7D Mk II vs. 6D
Nov 17, 2014 13:33:05 #
I have had the 6D for a while now and it has great image quality. Stationary objects are no problem with the 6D but birds in flight are really tough, possible but tough.
This past Saturday I bought the new 7DII mainly for wildlife and BIF and it is superb at tracking BIF but I am not at all pleased with the image quality so far. I'm not giving up just yet because I have seen some great photos on here with the 7DMkII but my shots with it in comparison to my 6D falls way short in image quality.
If only the 6D had the focus system of the 7DII, (5DMkIII maybe).
This past Saturday I bought the new 7DII mainly for wildlife and BIF and it is superb at tracking BIF but I am not at all pleased with the image quality so far. I'm not giving up just yet because I have seen some great photos on here with the 7DMkII but my shots with it in comparison to my 6D falls way short in image quality.
If only the 6D had the focus system of the 7DII, (5DMkIII maybe).
Nov 17, 2014 14:53:54 #
Good information all, thanks. But perhaps I need to rethink what my issue is. I understand that the camera body is only as good as the glass in front of it and the brain behind it.
I've experimented many different ways of taking photos with the 50D and I have yet to see it take anything resembling tack sharp. The picture above of the young lady and being able to count every hair on her head is not something I've been able to produce. From the research I've done it seems the 24-105 f/4L and 70-200 f/2.8L II are designed for FF cameras, correct? Therefore I'm thinking, yes they'll fit and work on a crop but won't perform as designed and I should be using a lens designed for a crop sensor camera.
Does that seem like a sound line of reasoning? If so, any recommendations for lenses or should I look at upgrading to a FF body?
I've experimented many different ways of taking photos with the 50D and I have yet to see it take anything resembling tack sharp. The picture above of the young lady and being able to count every hair on her head is not something I've been able to produce. From the research I've done it seems the 24-105 f/4L and 70-200 f/2.8L II are designed for FF cameras, correct? Therefore I'm thinking, yes they'll fit and work on a crop but won't perform as designed and I should be using a lens designed for a crop sensor camera.
Does that seem like a sound line of reasoning? If so, any recommendations for lenses or should I look at upgrading to a FF body?
Nov 17, 2014 15:10:36 #
Volk359 wrote:
Good information all, thanks. But perhaps I need ... (show quote)
The two lens you mentioned here will work just as well on a crop sensor camera as a full frame camera and probable better than any of the lens made just for crop sensors.
Nov 17, 2014 19:27:49 #
Volk359 wrote:
Good information all, thanks. But perhaps I need ... (show quote)
No - that reasoning is incorrect. The approach of 'optimized' for a cropped sensor relates to how much of the image is focused on the surface of the sensor. The FF lens puts a circle of light onto a cropped sensor where 40% of the frame is lost because of the smaller sensor size. The EF-S (or DX for Nikon) produce a smaller circle so more of what the lens sees is what you capture.
Your two L lenses are high end lenses. The resulting images are 'cropped' by a factor of 1.6. but the image through the lens are the same regardless of the body. The sensor with a more dense pixel count should be able to capture more of the minute details from the lens.
There are several possible problems that range between technique (human) and technical (equipment). Assuming similar lighting, your 50D and your 70-200 at ISO-200, f/4.5 and 1/250 should provide a similar sharp and detailed image as George provided of the couple. If it couldn't that camera never would of sold and the whole Canon line would have been in deep trouble when the 50D was current. That camera was the current model for about 2-years (2008-2010) and I've seen personally a few in the field over the past year. Looking at reviews they indicate it was a well regarded camera.
Nov 17, 2014 19:31:05 #
Can a 50D micro adjust? If not, a new body that can am might make all the difference in your lenses. Bab
Nov 17, 2014 19:56:53 #
Quote:
as I had seen, too. I doubt my technique is in question but I would welcome any criticism from the picture I posted above. Perhaps a trip to the local camera shop is in order and rent a body for a couple days.Looking at reviews they indicate it was a well regarded camera.
Nov 17, 2014 20:07:24 #
Quote:
Not that I can see in the owners manual. If you are referring to front or back focusing I don't think that's the issue. I tried using a ruler at different settings/lenses and it seems to be spot on, even with the original kit lens. Just a real soft photo.Can a 50D micro adjust?
Quote:
Which leads me to my original question! :mrgreen:If not, a new body that can am might make all the difference in your lenses.
Nov 17, 2014 21:28:06 #
Volk359 wrote:
Not that I can see in the owners manual. If you are referring to front or back focusing I don't think that's the issue. I tried using a ruler at different settings/lenses and it seems to be spot on, even with the original kit lens. Just a real soft photo.
Volk - If you mean the yellow flower, please refer to two specific comments (page 2 of this thread) regarding this photo that do speak to technique rather than technology from tdekany and CHG_CANON.
Nov 17, 2014 21:36:23 #
Grammieb1 wrote:
Can a 50D micro adjust? If not, a new body that can am might make all the difference in your lenses. Bab
YES, the Canon 50d body DOES have the micro adjust capability. :-)
SS
Nov 17, 2014 22:17:57 #
SharpShooter wrote:
so it does !! It's AF Micro Adjustment, pg 180 of the manual. (Not even listed in the table of contents ...)YES, the Canon 50d body DOES have the micro adjust capability. :-)
SS
SS
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.