CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

There was a post about the EOS XTi recently, a camera that was my first DSLR. I purchased that 10MP Rebel body in Dec 2006, so I'm approaching 20 years in digital overall. To create this retrospective post, I reached into the LR catalog looking for similar images to ask the question: can you see the difference?

Wrigley Building by Paul Sager, on Flickr


Wrigley Building


I'm unsure if I have UHH to thank for the impetus to change from an XTi to an EOS 7D, before then changing again to the current EOS 5DIII. The following series of image pairs will tend to be at least 10 years apart. The two bees compare a 100mm macro with a 180mm macro.

Bee and flower


Coneflower visitor


The exposure details and lenses of all the images are available from Flickr, using the URL links that are the image titles. I couldn't find any images that used the same lens on both cameras, for similar images. The best I could find was similar subjects and views, in a landscape format.

Buckingham Fountain


Buckingham Fountain


If you "need" a new camera, there's always a question of: why? Maybe you need more resolution. Maybe you need more frames per second. Maybe you need more external controls. Maybe better noise performance? Maybe better Auto Focus performance? But, what if it's really just that you need a better lens? And therefore, maybe, you don't really need more pixels or more controls or more frames or NR or AF performance?

Chicago


Chicago Skyline - Willis Tower


I wanted to just compare a 10MP cropped sensor to a 22MP full-frame, but the sequence of agave, below, adds the wrinkle of a circa 1987 f/1.8 prime against a nearly as old film-era zoom and the newest IS enabled zoom. Even though all these images are down-sized to 2048-pixels on the wide side (and linked as 1600px), I think for most of the images, one can see the resolution differences of the two / three cameras.

United States Botanic Garden


DeGrazia Gallery in the Sun


Wesley Bolin Memorial Park


Of these final two images, I think the Rebel actually wins the 1 to 1. All the images in this post were processed in LR6. The XTi images are a mixture of JPEG files and RAW against the RAW files of the EOS 7D and 5DIII. The bottom image suffers a bit from the 2x extender added to the 500mm L prime. It looks good, but I think there's more details in the upclose of the XTi at 52mm than the more distant shot from the effective 700mm of the prime.

United States Botanic Garden


Swamp Rose Mallow


Hopefully, these examples cause some serious questions about: Is it the camera, the software, the photographer or the lens?

Remember, the longer you read UHH, the more expensive it gets. Try not to get caught up in the hype.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

I am only a middle of the road mucker but I have ALWAYS believed for the most part and for most peoples needs, a better lens is more important than a new body. Learning the ins and outs of your camera in conjunction with a top shelf lens is IMO or if you like IMHO, more important than acquiring the latest camera body and making the same mistakes. The latest and the greatest offer features to make anyone drool; its easy to fall into the trap that thinking new will make you better automatically. Don't get me wrong, I love IBIS etc... and features like this have increased my keepers. I myself am rereading Kelby's book and am amazed at the little stuff I now understand better. BTW, my best shot of all time was with Sony's first bridge camera and the Zeiss lens on that baby is to die for. The vintage 28-70 2.8 L sits on my 6D at the moment and still resolves beautifully. We should always buy the best lens we can afford in my view without boxing ourselves out from future developments. Oh well, just an opinion from the middle of the muck... Time for more Joe... its way too early.

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

Don't discount the "feel good" aspect of owning newer and "nicer" equipment. I've told this story before -- when I was in high school I worked in a jewelry shop that built jewelry as well as sold it. We had a centrifuge and cast rings as well as setting stones, sizing rings, etc. We sold Rolex watches. One day I asked the owner of the shop why someone would spend 1500.00 on a solid gold Rolex when the gold-plated Rolex was 350.00 and the two couldn't really be told apart. Who would know by just looking which watch was the solid gold model? The owner replied, "the owner would know". The prices I mention are from 60 years ago when gold was 38.00 an ounce. In fact, while I worked there, we went off the gold standard and the price immediately shot up from 38.00 to around 150.00 an ounce. I wish I had purchased a couple of pounds at that time! But of course, I was only a poor high school student at that time. Anyway, having something nice makes the owner feel good about what they have which can translate into them doing better work. This may not have as much of an impact as their skill or how creative they are but still can have some impact. If someone feels they can do better work with a FF camera with 45 mgs., they most likely can.

Ava'sPapa Loc: Cheshire, Ct.

