would like to see a shoot out between the 7d and 70d in pross speed? I love how fast the 7d is taking long exposers 30Seconds + compared to say a 60D.

They are close in output speed. The 2x internal processing speed of 70D is sacrificed for the dual pixel AF. Without the dual pixel AF, it could output 40 Mp at 7 fps.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52114315

Dan

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Szarlej
New MemberPosts: 4
Like?
Re: 70D vs 7D vs 6D
In reply to MarshallG, 10 months ago

MarshallG wrote:

MarshallG wrote:

Wildlife or landscapes: Then the 6D's full frame sensor will provide better detail.

These are generalizations, however. Some wildlife photographers prefer the cropped sensor and higher durability of the 7D.

For wildlife, having 'reach' (i.e. as many pixels as possible on the subject) is best, so a crop sensor would be the way to go.

For landscape, FF offers no meaningful advantage in detail -- for equivalent framing, perspective, and DOF, a crop-sensor camera can, in fact, offer equivalent detail at equivalent pixel counts. Its true that at equivalent resolutions, a crop-sensor camera will suffer the softening effects of diffraction at wider apertures than FF, but this is counterbalanced by the FF camera needing to use a narrower aperture than the crop camera in order to obtain the same DOF. The deciding factor in detail reproduction will be the lens performance, not the sensor size.

And yet, many wildlife and landscape photographers use full frame cameras.

My point was not to start a debate, just to show him that there isn't an absolute "best" camera. I think the 7D, for instance, has a higher framerate than the 5D mIII.

I would disagree a little with your opinion. For wildlife photography 1Dm3 was always the weapon of choice. Since Canon decided to drop that crop factor from production its a matter of how deep is your wallet. It's either full frame and longer primes (serious $$$ bang on the wallet) or crop cameras with shorter lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
altair8800
Senior MemberPosts: 1,228
Like?
Re: 70D vs 7D vs 6D
In reply to Szarlej, 10 months ago

Szarlej wrote:

MarshallG wrote:

MarshallG wrote:

Wildlife or landscapes: Then the 6D's full frame sensor will provide better detail.

These are generalizations, however. Some wildlife photographers prefer the cropped sensor and higher durability of the 7D.

For wildlife, having 'reach' (i.e. as many pixels as possible on the subject) is best, so a crop sensor would be the way to go.

For landscape, FF offers no meaningful advantage in detail -- for equivalent framing, perspective, and DOF, a crop-sensor camera can, in fact, offer equivalent detail at equivalent pixel counts. Its true that at equivalent resolutions, a crop-sensor camera will suffer the softening effects of diffraction at wider apertures than FF, but this is counterbalanced by the FF camera needing to use a narrower aperture than the crop camera in order to obtain the same DOF. The deciding factor in detail reproduction will be the lens performance, not the sensor size.

And yet, many wildlife and landscape photographers use full frame cameras.

My point was not to start a debate, just to show him that there isn't an absolute "best" camera. I think the 7D, for instance, has a higher framerate than the 5D mIII.

I would disagree a little with your opinion. For wildlife photography 1Dm3 was always the weapon of choice. Since Canon decided to drop that crop factor from production its a matter of how deep is your wallet. It's either full frame and longer primes (serious $$$ bang on the wallet) or crop cameras with shorter lenses.

And I would disagree a little with your opinion. The 1Dm3 has less pixel density (pixels on target) than 20D and later of that size. It has better AF and fps, so you choose what you prefer.

If you have 800mm on your 7D, or if 500mm is the longest (heaviest) you can handhold with 7D, where do you go with full frame?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads