Landscape Photogs--Are you Full Frame or Crop?

Sirrith wrote in post #13984493
I do like shooting landscapes, but I don't only shoot landscapes.
I'm on crop at the moment, but eyeing the 5DIII rumours. TBH, the specs are perfect for me; ~22MP, good AF.
The 5D2 has already popped up several times at ~$2000, and I am not at all tempted to go for it precisely because of the AF. When I upgrade, I expect much better AF performance than my current camera, and the 5DII does not deliver, so I will not be buying it. The 5DIII though, if it lives up to its rumoured specs, I will be sorely tempted by, and will probably get as long as the price drops below $3500.

Funny thing is the autofocus isn't even bad, most people just try and compare it to every other camera, you have to understand the 5d series are their own breed.

This whole thread is pointless if people don't indicate what they do with the image. If you only put images on the web, any DSLR is overkill. If you only print up to 12x18, any APS-C will be great. If you print 20x30 from a 40D or higher, it will look fantastic until you put a 20x30 from a 5D2 next to it. Talking about IQ is meaningless unless you cite size and context.

tzalman wrote in post #13989549
This whole thread is pointless if people don't indicate what they do with the image. If you only put images on the web, any DSLR is overkill. If you only print up to 12x18, any APS-C will be great. If you print 20x30 from a 40D or higher, it will look fantastic until you put a 20x30 from a 5D2 next to it. Talking about IQ is meaningless unless you cite size and context.

Amazing how often that simple concept is overlooked in all the comparisons out there

There's nothing wrong with the 5DII's autofocus system for landscape or most any other kind of "sedate" photography. It's just not the quickest or best tracking for moving subjects, so not really ideal as a "sports" camera (though it can be used for that, you'd just have more missed focus shots). 50D's AF system is better for sports/action (so is 60D's, and of course 7D's). The current Rebel/xxxD series have AF most similar to 5D series'.

I'm also not buying some of the "leaked specs" of the highly anticipated 5DIII. Canon might surprise me, but I really don't believe that 5D Mark III will get the same AF system at the 1DX. I'd think it a lot more likely to get something similar to the 7D's (which still would be a very nice upgrade). Think about it... Why would Canon make a $3500 camera so comparable & competitive with their still unreleased top-of-the-line model that sells for twice as much. I also don't believe the dual memory slot spec: one CF and one SD. Canon has just - finally - gotten away from mixing memory types. The 1DX will have two CF slots. It's been a bone of contention and some complaints for years, that Canon has insisted on mixing CF and SD in their 1D line, and they finally have stopped doing that. Why would they reverse that in 5DIII? (It's also kind of funny that Nikon, which for years has put two CF in their high end cameras, has just announced the D800 will have a mix of CF and SD. D'oh!)

I prefer to use 5DII for landscapes, mainly because landscape shots often lend themselves to big prints... really big prints. But to be honest, 50D or one of the newer 18MP models can do pretty darned well.... I've posted these images before so please excuse the repetition, but it can be pretty hard to tell apart a 50D image from the 5DII image, at least as large as I've printed them to date (12"x18" or 12"x16"):

L.J.G. wrote in post #13985108
but after it just sat in the cupboard

You keep your camera in the cupboard?

I have both 50D and 5DM2 bodies. I used the 50D for landscapes up to 2010, then got the 5DM2. I now use it exclusively for landscapes ... better IQ for larger (13x19) prints, much less noise, wider view with the same lenses, etc., definitely better.

I keep the 50D for action and so I can still use the 17-55 f/2.8 IS (not for landscapes), a great lens IMHO ...

Maxdave

I took a shot of Primrose Hill here in London at night and got it printed 40x28 and it came out pretty good! No loss of detail or distortion etc.

HTTP response: 400 | MIME changed to 'text/html'

Prior to purchasing a 5DII, I used 7D's for all my landscapes. My largest prints size is 13x19 and they looked fantastic. Loved the shots I got at Denali in the fall. After that I purchased the 5DII and a 16-35 L II to go with it. I don't know quite how to describe it, but the results from the 5DII are just more painterly, artistic, smooth and rich. I know this is pretty subjective, but my advice for landscapes is that you will be perfectly happy with a 60D or 7D as long as you don't compare a 5D II with good glass alongside the crop frame. By the way I kept both my 7D's for wildlife and I wouldn't hesitate to use them for a landscape if necessary.

MNUplander wrote in post #13985417
Im primarily a landscape shooter with a 5D2 and 7D. There is no doubt the 5D2 makes better images than my 7D and it was the same back when I compared my 40D and 5Dc. But, the differences arent as stark as you might think - a little sharper here, a little less noisy there etc - but no wins by knockout, especially at ISO 100.

