5D or Mark IIn??

I'm sure this question has been asked before.. My objective is pretty simple, I only care about image quality. Which of these cameras would provide the best IQ on the same sized digital image. Every review I have looked at compares at 100% crops ; I am not concerned with that, it surely doesn't justify anything to me in the real world. Any experience or opinion is greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Rob

They're gonna be pretty similar. The 5D wins by a bit for ISO performance, imo has a bit better tones, and better skin tone reproduction. The 1-series will give you more detail, it will also have faster, probably more accurate autofocus, and I don't know what else.

Truth be told, I doubt you'd ever notice a difference, really. It'll depend greatly on the lens, and the guy behind the viewfinder. I think few people could tell what shot was taken with which camera.

Thanks Ronald, so an edge with skin tones but a fallback in detail.. Why doesn't the extra resolution shine in capturing detail though? I mean almost 13mp vs 8!?

I think Ron might be mistaken in this case. You are correct, with the same framing, the 5D will definately out-resolve fine detail better than the 1D2N (13 vs 8mp). In the case of the same distance to subject, the pixel density/pitch is the same for these two cameras so they will each throw the same number of pixels on the subject, technically the resolution of detail shoud be the same although the FOV will be wider in the 5D image (1.0x vs 1.3x). Having said that, I own both these cameras, and would have to say that in pixel peeping comparisons the 5D seems to resolve finer detail that the 2N. Maybe different AA filters, I don't know, that's just my opinion.

EMC 2 wrote in post #2364673
I think Ron might be mistaken in this case. You are correct, with the same framing, the 5D will definately out-resolve fine detail better than the 1D2N (13 vs 8mp). In the case of the same distance to subject, the pixel density/pitch is the same for these two cameras so they will each throw the same number of pixels on the subject, technically the resolution of detail shoud be the same although the FOV will be wider in the 5D image (1.0x vs 1.3x). Having said that, I own both these cameras, and would have to say that in pixel peeping comparisons the 5D seems to resolve finer detail that the 2N. Maybe different AA filters, I don't know, that's just my opinion.

Thank you for the intelligent schooling. I had a hunch that 5d would win in the same framing. Now how much would you say the difference is? Would you happen to have any examples to post or would you be able to take a same picture with both cameras and post. Maybe a picture of something at ISO 800 with lots of color and fine detail? I am trying to decide between cameras here and it's really tough.

Rob

I can definately help you out here if you'd like. I'm rather new to this particular forum and not sure how to post pics, but if you give me your email I could put something more specific together for you. That aside though, it really comes down to what you plan on shooting. Image quality is hands down better with the 5D IMO, but if you need speed (FPS), more versitile and accurate AF (which I love btw), weather resistance, etc the 2N is the way to go. If you are more into landscapes, candid people, wedding's and such the 5D was made for you. I can't stress that enough, the features of these cameras are the differentiators, not the actual picture quality.
Also, what size prints are you having in mind? IMO, at about 8x10 or 8x12 seems to be the size where the 5D noticibly resolve more fine detail. Smaller than that and nobody will ever notice the difference, IQ wise or noise wise.

Rumrunner wrote in post #2364796
Thank you for the intelligent schooling. I had a hunch that 5d would win in the same framing. Now how much would you say the difference is? Would you happen to have any examples to post or would you be able to take a same picture with both cameras and post. Maybe a picture of something at ISO 800 with lots of color and fine detail? I am trying to decide between cameras here and it's really tough.

Rob

I saw a high ISO test side by side and was amazed how close they were.......can't find the post now. I'm not sure about the whole pixel thing that the other guy wrote. I know they are the same, but the 5D just has more because of the sensor size. So to me if you crop a 5D the image should be the same........dunno, but that just makes sense to me.

Do keep in mind the weight of the Mk2, with a 24-70 2.8 and a 580 it's a major beast. Not the kinda of set up you want to lug around at a party, or family stuff. I'm picking up a 30D just because of that. Nothing beats the feel of a Mk2 in your hands, but they do wear on you in a few hours. Personally I love my Mk2N and retured the 5D I bought. But once you own a 1 series it's tough to really like anything else.

This IS a very popular question and I spend a good amount of time with both cameras as well. I must say that the differences in image quality are negligible. When printed or viewed on a monitor, the differences in the images are so minute that you'd be hard pressed to identify the camera. These two cameras are very different animals and I think that the choice really lies in the different characteristics and feature-sets offered each one.

Sean H. -- You are correct that both of these cameras have the same size pixels (pixel pitch) and the 5d only has more of them. That's why I said that "technically" resolution should be the same, but IMO, the 5D is definately better in most cases, possibly because of a slightly weaker AA filter would be my guess.