Guilty, Paul, I got caught up in the hype BUT I've enjoyed it! Since joining (2017) UHH I abandoned my perfectly fine D60 (purchased in 2005) and have purchased (and sold):a Nikon D610, D750, D500, a plethora of Nikon lenses, Nikon flashes, a Fuji XT-4, Fuji lenses, Sony RX100 MK VII, Sony hx99, and a couple of others that don't come to mind right now. I've also bought and kept two A6000s (one for 9 yr. old Ava and one for me), Sony lenses, Sony RX10 MKIV (my go-to), Olympus TG5, Lumix DC ZS70, Lumix DMC LX7, Nikon A900 and a Canon R6 (which I'll be selling) and my latest Canon R6 II with some expensive (and good) glass. Why all of the purchases? I retired in 2013...the stock market was very kind to me, I like cameras, I really have no others vices(well, cars to some extent)...so, why not? I don't regret any of the purchases. I satisfied my curiosities and have enjoyed the trip. Thank you Paul, for talking me out of a couple of the really high end $$$ cameras. I'm only 74, so the saga continues. In all of my dealings on the Hog, I've enjoyed buying and selling, with only one "sore thumb". Oh, the answer to your initial question is no, I don't really need an FF camera. Many of the shots from my D60 were comparable to many of my present photos. It's hard to tell some of them apart.
Great photos by the way.

bkwaters

There are 3 reasons why one MIGHT need a FF camera, but due to advances in post-processing these are less important than ever:
1) Shallow DOF (less important due to PP tools like PS depth blur neurofilter)
2) High resolution/Low Noise (less important due to tools like Topaz Gigapixel/Denoise, etc. and in camera high resolution sensor tilt modes)
3) Brand does not offer features like 2 card slots, large buffer, superior AF algorithms, etc. on their APS-C models and someone requires or wants a specific brand.

The theoretical advantages of APS-C and M43 are:
1) Smaller cameras
2) Smaller lenses - though Nikon and Sony make it easy and practical to use APS-C lenses on FF cameras.
3) Might be a better value because "enthusiast" FF cameras can sell at a premium relative to "consumer" APS-C cameras.

Let's compare the Sony A7R5 to the A6500 - there are, for practical purposes, only a few advantages of the FF model: 2 card slots, slightly more sophisticated animal tracking and faster bust shooting. For the most part the other advantages of the FF model can be obviated by post-processing. The size advantage of APS-C can be obviated by using APS-C lenses on the A7R5.

Maybe someone can do a OM-5 vs Canon, Nikon or Sony FF shootout comparison for us UHHs. Unless the OM-5 has inferior animal eye tracking, I suspect the images can be made to be of equal IQ after post-processing.

Bigmike1 Loc: I am from Gaffney, S.C. but live in Utah.

You know, some people can afford to spend money on all the newest camera gear when it becomes available. I cannot. I have only bought one new camera since film went out and digital took over. When I retired from the military in 2000 I bought an Olympus camera with two kit lenses from the online PX for a thousand bucks. The other cameras I have I bought from KEH used for 50 bucks or thereabouts. I have bought several lenses used from KEH. The images produced are fine for me. Why get caught up in the frenzy over all the latest gear? I can't afford to support Japanese camera companies.

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

Paul, thank you for such an insightful posting, not to mention the beautiful examples.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

UHH in a nutshell: There is nothing deep down inside us that can't be fixed by a new camera.

I'm not dissing 'new' for new's sake. But now, 16-years through 5 digital camera changes and numerous lens changes, I do have some insights into what really makes a difference in the results from a pure technology standpoint. A 10MP camera can still look great in 2023, but only if you're using top lenses, superior shooting technique, and not trying to crop into the frame. The first version of Wrigley and the final swamp flower, I think, win-out over their full-frame comparisons. I think there's some technique (aka human) issues in most of the other images that could better close the gap for the image pairs.

All these images compare entry- or mid-level equipment against Canon's top professional versions. Equipment, if purchased new, that is (was) 2x to 3x more expensive than the entry- / mid-level equipment.

