Which Canon Full Frame Dslr?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Interesting, can you tell more?

Best regards
Erik

I don't think the competition is real - it's fake. The original 5D and the 800e produce nearly the same quality with regards to prints, even up to 40x60.

Graham

[Graham Clark]

Hi,

Interesting, can you tell more?

Best regards
Erik

when comparing two large format prints (40x60+) from high quality exposures/glass the differences between the two is in terms of quality is identical. when comparing hundreds of large format prints against eachother the same holds true.

Graham

[ErikKaffehr]

Thanks,

I did compare 12MP to 24MP at one time in A2 and could see some difference in 2 out of three. On screen there was a lot of difference. I also made a 70x100 cm print from 10 MP APS-C and it was OK, if viewed at 80 cm or longer away.

But I had never the opportunity to compare 12 MP full frame with 36 MP full frame.

Best regards
Erik

when comparing two large format prints (40x60+) from high quality exposures/glass the differences between the two is in terms of quality is identical. when comparing hundreds of large format prints against eachother the same holds true.

Graham

[Graham Clark]

Thanks,

I did compare 12MP to 24MP at one time in A2 and could see some difference in 2 out of three. On screen there was a lot of difference. I also made a 70x100 cm print from 10 MP APS-C and it was OK, if viewed at 80 cm or longer away.

But I had never the opportunity to compare 12 MP full frame with 36 MP full frame.

Best regards
Erik

there's quite a bit that goes into testing these things, but from my experience, with exposure quality and optical quality equal, i have yet to see a major, discernible difference in image quality due to MP

Graham

[BernardLanguillier]

when comparing two large format prints (40x60+) from high quality exposures/glass the differences between the two is in terms of quality is identical. when comparing hundreds of large format prints against eachother the same holds true.

Are you saying that you did shoot "hundreds" of scenes with the same lens on the 2 cameras and did print all of them at 40x60 inch?

You are a rich man with a lot of time to waste Graham.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Ellis Vener]

At print sizes up to 20x30" I see no significant difference between a D800e and 5D2.  In a print.

That would depends a great deal on how the prints were made - processing and print technology, how the interpolation was done and on what surface the photos were printed on.

Were the exposures made of the identical subjects in identical lighting with (as near as possible identical lenses and camera settings? were they processed the same way? Clearly the 36mp images will not have to interpolated as much as the ones from the 5D Mark II to print at 20 x 30 inches.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I would also suggest it depends on the amount of detail. If the image lacks fine detail, the difference may not be visible. Also, if we stop down to far diffraction will limit resolution and reduce contrast.

I just made a small experiment I took an 24MP  image, sized down to 12MP (using nearest neighbor) and scaled back to 24 MP using bicubic and printed at approximately A2, there was not a lot of difference. But that image did not contain a lot of fine high contrast detail.

Than I took an image with a lot of hard edges made the same operations and printed at approximately 54 x 78 cm (halfway between A2 and A1) and the difference was quite obvious.

Normally, processing parameters may affect judgement, but in this case the only difference was the downsize upsize cycle.

So what I saw was that the contents of the image matter a lot.

Best regards
Erik

At print sizes up to 20x30" I see no significant difference between a D800e and 5D2.  In a print.

That would depends a great deal on how the prints were made - processing and print technology, how the interpolation was done and on what surface the photos were printed on.

Were the exposures made of the identical subjects in identical lighting with (as near as possible identical lenses and camera settings? were they processed the same way? Clearly the 36mp images will not have to interpolated as much as the ones from the 5D Mark II to print at 20 x 30 inches.

[Graham Clark]

Are you saying that you did shoot "hundreds" of scenes with the same lens on the 2 cameras and did print all of them at 40x60 inch?

You are a rich man with a lot of time to waste Graham.

Cheers,
Bernard

no

Graham

[BernardLanguillier]

no

Graham

Ok, now that we know one thing you are not saying, can you elaborate on what you are then saying?

All the 1Ds3/5D2/5DIII/6D users I know seemed pretty thrilled about their improved ability to print large when they moved up from the 12mp 5D to the 20-22mp more recent Canon bodies. Did they all imagine the improvement they were reporting?

Are the MFDB users printing large also imagining the improvement they see?

Cheers,
Bernard

[BJL]

when comparing two large format prints (40x60+) from high quality exposures/glass the differences between the two is in terms of quality is identical. when comparing hundreds of large format prints against eachother the same holds true.

At what viewing distance? The difference is about 123ppi vs 73ppi, which should be readily distinguishable from even 20" away, unless the lenses used on the D800e are not up to the job.

But I would certainly expect this to be true when those big prints are viewed the way such prints most often are -- from a distance no closer than the short dimension of the print or greater. At that ratio of print size to viewing distance, about 20MP reaches the resolution limits of most human eyes.

But if the indistinguishability holds up with close viewing, as close as one might typically view a 12x8" print, then what you say is equivalent to seeing no difference between 12"x8" prints from 1.44MP and 0.88MP sensors, which sounds strange.  If that is true, the lenses used with the D800e are not making use of the extra sensor resolution.

