Canon EOS 7D Mark II Is Sharper And Has Less Noise Than EOS 5D Mark III

stsva wrote in post #17237518
This, of course, is only for the really big lenses:
http://upload.wikimedi​a.org …d/Crawler-Transporter.jpg

Ha ha. I see what you did there

Firstly, both cannot be 100% crops and have the object to be identical in size. The 7D is 20MP and the 5D is 22MP. With that said, I would expect the 7Dii should have more resolving power than the 5diii. Isn't this one of the major factors that you would buy crop camera? The "reach" is the advantage. There is no reason to buy "reach" if a FF camera photo can just be enlarged 1.6x and be sharper.

Here is my calcs to predict "sharpness" power.... (MP x sharpness rating). The sharpness rating is from DXO mark based on the pairing of camera and lens.

5diii with Canon 600mm f4 lens:
22MP x 20P-Mpix =440 MP-P-Mpix

70d with Canon 600mm f4 lens:
20MP x 1.6 x 14P-Mpix =448 MP-P-Mpix

So with the 70D vs 5diii, 448 vs 440 is pretty close in sharpness resolution. I would imagine that the 7Dii will be better than the 70D (because of reduced noise), therefore the reach factor should give you a better sharpness rating than the 5diii. Well at least with using the canon 600mm f4 lens.

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #17237266
^wish you could compare to the A7s as well....less pixel density+huge photosites would prove an interesting compare to the 6D dont you think?

You can check out a comparison using DPR's comparison tool here:
http://www.dpreview.co​m …ws/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii/8

Just change one of the comparison boxes to the A7 or A7s and then change up the ISO settings. You can compare both JPEGs and RAW using that tool, also.

snake0ape wrote in post #17237608
5diii with Canon 600mm f4 lens:
22MP x 20P-Mpix =440 MP-P-Mpix

70d with Canon 600mm f4 lens:
20MP x 1.6 x 14P-Mpix =448 MP-P-Mpix

That is strange math. It's really a lot simpler than that. A FF sensor has 2.56x the area of Canon APS-C. So a 1.6x crop from a 20 P-MP system would have 20/2.56 P-MP or 7.8 P-MP.

Not that I put much stock in the idea of P-MPs, but that is how the math would work.

If you crop a 1DX image to match an APC sensor you would have just under 11 MP as opposed to 20 MP on the 7D II. (13.2 MP on a 5DIII)

John Sheehy wrote in post #17238224
That is strange math. It's really a lot simpler than that. A FF sensor has 2.56x the area of Canon APS-C. So a 1.6x crop from a 20 P-MP system would have 20/2.56 P-MP or 7.8 P-MP.

Not that I put much stock in the idea of P-MPs, but that is how the math would work.

Yeah, forgot to square the area. My bad. However, I also like to factor in the dxo "subjective" number because I need some "noise and degradation" factor for a crop camera. It seems to work for me and appears to be consistent to my testings.

butterfly2937 wrote in post #17238320
If you crop a 1DX image to match an APC sensor you would have just under 11 MP as opposed to 20 MP on the 7D II. (13.2 MP on a 5DIII)

Like John mentioned, it's actually even less, if I understand what you're trying to say.

If cropped to match the 20mp APS-C sensor, the 5DIII will yield a roughly 8.6mp image, while the 1DX will give you 7mp.
1.6x1.6 since it's surface area.

gabebalazs wrote in post #17238546
Like John mentioned, it's actually even less, if I understand what you're trying to say.

If cropped to match the 20mp APS-C sensor, the 5DIII will yield a roughly 8.6mp image, while the 1DX will give you 7mp.
1.6x1.6 since it's surface area.

Well that is even worse if you use FF and have to upsize an image to equal the FOV of the 7DII.

Holy Thread revival Batman!

So having wondered about the merits of the 7DII vs the 5DIII I have finally got an answer...of sorts

I went to the brilliant Calumet shop in Manchester and set about buying the 100-400mm II (I have the Tammy 150-600mm but don't really get on with it). While I was looking at the lens and discussing various discounts, I mentioned that I was thinking of replacing my 4 year old 7D and had saved up enough for a 5DIII. I actually have a piggy bank at home with hundreds of 1 pound coins in it (well I did have ). The lovely John (salesman) talked me though options, let me play with all the gear and then said that I would get £250 cash back on the 5D, £100 on the 7D and £185 on the 100-400mm if I bought it in conjunction with one of the cameras. I mentioned that the 7D was interest free for two years , but not the 5D and so the conversation went on...


To cut a long story only a little shorted, he made a phone call to this finance people and asked for a deal on everything I bought being on 0%. So I am now the proud owner of .......

