Is APS-C narrowing the IQ gap with FF?

[Kayaker72]

Ok, I am still getting my head wrapped around this, but I thought I'd post this and get everyone's thoughts. Over on CR there is a thread going where the OP has asked about the difference in IQ between a 5DIII and T4i. His shooting conditions were good light and low ISO. I took a quick look at Bryan's ISO 12233 charts for the 200 mm f/2 expecting to find a significant difference in IQ such as can be seen between the 5DIII and 7D. But instead, what I found was a much more subtle difference in IQ between the the T4i and 5DIII. Then, comparing the 6D to the 5DIII, honestly, I give the nod to the 6D, abeit, not by much.

But getting back to my question, there seems to be steady improvement in the APS-C sensors under Bryan's test conditions: T2i and 7D are similar, T3i bests the T2i and then the T4i is better than the T3i. At least to my eye.

I am, of course, not missing the other benefits of FF and the higher end cameras (dynamic range, better control of noise/color depth at any give ISO, DOF, etc) (I tried to link to individual graphs at DXO, but that didn't apparently work, here is a link to the comparison page). But, is APS-C closing the IQ gap, specifically sharpness and contrast? How is this happening with the "same" sensor, better AA filter?

[Dr Croubie]

It all depends on shooting conditions, as well as viewing. I was also reading that thread on CR, and I think the main points to take from it are:
- Below ISO 800, there's not much in it. At ISO 50k or so, the 5D3/1DX/6D are going to trounce any APS-C.
- How many MP is enough? 18MP can print you a nice A3 or A2 (even bigger if your lens is good enough). The total number of prints i've made at these sizes in the 2-3 years i've had my 7D is about 0.
- Do you need to crop? More MP (and better-looking pixels) helps a lot more the more you crop.
- What is the 'overall' IQ with the lenses you have? (ie 50mm on APS-C vs 85mm on FF, or 200mm f/2.0 on APS-C vs 300mm f/2.8 on FF)
- Do you need to push 1-2-3 stops in Post, or do (can) you get it right in-camera?

Of course all of Bryan's test charts are shot at good conditions, but they're still pixel-peeing, and the newer sensors do look good.
We're definitely at the point of 'this is good enough for me'. Hell, my 7D is 'good enough for me'.

For an example, we had a guy come to my work to take product pictures the other day. He had what looked like a 4-year-old nikon DX body (so maybe 'only' 12-15MP), with some sort of zoom lens (I'm presuming a cheaper slower one because the front element was rather small). But with his skill, and his lighting rig, and his PPing skills (like cropping out the ugly warehouse behind and making it look like a studio-shot with a nice white background, it couldn't go to a studio because it was 2 300kg control panels 2m high with a solar panel on top) the shots looked great for what we used them for, website marketing and a glossy A4 brochure.

Anyway, i had more to add but I have to go re-wire a control panel and take my own shots of it before it gets shipped to some mining site in the desert...

[HDNitehawk]

I am, of course, not missing the other benefits of FF and the higher end cameras (dynamic range, noise, high ISO performance, color depth, DOF, etc). But, is APS-C closing the IQ gap, specifically sharpness and contrast? How is this happening with the "same" sensor, better AA filter?

Contrast the answer is no, my 1D IV does a much better job than the 5D II's I have had. The 5D II's handled contrast better than the 7D.

Sharpness the 7D has always had more resolution. In all the other areas you just mentioned the 5D II did much better.

Possibly what you are seeing in those bodies is the improvement in firmware and how the camera processes the data.

I am hoping when the 7D II is released they do not skimp and dumb down the firmware. What I always found with the 7D files is they can be improved significantly in post processing. I can sharpen the 7D files with a much wider range than I could sharpen the 5D II files or the 1D IV files. I am of the opinion that Canon could have improved the 7D files but they choose not to because they didn't want it to outperform the 5D II's. Much of the good data is there but Canon makes us work harder to get it out.

Still, the items you listed contribute as much to IQ as sharpness. Even if the 7D has a bit more resolution everything else far out weighs the benefit.

[Dave Throgmartin]

My wife just recently picked up a 6D and her similarly framed images are much better than mine. The particular is a 17-40 shot where I shot at 17mm on 60D and she at 28mm on a 6D.

See full images below, I may be able to put together some 100% crops. Note I had a white balance issue in my shot...

6D


2013_01_19_0433_upd by jthrog, on Flickr

60D


2013_01_19_2531_upd by dthrog00, on Flickr

On the eagle trip she used her Dad's 70-300 IS and I used the 70-200 f/4 L USM + 1.4x EF II teleconverter and again even though in this case she was focal length limited her shots were every bit as good as mine with what according to the ISO crops is a worse lens combination.