Rumjungle -- I am curious at what print sizes you're referring to? I don't doubt what you say at all, just that I can very easily notice a minor difference in the prints at 8x12, and at say 16x24 I think it's very noticible. Simply put, with similar framing, the differences will not be minute IMHO. On the monitor, that might very well be the case, but on larger prints the 5D wins.

SeanH wrote in post #2364917
I saw a high ISO test side by side and was amazed how close they were.......can't find the post now. I'm not sure about the whole pixel thing that the other guy wrote. I know they are the same, but the 5D just has more because of the sensor size. So to me if you crop a 5D the image should be the same........dunno, but that just makes sense to me.

Do keep in mind the weight of the Mk2, with a 24-70 2.8 and a 580 it's a major beast. Not the kinda of set up you want to lug around at a party, or family stuff. I'm picking up a 30D just because of that. Nothing beats the feel of a Mk2 in your hands, but they do wear on you in a few hours. Personally I love my Mk2N and retured the 5D I bought. But once you own a 1 series it's tough to really like anything else.

Rumjungle wrote in post #2364919
This IS a very popular question and I spend a good amount of time with both cameras as well. I must say that the differences in image quality are negligible. When printed or viewed on a monitor, the differences in the images are so minute that you'd be hard pressed to identify the camera. These two cameras are very different animals and I think that the choice really lies in the different characteristics and feature-sets offered each one.

EMC 2 wrote in post #2364947
Sean H. -- You are correct that both of these cameras have the same size pixels (pixel pitch) and the 5d only has more of them. That's why I said that "technically" resolution should be the same, but IMO, the 5D is definately better in most cases, possibly because of a slightly weaker AA filter would be my guess.

Rumjungle -- I am curious at what print sizes you're referring to? I don't doubt what you say at all, just that I can very easily notice a minor difference in the prints at 8x12, and at say 16x24 I think it's very noticible. Simply put, with similar framing, the differences will not be minute IMHO. On the monitor, that might very well be the case, but on larger prints the 5D wins.

Excellent insight everyone. Many times I hear 1 series owners say they will never go back, I suppose the build quality and feel must be close to erotic. The weight wouldn't bother me, I can carry it. Now let me just cut to the chase and tell you what I plan to use my new camera for -- Mainly indoor low light events such as weddings. I just got a part time job as a second shooter and I need a camera that will perform best at high ISO such as 800 and sometimes create larger prints. The larger prints are more of a rarity compared to the majority that will go into the album, so I am mostly concerned with smaller prints from 4x6 to 8x10. I am mostly concerned with the image quality, but if the difference is so very negligable, I will be easily driven to the 1 series.

EMC 2 please check your PM box, my email adress is sent to you.

Rob

Don't down play the weight issue without checking. One thing with digital is that you don't get the break while you change polls! I shot off about 500 shots with a D70 and 70-200 2.8 and at the end felt like a truck had driven over me! Never had that with my EOS-1HS.

A 1 is just so `right', that dropping that for an extra 12% resolution is asking a lot.

Here is a good site for image comparison, this actually swung it for me when I was torn between the two.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/CO​MPS01.HTM

edit: it looks like they have taken off the 1Dn II. Cant think why. I'll leave the link anyway as it is a useful site.

peatoire wrote in post #2365596
Here is a good site for image comparison, this actually swung it for me when I was torn between the two.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/CO​MPS01.HTM

edit: it looks like they have taken off the 1Dn II. Cant think why. I'll leave the link anyway as it is a useful site.

At the very top for your selection is this: Display Current | All Cameras

SELECT ALL CAMERAS.

Wow great comparison, check out the 5D to the 1DMKII

prep wrote in post #2365366
Don't down play the weight issue without checking. One thing with digital is that you don't get the break while you change polls! I shot off about 500 shots with a D70 and 70-200 2.8 and at the end felt like a truck had driven over me! Never had that with my EOS-1HS.

A 1 is just so `right', that dropping that for an extra 12% resolution is asking a lot.

Not trying to downplay or make it seem easy. If I have a hard time with it, then shame shame, time for neck bridges. I will still have the rebel for long walks. I consider photography as service before self or comfort . Anyway, dropping the Mark IIn for the 5d would give a bit more than 12% resolution no??

peatoire wrote in post #2365596
Here is a good site for image comparison, this actually swung it for me when I was torn between the two.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/CO​MPS01.HTM

edit: it looks like they have taken off the 1Dn II. Cant think why. I'll leave the link anyway as it is a useful site.

mrclark321 wrote in post #2365638
At the very top for your selection is this: Display Current | All Cameras

SELECT ALL CAMERAS.

Wow great comparison, check out the 5D to the 1DMKII

Wow, great link there. That is a significant shine in the 5D IQ from what I see..