Is 5D IQ that much better than 30D?

Where is that nice color booklet I got about 8 months ago from Canon about the 5D? That brochure sold me. Canon did a great job advertizing the 5D, making it sort of affordable for semi-pros and serious amateurs. In my wildest dreams I never thought I'd own one 8 months ago and now I have one. See, the hype worked! Darn it!

I think the 5d image quality is much better. If you frame the same subject matter equally with each camera you are getting a lot more pixels which equals greater IQ.

I thank you all for your input. Thanks also, for aspects of 5D full frame, not readily apparent such as the change in depth of focus. As for UWA, I would have thought that the full frame would demonstrate poorer edge definition on most lenses, as well as UWA. Other aspect of higher pixel counts that are not so attractive to me, are larger CF cards, slower downloads, and just increased cost overall.

Don Powell wrote in post #2259495
I thank you all for your input. Thanks also, for aspects of 5D full frame, not readily apparent such as the change in depth of focus. As for UWA, I would have thought that the full frame would demonstrate poorer edge definition on most lenses, as well as UWA. Other aspect of higher pixel counts that are not so attractive to me, are larger CF cards, slower downloads, and just increased cost overall.

Well the cropped cameras help hide weaker lens flaws, in general.

One thing with the ultra wides you get that the cropped wides don't give, is bigger apertures.

The 10-20/10-22's don't give you 2.8. The 16-35 will give you 2.8 if you really need that 2.8.

dontblink wrote in post #2256742
Under most conditions, you cannot tell the difference between an image from a 30D and an image from a 5D. Shooting at high ISO or printing to large sizes reveals the strength of the 5D

With my primes, I see a difference in the detail--at all ISOs.

cc10d wrote in post #2258433
I thought Depth of Field was a function of the lens, focal length, aperture/distance to subject. What did I miss here?

CC, if this was correct. Then wouldn't P&S have great DOF?

ScottE wrote in post #2258661
Image quality on the 5D is somewhat better than the 30D, but not so much that it makes much difference for most applications. The 5D makes use of newer technology while the 30D still uses the same sensor technology that was introduced with the 20D.

I read one article that claimed Canon was working on a 12 MP EF-S sensor that would outcompete the Nikon D2X, but decided not to bring it out yet because sales would hurt the 5D. The thought was that Canon will hold off releasing that sensor until after they bring out the next generation of the 5D which will have a 16 MP sensor.

Image quality of both sensors will continue to improve as new technology is released and full frame will likely always be ahead. The real question for the camera buyer will always be, "How much image quality do you need and how much are you willing to pay for it?"

Unless Canon has made some major improvements from the 20D to the 30D, the 5D's focusing is significantly better. I just came off from a 3-day shoot of a swimming event, I shot more than 6,000 images and the keeper rate (in-focus images) is much higher on the 5D.

Atlasman wrote in post #2262565
Unless Canon has made some major improvements from the 20D to the 30D, the 5D's focusing is significantly better. I just came off from a 3-day shoot of a swimming event, I shot more than 6,000 images and the keeper rate (in-focus images) is much higher on the 5D.

I found the keeper rate to be much higher than even my MKIIN (but to be fair, because of the weight of the MKIIN, I had camera shake that ruined a lot of my shots)...my 5D's focus is significantly faster than my 30D...I think it locks faster than my previous N but I didn't have the two together to test it...just from memory. The 30D is a great camera but I am amazed that people think the 30D is acceptable at 1600 ISO. I think it's horrible. It does really well up to 640 (and 800-1250 is acceptable but only if you expose VERY very carefully)...which is still very good indeed but at 1600 and beyond the 5D blows it out of the water. The image details are also quite noticeable in a comparison of the two. The 30D's speed makes it very valuable though. I wish the 5D had at least 5fps.

Permagrin wrote in post #2262600
I found the keeper rate to be much higher than even my MKIIN (but to be fair, because of the weight of the MKIIN, I had camera shake that ruined a lot of my shots)...my 5D's focus is significantly faster than my 30D...I think it locks faster than my previous N but I didn't have the two together to test it...just from memory. The 30D is a great camera but I am amazed that people think the 30D is acceptable at 1600 ISO. I think it's horrible. It does really well up to 640 (and 800-1250 is acceptable but only if you expose VERY very carefully)...which is still very good indeed but at 1600 and beyond the 5D blows it out of the water. The image details are also quite noticeable in a comparison of the two. The 30D's speed makes it very valuable though. I wish the 5D had at least 5fps.

As I said in a previous post, the 5D's image quality comes shining through with my primes—I did a 30 birthday party recently, I went with my 50 f.14 and 135 f2 and what I was image that were 3d-like--the wow-factor went off the scale!

I never got that from my 20D.

Permagrin wrote in post #2262600
I found the keeper rate to be much higher than even my MKIIN (but to be fair, because of the weight of the MKIIN, I had camera shake that ruined a lot of my shots)...my 5D's focus is significantly faster than my 30D...I think it locks faster than my previous N but I didn't have the two together to test it...just from memory. The 30D is a great camera but I am amazed that people think the 30D is acceptable at 1600 ISO. I think it's horrible. It does really well up to 640 (and 800-1250 is acceptable but only if you expose VERY very carefully)...which is still very good indeed but at 1600 and beyond the 5D blows it out of the water. The image details are also quite noticeable in a comparison of the two. The 30D's speed makes it very valuable though. I wish the 5D had at least 5fps.