Anyone today holding a 20- to 24MP camera has all the 'camera' they'll likely ever need, even if it still has a mirror. Interchangeable-lens cameras in the post 2020 world are luxury goods, packed with technology -- even at the entry-level -- that was reserved to the top models back in the 2010 ish age of cameras. When GAS hits, aspiring photographers with these modern bodies should look instead at better lens(es) or software or external flash or a quality tripod; not giving more money to the camera companies for another body. Certainly not if their goal is a tangible improvement in the image results.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Finding KEH was the biggest impact on my photography over these 16+ years. I swapped through a bunch of bodies and lenses, both film and digital, using KEH, along with ebay and the used department at B&H. When I landed on the EOS 5DIII, a LN purchase from KEH, I promised myself to stand pat for the 10 years this body should last with mid-level usage. I added a second copy and now both cameras report over 100K on their shutters, still as good as new, even if they don't look as good as new.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Agreed. There are camera features that do differentiate different models. There are subtle technical differences, like really 'wide' wide angle that too differentiate sensor-sizes. But, as I repeat myself, anyone today holding a 20- to 24MP camera has all the 'camera' they'll likely ever need, even if it still has a mirror. Not matter the sensor size.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Ray, my camera and lens swapping has slowed since my own retirement. I've been glad to help with ideas, when and where I can.

I only own what I actively shoot, as in, I bring a perspective of using cameras rather than collecting them. I understand other's interests in other aspects, even if they don't match mine. People that really understand most of the content of my UHH participation are those that recognize my 'hype' posts are more sarcasm of 'new equipment' than actually leading the herd with a shopping cart full of new models.

There's nothing wrong with trying, learning, changing. Although, some of the community seem to be oblivious to the many different financial situations of a worldwide community, when their standard answer is the newest top full-frame model as the solution to every camera question. A casual read of my posting history will see those posts attract my sarcasm like a magnet. Yesterday, I tried to pull together some visual examples of the same idea.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Hey Bob, I'm already seeing the mirrorless revolution is putting a premium on quality lenses, bringing back value and higher prices for even legacy film-era lenses with no internal electronics. Canon's long forgotten FD lenses have virtually disappeared from the resale market, where 10ish years ago they were everywhere for sale online. There's a few items I sold during a circa 2014 consolidation that I now wish I'd held onto for sale in this current market, or to keep for more use on cameras I now own.

Ava'sPapa Loc: Cheshire, Ct.

I just came back from my 3 mile walk which gave me time to reflect on all of this. Of all the cameras that I've owned, my favorite was my Olympus OM 10 (around '78 or so) which I purchased right after I sold my Yaschica Electro 35 (another favorite) which I purchased at the BX overseas in 1969. Cameras are like to cars to me. How many of us have said, "boy I wish I still had my '65 (insert car name here)?!
But I will add that I do like my R6 II quite a bit.

bkwaters

You make a very important point. Camera equipment is in itself a hobby distinct from the resultant image. This is KEH is so cool. I enjoy learning the controls and menus of different brands just like I enjoy learning the interfaces of the various PP products.

mikeroetex Loc: Lafayette, LA

Great photos. I jumped back in to photography as a hobby in 2004 after setting film aside for 25 years. I still have first Nikon D40 which I gave my wife when I "upgraded." Coincidentally, I took it out for spin recently (the battery actually charged up) and it worked great with its whopping 6mp.

I have since owned a D7100 (my first "serious" camera) but traded for a D7200 for better low light and deeper buffer. Then came the D500 with 10fps and a perfect buffer and everything I needed for sports/wildlife and astro with my new backup, a used D750. I could still be using that combo for life, but have now gone mirrorless and chose Nikon Z9 over Sony A1. And I'm fully ready to trade the Z9 fo a Z6iii orZ90 that's smaller and less bulky with a 33-45mp sensor, 20-30 fps and the continually improving AF.

I mention all this because photograhy is my hobby . I don't buy because of need, mainly because every other aspect of my life is based on need. I have a modest afforable home but could buy bigger. I drive a used truck, not a BMW. We have a used camper that I paid cash for. I haven't needed to buy dress shoes for 20 years and business attire is only replaced when threads are bare or the waistline demands a bigger size.

So do I go a little crazy buying the latest and greatest cameras and new lenses... sure. It's my treat to myself. I will probably quit buying when I fully retire in 2 years. But make no mistake, UHH has nothing to do with my purchase decisions. I was doing this before I knew UHH existed. Of course, my "hobby" then was golf and I could never resist a new driver!

P.S. I've only bought new twice in 19 years. The D40 and the Z9 + lenses. Thanks to MPB, ebay and Robert's Camera.