..... a 5DIII, a 7DII and a 100-400mm, plus also I got some Calumet money back to get a grip for the 7DII (in addition to the Canon Cash back offers) and I got the 5DIII grip added to the 0% finance, oh and he threw in a 32GB fast SD card and did a half price 32GB San Disc Extreme Pro CF card for me too. I still have my original 7D too, which is nice because I do love it still.

So far I have only taken pictures of my feet with high iso to see a) how good the two cameras high iso's are and b) to see how good the pseudo macro of the 100-400mm is. If my feet were webbed, I would post them up on here as a duck picture of sorts.

Geordie Amanda wrote in post #17956173
Holy Thread revival Batman!

So having wondered about the merits of the 7DII vs the 5DIII I have finally got an answer...of sorts

I went to the brilliant Calumet shop in Manchester and set about buying the 100-400mm II (I have the Tammy 150-600mm but don't really get on with it). While I was looking at the lens and discussing various discounts, I mentioned that I was thinking of replacing my 4 year old 7D and had saved up enough for a 5DIII. I actually have a piggy bank at home with hundreds of 1 pound coins in it (well I did have ). The lovely John (salesman) talked me though options, let me play with all the gear and then said that I would get £250 cash back on the 5D, £100 on the 7D and £185 on the 100-400mm if I bought it in conjunction with one of the cameras. I mentioned that the 7D was interest free for two years , but not the 5D and so the conversation went on...


To cut a long story only a little shorted, he made a phone call to this finance people and asked for a deal on everything I bought being on 0%. So I am now the proud owner of .......

..... a 5DIII, a 7DII and a 100-400mm, plus also I got some Calumet money back to get a grip for the 7DII (in addition to the Canon Cash back offers) and I got the 5DIII grip added to the 0% finance, oh and he threw in a 32GB fast SD card and did a half price 32GB San Disc Extreme Pro CF card for me too. I still have my original 7D too, which is nice because I do love it still.

So far I have only taken pictures of my feet with high iso to see a) how good the two cameras high iso's are and b) to see how good the pseudo macro of the 100-400mm is. If my feet were webbed, I would post them up on here as a duck picture of sorts.

What do you mean your feet arn't webbed? Everyone round here have webbed feet (well the locals do ).

I'm from the North East. We have heads shaped like a flat cap and apparently a permanent speech impediment

So I took both cameras out on Sunday to a nearby water park and shot some jet Skiers that I know well. I started off in sunshine (and shooting only in RAW) and mostly the 5DIII then as I moved down the lake I started to use the 7DIi again mostly with the 100-400mmII. What did I notice in the couple of thousand snaps (I used maximum drive speeds). Well, once the light went (quite soon on, this is the UK and you are rarely far from a fully cloud ridden sky) and I went to 400-800 iso on the 7DII, the images look quite noisy, in fact nearly as noisy as my 7DI, although the noise is finer I guess (more pixels?). Also I found the 5DIII filled it's buffer quite quickly, even with a San Disc Extreme Pro CF card, oh and once I got to iso800 and a very heavily clouded sky, both cameras seemed to underexpose more than my original 7Di. Around 1 stop imho

But, the 7DII is amazing with it's high burst rate and fast clearing of it's buffer. The focusing is something I haven't quite dialled in yet and am still experimenting with which mode to use. I did find the images looked a little softer than the 5DIII;s no matter what I did.

...and the 5DII. I love this camera. It just makes my half ar$ed efforts look so much better than I deserve. Faithful colours, great detail (I didn't go beyond iso 800 I think, but I have played with iso1,600 and loved it) and hardly need to touch noise reduction in LR. I had thought that I would end up with the 7DII as my number one camera and the 5DIII for special occasions, but so far I can't see me ever putting the 5DIII away. It's my first full frame and can't believe what I have been missing since my 350D. If the 5DIV is better still then I will have to sell a kidney or something and get one.

Anyhoo, here is a snap at 400mm on my 5DIII (there were some not as sharp I'll be honest, but I suspect it was my fault)

Canon 5DIII, 100-400mm at 400mm. F5.6. Iso400. 1/1,600th

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/F49z​LW

If the 7D2 is noisy at ISO 800, either there is underexposure, or the raw conversion is not correct/wrong settings engaged. There could be something wrong with the 7D2 too, but I suspect underexposure was the root cause, and you were potentially really at ISO 3200/6400 if you moved the exposure slider up during post.

Do you have any CR2 files at ISO 800 from the 7D2 you could share?

I have always set my 7DII at +2/3 stop EC. If I shoot as metered, I get underexposure.