I just had to try some way to test all of the theorizing that was going on. Much prefer looking at something instead of risking brain strain wrapping my head around concepts and trying to visualize the end results. Understood that resolution of a smaller pixel size would expose lens flaws or resolution capability. Just didn't expect the 100-400 on the 5D to do better than the 70-200 f2.8 IS II on the 7D because I know the 100-400 does not match the resolution of the 70-200 over their shared range. What I didn't check beforehand is that the area of the 7D pixels is around half of the 5D pixels. 70-200 may be better, but not by a factor of 2.
Also looking back at the photos I realized that where I saw off colours in solid colours they were all dark. In lighter areas of the same shots that was no longer present. Dark means less signal reducing SNR values. Design tradeoffs indeed.
@ChadS I must remind you that I said I WON'T be getting rid of my 7D, unless someone will offer me $2000? The resolution for cropping matters to me sometimes as well as use at sports events. Now I'll have a better idea of what the lens and body combos will be able to do. At the end of the day, I have learned something about my tools which I can only hope will improve my usage of them.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by jrw
