Comments on: Canon EOS 7D vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II: ISO Comparison

By: Digital Cameras » Blog Archive » Leica X1 vs. Sigma DP2: Two Photographer’s Compacts Compared

Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:50:46 +0000

[...] Canon EOS 7D vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II: ISO Comparison [...]

By: Digital Cameras » Blog Archive » Olympus E-P2 vs. Panasonic GF1: JPEG Engine Comparison

Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:11:13 +0000

[...] Canon EOS 7D vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II: ISO Comparison [...]

By: Patrick

Patrick — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:58:52 +0000

burak,
I’d prefer “softer” than “out of focus”, and I’d argue that the 5D2 has superior IQ. In general full frame cameras tend to look softer to my eye, but that could just be the units we’ve received. Also the cameras do have different depths of field, just look at the third crop where the bird is clearly in focus but that bottle isn’t with the 5D2.

And yes, we’re working on getting “a life”.

By: burak

burak — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 20:21:25 +0000

sorry but this test is BS
5d is out of focus and they have same image quality?
yeah right

get a life

By: Digital Cameras » Blog Archive » Olympus E-P2 vs. Panasonic GF1 Part One: ISO and IQ Comparisons

Fri, 05 Feb 2010 15:34:02 +0000

[...] Canon EOS 7D vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II: ISO Comparison [...]

By: Jay_S

Jay_S — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 00:28:43 +0000

Pat,

Thanks, and I’m not debating, truly, but it is hard to compare those two images without know a lot more. First, the bows aren’t even in the same position so depending on the focus point the DOF can have a play in it. Also handheld vs. tripod, shutter speed, f/stop, and you mention kit lens.. which lens’ was on each camera as that can make a huge difference as you know. If it the same as your description where the 5DII had the 1.4 50mm and the 7D the 28-135, that alone can make a night and day difference. The 50mm 1.4 is arguably one of the sharpest Canon has made, while the 28-135 is several generations old in lens design and far from L quality. I know you’re trying to show a comparison of an ISO 1600 vs. an ISO 100, but I’ve also seen all the ISO comparisons and I’ve not seen a 5DII at 1600 that clear!! That’s a definite keeper if that a NR off shot.

Jay S.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 21:44:20 +0000

Jay,
I see what you’re saying, and I agree the 5D2’s output is softer a bit out of camera (I think every full frame has this same look now that I think about it). I’ll just say that it is my experience that the 5D2 is capable of blistering levels of detail, much more than the 7D offered during our testing. One of the main sections I look at in our ISO test is the red/orange roll of ribbon on the left. It has a very fine rayon weave, and in general most crop cameras don’t full resolve it (and yes they’re hampered by kit lenses).

here’s the 5D2 at ISO 1600 NR off in very low light: http://www.flickr.com/photos/patrickdean/4308607196/sizes/o/in/set-72157623168347727/
here’s the 7D in normal conditions at ISO 100 NR off: http://www.flickr.com/photos/patrickdean/4052822106/sizes/o/in/set-72157622556744581/

On the 5D2 it’s more clear that the one ribbon is rayon and the flower on top is made from cotton, you can feel the textures better. Of course none of this matters if you’re not printing large or working at higher ISO settings. Both cameras are good, and if you’ve read the 7D review on the site, you’ll know we ended up giving the 7D an “essential rating”–so I’m not saying I’m not a fan of the 7D, just that with the right settings, and lens, the 5D2 does bring more detail…IMO

By: Jay_S

Jay_S — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 19:28:37 +0000

Hi Patrick and thanks for the reply. I’m not referring to sharpness as much as loss of detail. I shot a charity event (I’m still on a 40D) with a co-photographer with 2 5D MKIIs. In almost shot for shot (with identical lens’) everything from the 5Ds had a much softer feel (which isn’t a bad thing in some cases, e.g. portrait work), but again from most of what I’ve read, the 5D leaves detail (not sharpeness) behind for sake of noise reduction. My thought here was that since you started these all off with no NR turned on, it would appear that there is appreciably more detail with the 7D. This is born out in other comparisons I’ve seen. So the question remains, at what point is there a crossover of adding NR (low, normal, high) to a 7D image where the detail loss comes up to the zero NR the 5D starts with. I may try both, with the intent of returning one. Seems like there are so many opinions out there. Thanks again!

Jay S.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:10:48 +0000

Hi Jay,
I would caution against judging sharpness results from these crops as you do have DOF issues as well as subtle differences in where a lens has absolute focus etc. If you’re after REAL detail, the 5D2 is the superior camera. In my analysis the 5D2 is much superior to the 7D in every regard, after ISO 800. If you wanted more out-of-camera sharpness you could bump up the sharpness settings in-camera (which I typically turn down for these tests). I still think the 7D is a great camera, especially compared to other cropped cameras, but I’m not trading in my 5D2 for one.

By: Jay_S

Jay_S — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:03:00 +0000

I seen so many of these comparisons and considering both. Clearly the 7D is showing more detail, which is the consensus by many. Since NR was turned off for these tests, and you have a much better lens on the 5D, it is a bit scary the the loss of detail is significant in comparison. That’s not to say a 5D image can’t be sharpened, but you can’t sharpen detail that really isn’t there.

By contrast, I wish we could see a comparison at 400, 800, etc. on the 7D with various NR’s turned on to get a sense of how much detail remains or is lost vs. the 5D. If some NR on the 7D negates some of the difference between the two as far as ISO performance goes, but still maintains more detail, than with all the other benefits, the 7D would seem to be the way to go.

Jay S.