I'd be willing to bet, you'd have more keepers with the 1DmkiiN if you shot with it on a monopod and shot with the 5D on the monopod.

But defintely agree with focus being faster than 30D. They are very unkind to the lower cameras. One of the pros of Nikon is they give you good overall features for just about any camera.

The 30D makes me not want to use it after having my 1DMKII and using the 5D for a little while.

davidfig wrote in post #2262550
CC, if this was correct. Then wouldn't P&S have great DOF?

For sure. Go to any P&S forum. The most frequent question, after how to reduce noise, is how to blur the background of a portrait.
Elie

Don Powell wrote in post #2256382
I understand that the 5D sensor is about 2.5 times the surface area of the 30D, however the 5D has many fewer pixels per square mm. I also realize that the potential for noise, in the 30D, is higher. At what size print can a difference be seen?

about A3+ at a guess. assuming a dpi of about 240

willg wrote in post #2256717
the fewer pixels per mm helps in the image quality

Jon wrote in post #2256731
Well, 50% more pixels lets you go about 22-23% (linear) larger with the same pixel resolution. So figure how big you can make an acceptable 30D print and multiply the size by 1.22.

exactly go into photoshop and fiddle about withe 'image size' you'll be able to see how big a print your pixels will take you for any given dpi.

John7 wrote in post #2256857
And more fine detail in WA images from 5D sensor

not so much more fine detail but considerably more WA (for the same FL)

ggw2000 wrote in post #2258262
DOF is considerably less on the 5D also. The DOF on the 30D is tough sometimes. I can't imagine less.

get a tripod.
i.e. stop down and get whatever DOF you want (pretty much)

sapearl wrote in post #2258794
My 5D will attest to that - almost as good my old medium format .

Re: which print size will show a difference... I have prints at 240dpi from the 5D at A2 and they look good, doubt the 30D would look quite as good at that size, but probably not far off

The single biggest advantage of the 5D is the FF sensor.

If 1.6 is OK with you and you want the best IQ up to about A3, wait for the 30D upgrade to 10MP to match the 400D, it might even get a 12MP upgrade, or get the 400D instead now.

I very much doubt you will tell the difference in IQ between the 400D or any of the 8MP 1.6 crop DSLR cameras unless you do make A3 prints or larger.

Mt recommendation would be to decide wheter you prefer to shoot long or wide, if wide go for the 5D if long go for the 400D or 40D (when it comes out). IF you need BIG prints

Personally I got the 5D for the FF and will also get the next iteration of the 5D for really big FF prints

Don Powell wrote in post #2259495
I thank you all for your input. Thanks also, for aspects of 5D full frame, not readily apparent such as the change in depth of focus. As for UWA, I would have thought that the full frame would demonstrate poorer edge definition on most lenses, as well as UWA. Other aspect of higher pixel counts that are not so attractive to me, are larger CF cards, slower downloads, and just increased cost overall.

really depends on whether you are using 'L' lenses or not. even if you're not the edge def on all lenses isn't so bad that it needs cropping!

but as you say there is an increased cost overall

Atlasman wrote in post #2263921
As I said in a previous post, the 5D's image quality comes shining through with my primes—I did a 30 birthday party recently, I went with my 50 f.14 and 135 f2 and what I was image that were 3d-like--the wow-factor went off the scale!

I never got that from my 20D.

see the corners are NOT all crap!

Atlasman wrote in post #2262565
Unless Canon has made some major improvements from the 20D to the 30D, the 5D's focusing is significantly better.

Permagrin wrote in post #2262600
..my 5D's focus is significantly faster than my 30D..

grego wrote in post #2264420
But defintely agree with focus being faster than 30D.

...there's another plus for you

I love my 5D, I do a lot of really big prints, so the extra MP was needed. High ISO and low ISO (3200, 50) come in very handy when shooting without a lot of available light, or with a lot of light. I have blown up a picture, shot at 3200 ISO to 20x30 and it looks amazing. Can barely even see the noise, and full frame really is A LOT better than a 1.6 or 1.3 crop. (for what I use it for anyways)

Michaelmjc wrote in post #2266357
I love my 5D, I do a lot of really big prints, so the extra MP was needed. High ISO and low ISO (3200, 50) come in very handy when shooting without a lot of available light, or with a lot of light. I have blown up a picture, shot at 3200 ISO to 20x30 and it looks amazing. Can barely even see the noise, and full frame really is A LOT better than a 1.6 or 1.3 crop. (for what I use it for anyways)

I know...it really makes a big difference for what one uses it...for landscapes and detail shots (architecture), even animals and portraits...the larger pixels, the more light, the better detail....it's incomparable. For sports, or racing I'd want the 30D or even more, a 1 series...(not the ds) for the speed and the crop. I'd love the ds but for the same reason I love the 5....