[BJL]

I just made a small experiment I took an 24MP  image, sized down to 12MP (using nearest neighbor) and scaled back to 24 MP using bicubic and printed at approximately A2, there was not a lot of difference. But that image did not contain a lot of fine high contrast detail.
... Then I took an image with a lot of hard edges made the same operations and printed at approximately 54 x 78 cm (halfway between A2 and A1) and the difference was quite obvious.

Going from 24MP Bayer CFA (12MP G, 6MP R, 6MP B) to a 12MP format like TIFF or JPEG (12MP G, 12MP R, 12MP B) might lose almost no resolution on some subjects, like ones where the G captures most of the needed luminosity information. So that is not an ideal way to simulate the difference between 24MP Bayer CFA and 12MP Bayer CFA images. It is interesting that some images do show a substantial advantage for the 24MP file: this supports the claim in some recent Bayer CFA vs X3 discussions that with good demosaicing algorithms, the R and B channels can contribute usefully to resolution, contrary to the doctrine that "only green pixels count for resolution".

[TMARK]

Ellis,

Prints were made on an Epson 7880 using PS3 and later 6.

Different subjects, different lighting, but same lens (Hass. V 150 CF).  Lighting was strobe, hard key.  Both cropped to 20x30.  Say F11, maybe 8.

This was not a test, just an observation.  I couldn't remember which camera was used on each print until I went to the file.  Subject matter was portraits, which is of course less demanding on fine detail than say landscapes.  Lots of flat areas that are essentially volume.

Another observation:  Leica M8 files hold up well to enlargement, say to 16x24.  Mostly.  That sensor could have some rough aliasing artifacts that look like detail until you try to uprez, which can result in odd shapes in grass and other fine detail.

The D800e can go larger, of course, and I'm not making prints for sale.

At print sizes up to 20x30" I see no significant difference between a D800e and 5D2.  In a print.

That would depends a great deal on how the prints were made - processing and print technology, how the interpolation was done and on what surface the photos were printed on.

Were the exposures made of the identical subjects in identical lighting with (as near as possible identical lenses and camera settings? were they processed the same way? Clearly the 36mp images will not have to interpolated as much as the ones from the 5D Mark II to print at 20 x 30 inches.

[Graham Clark]

Hello all,

For what it's worth I have reviewed the Canon EOS 6D recently, which summarizes my 3-month experience with it You can find the review here!

[BernardLanguillier]

For what it's worth I have reviewed the Canon EOS 6D recently, which summarizes my 3-month experience with it You can find the review here!

Thanks. Just out of curiosity, do you find your 6D to enable larger prints compared to the 5D?

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

Thanks. Just out of curiosity, do you find your 6D to enable larger prints compared to the 5D?

Did you not compare the 2?

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

Did you not compare the 2?

Strange... you spend weeks comparing hundreds of 5D vs D800 prints, reach the conclusion that the 36mp of the D800 bring nothing in terms of print quality... But don't seem to be interested at all in the value brought by the 20mp of the 6D...

Cheers,
Bernard

[NancyP]

daioumex (sic) wishes for a full frame dSLR with swivel screen. You aren't alone - I find the screen on the 60D incredibly useful at times. Yes, you could run a separate screen on a tablet or iPhone, but I like the simplicity of the swivel screen. I keep mine folded back (screen not visible) most of the time, only deploy screen when needed for live view or the adjustments that can't be made through conventional controls.

[uaiomex]

Yes Nancy, The swivel screen is big time convenient. I own a 4Ti and a 6D. When it is needed, using the swivel screen (4Ti) is light years ahead from using my iPhone as a substitute when using the 6D.
I can't hardly wait for Canon to come with my FF dslr with a swivel screen.
Eduardo

 

daioumex (sic) wishes for a full frame dSLR with swivel screen. You aren't alone - I find the screen on the 60D incredibly useful at times. Yes, you could run a separate screen on a tablet or iPhone, but I like the simplicity of the swivel screen. I keep mine folded back (screen not visible) most of the time, only deploy screen when needed for live view or the adjustments that can't be made through conventional controls.

[EgillBjarki]

I currently have a 6D and 5D Mark III, I recently sold my 5D Mark II to get the 6D.

Surprisingly, the 6D has a slightly better low light performance compared to 5D Mark III. Everything else is better on the Mark III.

I am happy with the upgrade, I do not regret selling my 5D Mark II.

[HSakols]

I see the point Grahm is making.  When it comes down to looking at a print (or screen) the difference, as founder of this site has said, is peanuts.  Yes we still buy into the marketing hype - myself included.  Is there a difference? Sure there is but at what level can you detect it?  I recently made a 14x21 in mistake print from a panasonic lx3 (a compact camera) that held up more than I expected.  With that said, last year I upgraded from a Nikon d300 to a d800 and I must say that I see a significant improvement at 14x21.  But resolution never has really been a concern of my customers.  It is more important to me.  The question you must ask yourself is at what point is it worth spending more for an upgrade?