There are 3 areas where FF really has an advantage:

-Using the wide primes in their native FOV - TS-e 17, TS-e 24, 24 1.4, Zeiss 21 etc. These lenses kick the snot out of anything a crop camera has to offer.

-Long exposures are significantly less noisy with my 5D2.

-If I need to stop motion in low light, my 5D2 does a much better job at keeping the noise down. For example, if Im doing a sunrise shoot, its still early and I dont want a glass surface on the lake - actually want to see the waves - I need to crank up up my ISO to 1200+. The 5D2 images look better - although I still end up exposure blending the waives in so my sky and foreground are still ISO 100.

However, crop cameras have their own benefits for a landscape shooter:

-You get more DOF at the same aperture which means shorter shutter speeds for more handholdability (nice for hiking w/o a tripod)/lower ISO to get the same DOF.

-IMO, the 10-22 is superior to the 17-40.

^^^ This.

Except the DOF 'advantage'. With a crop you start seeing diffraction sat say f11, where as on FF at f16, so while you do lose a stop of light, the DOF isn't an issue.

not sure about the 10-22 vs 17-40, BUT, the real advantage in IQ is when you get a nice prime/TS-E.

I also don't always shoot at ISO100. There are times when the light is so low and I don't want that blurred cloud/sea look that I crank up the ISO to 800 or even 1600. With the t1i (50D would be similar) that spells disaster for a 16 inch print, but is really not at all bad with the 5DII.

I also have shots that have quite a lot of manipulation (curves, levels + local contrast enhancement filter), and then even ISO100 with a crop can yield noise, especially if you underexpose a bit.

newphoto wrote in post #13990743
Prior to purchasing a 5DII, I used 7D's for all my landscapes. My largest prints size is 13x19 and they looked fantastic. Loved the shots I got at Denali in the fall. After that I purchased the 5DII and a 16-35 L II to go with it. I don't know quite how to describe it, but the results from the 5DII are just more painterly, artistic, smooth and rich. I know this is pretty subjective, but my advice for landscapes is that you will be perfectly happy with a 60D or 7D as long as you don't compare a 5D II with good glass alongside the crop frame. By the way I kept both my 7D's for wildlife and I wouldn't hesitate to use them for a landscape if necessary.

I had the same experience. 7d looks great until you compare the prints to the 5d2. Printed larger than 16x20, there really is no comparison for detailed landscapes. If you want to shoot landscapes, get the 5d2 and you'll never have to second guess yourself.

Yeah there's no question if I only shot landscapes, the 7D would've been sold for the 5D II. But I felt the 7D is a better all-around camera.

watt100 wrote in post #13985260
I'm crop for landscapes - I wouldn't be tempted until full frame model gets to $1,000

By that time a 56 Megapixel MF body with lens will be about $3,000 then I can bid adios to 35mm digital altogether!

I do a lot of landscape work and use both types of cameras (5DII and 7D). The link in my signature contains images from both cameras, and I would be surprised if most people looking through them would be able to tell a difference in the image quality that would single out the shots taken with the 7D. Those are mostly 900px web previews, however, and in prints, there is a slight difference. The biggest difference comes in processing the images. Landscapes tend to involve large amounts of dynamic range, and the 5D Mark II excels in that department; so I can pull more detail out of shots taken with it.

Auto-focus for landscapes?? It's a rare occasion when I'm not using a tripod and focusing manually with Live View at 10x magnification. Most archaeological sites prohibit the use of tripods, so in those locations I handhold and use AF, but the 5D Mark II handles that kind of auto-focusing just fine. I wouldn't let the AF of the Mark II worry you one bit.

The real benefit of the Mark III might be an increase in dynamic range. I think that is the one feature that landscape photographers might find particularly appealing about the new model, but only time will tell if there really has been any improvement in that category.

I had my 7D before the 5DII. When I learned the use of the 7D I was getting good images. Once I took the 5DII out, at first I was disappointed. Then I figured the camera/lenses out and there is a difference. The color/contrast, richness and "magic" of the lens combos and body are hard to describe. Yes, I still use the 7D, for both landscape and architectural. There are distinct differences in the images I make of the same location though. Both are great cameras.

FF here. Had both for a while and seeing images take from same location but camera width apart (tripod's side-by-side) showed me that FF was more to my liking.

Yes, the equipment cost a boatload of $$, but I'm happy and that's really all that matters. LOL