Canon EOS M vs Canon DSLRs

[leoskats]

Hello guys,

Hope you are good! Today I would like to express my questioning with the mirrorless cameras of canon (Canon EOS M) and Canon DSLRs (5D III, 6D, 6D II) in terms of performance and generally the quality of the image they offer. At first I would like to point out that I am owner of amateur photographs. I originally had the Canon EOS 700D kit DSLR and then I upgraded to the Canon EOS M6 (mirrorless).

This choice was not accidental and I would like to discuss it. First of all, I believe that the new series of Canon EOS M provide a crystal image, intense color depth, and often the details that I capture, I will dare to say that they are perhaps even clearer than other Canon DSLRs; for example 5D III (22.3 MP), 6D (20.6 MP), 6D II (26.2 MP) etc. Of course, it does not matter the pixels, because with the proper lens the camera can perform with impeccable results against other cameras with more pixels. Below I want to show you a test made by a photographer and shows how much more the Canon EOS M new line versus the professional DSLR Canon 5D III is doing. Hence, the photo-result is that 5D III it misses the detail that a smaller mirrorless can catch.

So in practice the video is that:



Also the result of the photo comparison is: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/t7ize655egzsczd/_OAenvRqHP

I will choose only one example to compare in order to show you better, guys, what I mean. So, below I attach two photos from different cameras. If you carefully observe and zoom in on the 3 tubes of the car, you will see how much greater clarity and quality performance the EOS M has than 5D III. My question is why the 5D III DSLR camera, while having a full frame frame sensor, loses such details? Has it to do with the new technology of the generation of the EOS M? I really don't know. Also when I see the pixels in Affinity the one has almost 17MP (the Mirrorless) and 22.3 (the DSLR). And more: the storage in the mirrorless is bigger than the other camera. But the result is so strange.


Canon 5D III




Canon EOS M

Now my point is: I got the Canon EOS M6 with 24 MP active pixels and the sharpest wide-angle len of EF-M 22mm. My question is that all those results based on the crop sensor and the full frame. I mean that Canon EOS with the APS-C cropped sensor catch the detail because of the smaller size and thus has better focus? Or the 5D III loses the quality because of the size range of the photo (35 mm). But some lens, for example the Canon EF-M 22mm promises: that Moderate wide-angle lens; equivalent to 35mm on a full-frame camera. So what is the explanation and why the Canon EOS M is sharper than the normal DSLRs cameras? Moreover 6D II with 26.2 MP can it catch less in detail than the Canon EOS M6 with 24 MP? Has to do with the sensors or megapixels or what?

Thanks in advance,
Leo.

 

[Marco Nero]

The EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens is a sharp lens, especially with narrower apertures like f/4 etc. The EOSM cameras are ALL capable of DSLR quality images. They use the same sensors as Canon's APS-C DSLRs which means that the image quality is the result of the lens used. The camera itself is simply a cage for the sensor to sit in.
.
Some of the sharper lenses for the EOSM cameras include the EF-M 28mm f/3.5 IS Macro STM lens and the wide EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM lens.
.
I don't believe that the smaller body makes any difference to the detail captured. The sensor size in Megapixels (Millions of Pixels) can have an effect but the sharpness of the images captures relates to the lens used and any in-camera sharpening algorithms in the camera's processing software.
.
The advantages of the much LARGER sensors on the Full Frame DSLR cameras generally relate to better Bokeh (at the same distances), full focal range of any lens and significantly better lowlight performance over APS-C sensors. The EOSM cameras with their APS-C sensors produce images that are essentially identical to DSLRs with APS-C sensors.

 

[Pepege]

Marco explained the tech. And I will add one observation:

Those two images are not suitable to compare image quality of those camera sensors. There are many reasons. One is: The tubes on the 5D images are definitely out of focus. Maybe due to focusing, maybe due to the smaller depth of field. If I look at the spokes of the wheel, sharpness is about the same.

 

[Adielle]

I don't need to read any of the text, because all the pictures I see were taken in bright sunlight. You'll never see a significant difference between good APS-C and good full-frame, and any detail or focus issues are not related to the image quality that's possible to achieve. With an equivalent lens, a picture taken with settings equivalent to those in a good APS-C camera, would have pretty much twice less noise. That's the only significant difference. As far as non-equivalent settings go, you have a lot more, probably also about twice larger "bokeh" range and options in full-frame. So it's all physics. Dynamic range and other factors are all down to sensor design and not related to the sensor's size.

 

[hathawayep]

It is about focus and depth of field in your examples. The near edge of the fender on the full frame is sharper than the same area on the 1/2 frame. Repeat the experiment focusing deeper into the image subject. I suspect that would make a significant difference. I do agree the M sensor with good lens is surprisingly good.

 

[R2D2]

below I attach two photos from different cameras. If you carefully observe and zoom in on the 3 tubes of the car, you will see how much greater clarity and quality performance the EOS M has than 5D III.

For purposes of your test you have to start by placing the focal plane in the exact same location (reshoot).

