Comparison of different telephoto lenses on different Mp size bodies

Folks just been googling this to find a comparison -

If you had the option to either put say a canon 70-300 IS USM lens on a 20 + Mp body and crop the image to equal a 400mm lens FOV, or put a mediocre 400mm lens on a slightly smaller Mp body say 16/17Mp and use it at 400mm - the weakest IQ range of that lens.

Say using a 50D with a Tokina 80-400 at 400mm or using a 80D with a Canon 70-300IS USM at 300mm and cropping in post to the same size FOV as the 400mm lens.

What would you do?

P.

Neither; I'd save my money and get a 400mm f/5.6L

Impossible to speculate, as you need to compare the combinations in actuality, not merely in theory, to derive MTF scores for each before computing the differences resulting from final magnifcation.

I'll play, i would go new sensor and shorter lens. Could get away with lower shutter speeds on the 300 with better noise control

Starting with 2 mediocre lenses isn't going to get you really good results no matter what you do.

Pagman wrote in post #18168037
Say using a 50D with a Tokina 80-400 at 400mm or using a 80D with a Canon 70-300IS USM at 300mm and cropping in post to the same size FOV as the 400mm lens.

You would end up with a 13.5 Mp image from the 80D, which most likely would still provide good IQ.

But the 50D is 8 years old, and sensor technology and AF performance has improved. And since your an aviation photographer,
the 80D's AF would be a better choice.

Wilt wrote in post #18168132
Impossible to speculate, as you need to compare the combinations in actuality, not merely in theory, to derive MTF scores for each before computing the differences resulting from final magnifcation.

I'm with Wilt on this one. Though you could do the math, actual hardware never performs to theoretical limits and in this case, as it's so close, the performance of the actual hardware will make a huge impact.

Which one of the currently available four 70-300 Canon IS lenses are you thinking about:

70-300 DO

70-300 IS L

70-300 IS non-L

new 70-300 IS non-L

To the OP...

Are you considering buying an 80D for aviation photography?

The 80D isn't the first camera to come to mind when thinking about aviation. Usually it's the 7DII.
The 80D doesn't pack all the performance of the 7DII, but it has 4 more Mps and better DR than
the 7DII (at least according to DPR). And it's less expensive.

While surfing flickr I came across these 80D aviation photos. I believe the photographer is a fellow
forum member here. Pretty impressive 80D aviation images, I say!

https://www.flickr.com​/photos/private_custar​d/

I may have about £500-£550 around xmas to get a dslr and long lons as possible, I had a short list that due to money has come down basically to a Nikon D7000 with the most budget available zoom going to 400mm that I have seen second hand is the Tokina 80-400 D.

I used to have a Nikon D7100 with a AF-S 70-300VR and at the moment am re editing my aviation pics from it, I am plesently supprised how good this set up was, this is what has led to me asking the question as My budget will be extremely tight and a one off occasion with no opption to save any more money.

I had considered Canon but tbh not the 7D as the one I had I just did not take to, the 80D I mentioned not to buy as its well out of my budget metioned, I know the 60D is near to my budget if I look hard on Ebay(might be a bit rough round the edges if cheap), then I know the only Canon 400mm zoom the mk1 100-400 would be out of my budget.

So not many opptions due to the budget and my requirements - Light weight, 400mm lens with less need for cropping, or a 300mm lens but on a larger Mp body allowing more cropping to reach the 400mm lens length.

I know £500-550 doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room.


P.

crbinson wrote in post #18168098
Neither; I'd save my money and get a 400mm f/5.6L

Cant afford one

P.

Wilt wrote in post #18168132
Impossible to speculate, as you need to compare the combinations in actuality, not merely in theory, to derive MTF scores for each before computing the differences resulting from final magnifcation.

Ta for that - I have tried to make sense of the lens charts but they do seem to differ between different online reviews.

P.

bildeb0rg wrote in post #18168232
I'll play, i would go new sensor and shorter lens. Could get away with lower shutter speeds on the 300 with better noise control

Ta for that = the 80D was just an example due to its 24mp size.

P.

Bassat wrote in post #18168302
Starting with 2 mediocre lenses isn't going to get you really good results no matter what you do.

Very true - but if on a Tight tight budget there isnt a lot you can do about it


P.

Perfectly Frank wrote in post #18168308
You would end up with a 13.5 Mp image from the 80D, which most likely would still provide good IQ.

But the 50D is 8 years old, and sensor technology and AF performance has improved. And since your an aviation photographer,
the 80D's AF would be a better choice.

I did some math on the linear edge comparing the percentage difference between a 24mp and 16mp long edge linear, and it works out at 22% if you cropped the 24mp linear edge down to the same as the 16mp.
But to reach 400mm FOV by cropping alone as said above would require a crop down to 13.5mp.

P.