5Dii -vs- 7D for landscaping?

this is interesting, one with the 5Dii and 24L, the other the 7D and 10-22 (exif intact, but can you see a difference?):

Ill take a guess, the first one appears to have slightly more details thus look sharper, the greens also looks much more green. Ill go on and say thats the 5DMII image. But It could be just how it was post processed/light, because it appears to have more contrast.

5DII has more detail and less noise. The 7D rocks great pics...when the prices sink I'll have one.

intresting comparison

I like the corner sharpness better on the 24L + 5D2 photo. (looking at the rocks on the lower left corner). But I think that's more a property/quality of the lens than it is with whatever camera you used. But given that at this time, there are no UWA-high quality primes designed for crop, I suppose it still supports the FF argument for landscape.

But if the EXIF wasn't intact, I seriously couldn't tell you which was taken with which. It'd be a 50/50 guess on my part.

Ben! I thought you were a Nikonian now?

jwcdds wrote in post #10678741
But given that at this time, there are no UWA-high quality primes designed for crop, I suppose it still supports the FF argument for landscape.

I'd say the 10-22 on crop is at least equal to the 17-40L optically...
canon's UWA primes aren't that impressive regardless of the sensor IMHO. Certainly good enough though.

Without pulling up the full size photos first, I thought the left photo had more detail (i.e.-the foggish swirl around the center, black rock...the cloud textures...the rocks). The 7D looks good and if it wasn't matched up against the 5D, who'd know.

Wow, good comparison. Looking at the full photos, the 5D/24L does have a marginal edge in detail/contrast. The distant shore looks like it's better resolved. But at typical print/web sizes, those types of differences aren't as apparent.

That is really interesting, and both are awesome shots. Thanks for posting these!

It would have been nice if the shots were the same duration and aperture. The 5d2 was 20s at f 11 while the 7d was 30s at f 6.7. I think that's why the 7d photo seems to have less resolution because more light got through with the longer shutter speed and larger aperture opening. I think the results would have been a bit closer if the op had two tripods and filter sets to shoot side by side.

insanecutback wrote in post #10679422
It would have been nice if the shots were the same duration and aperture. The 5d2 was 20s at f 11 while the 7d was 30s at f 6.7. I think that's why the 7d photo seems to have less resolution because more light got through with the longer shutter speed and larger aperture opening. I think the results would have been a bit closer if the op had two tripods and filter sets to shoot side by side.

I already said it was as fast as I could go switching bodies on the legs and filters (threading the cokin ring on has always been a ****)... But the 7D's shot was taken FIRST. Actually 4 minutes earlier if the camera's times are exact, but I KNOW it was first, that's why it was on a longer exposure. I didn't double check to make sure the exposures were exact because I noticed the exposure on the same camera shot to shot was already changing, so duplicating it a few minutes later would have blown it out.

insanecutback wrote in post #10679422
I think that's why the 7d photo seems to have less resolution because more light got through with the longer shutter speed and larger aperture opening.

Huh? What does the amount of light have to do with the resolution?

The 10-22 hits peak resolution somewhere around f/5.6-f/8, while the 24 peaks at f/5.6...if anything, this helps the 7D. The only problem is the 10s difference in exposure - were the conditions bad enough (or the tripod light enough) that camera shake is an issue?

Both are awesome shots but like the above poster said, the corner softness on the right image gives it away. Still...the 7d is a very capable camera!

Very nice pics and comparison...nice to finally see this comparison. With a wide enough lens, the 7D is more than capable of producing landscape shots. Hopefully people will think a little bit harder when saying which body is better for this/that medium.