R2

 

[brightcolours]

Like others have mentioned:

• Focus on the same plane with both combinations.
• Use equivalent f-stop settings. You do it with the focal length, why not with the aperture? f4 on Canon APS-C is equivalent to 4x1.6 = f6.4 on FF.

 

[Dave Seeley]

I'll add that the M5 replaced my 5Diii as my travel cam, because of portability, and no discernable loss in image quality. Agreed that the lens is critical to sharpness, as is the sweet spot of any given lens... and low light capability is still a serious pitfall of M series.

 

[Hclarkx]

I'll add that the M5 replaced my 5Diii as my travel cam, because of portability, and no discernable loss in image quality. Agreed that the lens is critical to sharpness, as is the sweet spot of any given lens... and low light capability is still a serious pitfall of M series.

 

[plantdoc]

Are you sure your full frame is focusing accurately? A slight front/back focus can make a significant difference. Simply shoot a detailed flat subject with the lens wide open and compare live view vs optical finder. They should be equal. If live view is sharper, you have a focus problem that requires MFA. Fairly common issue.

Greg

 

[crashpc]

It seems that 5D focused nearer, and with f/4, it has narrower depth of field, thus less detail where you looked. 5D III still outdoes M cameras most of the times, when focused properly. BUT, M cameras sure hold their own, and creep in - in some department, they get better than older DSLRs. That´s why we have it. Awesome piece of machinery! :-D

 

[verum lens]

Like others have mentioned:

• Focus on the same plane with both combinations.
• Use equivalent f-stop settings. You do it with the focal length, why not with the aperture? f4 on Canon APS-C is equivalent to 4x1.6 = f6.4 on FF.

Indeed. Using a APS can make it easier to get everything in focus, but also can limit you when you want a narrow depth of field.

 

[realmadeira]

Stationary things in sunlight: even 12MP iPhone shots look decent

Try to shoot the things that move, to get focus where you want it AND to get a shot at the moment you want it - then you will see the difference between M and 5DIII (or any professional DLSR from Canon or Nikon)

 

[jboyer]

I'll add that the M5 replaced my 5Diii as my travel cam, because of portability, and no discernable loss in image quality. Agreed that the lens is critical to sharpness, as is the sweet spot of any given lens... and low light capability is still a serious pitfall of M series.

 

[Marco Nero]

Stationary things in sunlight: even 12MP iPhone shots look decent

Try to shoot the things that move, to get focus where you want it AND to get a shot at the moment you want it - then you will see the difference between M and 5DIII (or any professional DLSR from Canon or Nikon)

Try doing that with any DSLR using Live View. Seriously, try it.

 

[Steven Blackwood]

so why continue

 

[Hclarkx]

I'll add that the M5 replaced my 5Diii as my travel cam, because of portability, and no discernable loss in image quality. Agreed that the lens is critical to sharpness, as is the sweet spot of any given lens... and low light capability is still a serious pitfall of M series.

--
pro photo-illustration

X2 ....... for landscapes and convenience the M5 is exceptional. I recently spent a month on the California central coast and only used the 28mm.

What is the sweet f stop for the 28mm used as a normal lens?

--
Jerome Boyer
http://jeromelouiseboyer.zenfolio.com/

I'm not the best person to ask. After a year+ with the M5 I'm still getting used to APS-C. My last APS-C was the 30D. I shoot landscapes only, usually with some pretty close foreground and usually in good light, so to get maximum DOF I'm usually shooting F8 or F9. I've never detected diffraction distortion with the 28mm at F9. Because it's so sharp, maybe it makes diffraction distortion hard to see but I don't think I get any at F9. I really need to experiment with lower aperture to see where I lose DOF and at higher to see where diffraction distortion comes in.

When I'm shooting a cat or my wife I use F3.5; plenty of DOF and some mild bokeh. Center sharpness wide open if great on the 28.

 

[realmadeira]

so why continue

 

[jboyer]

Thanks. I will experiment.

In the film days, Macro lenses were often closed at f/22 or more, to get some minimal DOF. In the digital age, we need to pay attention to DOF vs Diffraction. An FF sensor seems to have no diffraction at f/22.

It looks like for an APS_C, diffraction will kick in at f/16 - I will need to test how bad it looks!

 

[brightcolours]

Thanks. I will experiment.

In the film days, Macro lenses were often closed at f/22 or more, to get some minimal DOF.

maximal DOF.

In the digital age, we need to pay attention to DOF vs Diffraction.

In the film age you should have too, depending on print size.

An FF sensor seems to have no diffraction at f/22.

What? An FF sensor shows a lot of diffraction softening at f22, ESPECIALLY at macro distances where the real aperture is actually smaller.

It looks like for an APS_C, diffraction will kick in at f/16 - I will need to test how bad it looks!

With higher res. APS-C (18-24mp) diffraction softening already kicks in at f5.6, and is already noticable above f8.

--
Jerome Boyer
http://jeromelouiseboyer.zenfolio.com/