6D


2013_01_26_0716_cropped_upd by jthrog, on Flickr

60D


2013_01_26_2842_upd8x10 by dthrog00, on Flickr

Here's one she had that has received lots of oohs and aahs:


2013_01_13_0112_upd by jthrog, on Flickr

I would humbly say the FF is quite a step up...

Dave

[Kayaker72]

Thanks for the comments everyone and for the comparison photos Dave.

I should have known Bryan would have already noticed the same thing. About 1/4 down in the review he comments:

"What does not match these prior-released 18MP DSLRs is the image sharpness the T4i delivers at identical processing settings. Check out this Canon EOS T4i/650D vs. T3i/600D comparison. While you are there, compare the T4i results to the rest of the 18MP APS-C (1.6x) bodies tested with the same lens. The T4i is easily sharper than all of them in this regard."

"While this comparison is primarily designed to show noise (and color), I am again struck with the obvious difference in the T4i's sharpness compared to the other APS-C bodies including the T3i. Results for the 1D X are not included here, but the T4i compares similarly to this high end 18.1MP DSLR. Has Canon begun normalizing image sharpness across the EOS line?"

Canon seems to attribute it to the Digic 5 sensor...Bryan seems to conclude that Canon has increased the sharpening algorithm at the expense of introducing more noise. But, he does seem very impressed by the T4i's image quality, calling it "professional grade" a couple of times, especially sharpness and color.

Anyway, I had been wondering if there had been a physical improvement to increase the sharpness that will carry over to the 7DII, if it is ever released. Looking at all this data has left me thinking that Canon is in a bit of a bind. As stated in Luminous-Landscapes 4 years ago (taken from the CR thread), the quality at the lower end of digital cameras is/was improving faster than at the higher end, narrrowing the quality gap. Looking over the data from this site and DXO it seems to me that FF has a 1-2 stop ISO advantage over APS-C in important aspects of IQ such as dynamic range, noise, color depth, etc. But the way I would like Canon to improve on the 7D is to errode into that advantage. The other way Canon could "improve" on the 7D for the 7DII is a 5DIII make over, similar sensor, better everything else (AF, etc).

So, I have been on the optimistic side thinking that the 7DII will have the "new sensor technology" and improve on the 7D by 1-2 stops in those areas, slight bump in MP, slight increase in sharpness, and a better AF (30-40 pt AF?). But the issue I now see, if it is even physically possible, is that would seriously errode the benefit of the current generation of FF camera bodies, leaving better lens selection ("L" lenses are better suited for FF focal lengths, IMO), DOF, and some available light advantages (the whole f/2.8 on APS-C is f/4.5 on FF). This could explain why we haven't seen the 7DII. It would make a lot of business sense to hold off on releasing such a camera, if it does have the new sensor technology and the 1-2 stop improvements, until well into the FF cameras model cycle to avoid competition. But I don't want to turn this into a CR worthy thread of nothing but idle speculation.

This still leaves me battling winter induced G.A.S. and deciding whether to buy the 6D or 5dIII before Saturday (EDIT--or hold off and stay with the 7D for now). Dave's photos are highlighting the difference I've been starting to be able to see in my 7D....

[HDNitehawk]

It all sounds reasonable.
Perhaps the new Digic 5 sensor is the reason, more processing power to do more in camera. It brings up this question in my mind, when I bought my 1D IV it had very little head room to sharpen the pictures, they came out of the camera in very good shape. The 7D always had head room. So the question is, do the 7D files and the T4i files finish out about the same in PP? Out of the camera one might be better than the other, but what counts is after PP in my book.

I vote you go for the 5D III. The AF system will probably trump any perceived difference in IQ between the two. Of course I have never owned either for a hands on recomendation, but the choice just seems logical.

[Kayaker72]

[QUOTE=HDNitehawk;80685]
I vote you go for the 5D III.[QUOTE]

Done....now Canon can stop tormenting the rest of the world and release the 7DII

[ahab1372]

Done = you actually ordered one?


Arnt

[Kayaker72]

Yep, I ordered the 5dIII with 24-105 L kit and a 1.4x tc.

I am pretty excited. But, of course, I am now expecting Canon to release the 7DII on Tuesday.

[HDNitehawk]

Done....now Canon can stop tormenting the rest of the world and release the 7DII

Congratz,

After you get your 5D III and play with it a while, a new 7D II release will not bother you.
The creative ability the FF gives you over a crop body will make it very worth while.