Canon 5Dc vs 5DII

[criza]

Hello! First the disclaimer: This thread shall start as a highly hypothetical I heard/read something somewhere and want to know what the people opinions on this site are about that, and then it must evolve into a thread with scientifically proven arguments...

So after owning a 5Dc for a (very) short period of time I was really impressed by the overall IQ of the pictures I took with the camera! Now I'll get me a 5DII and will be looking forward to see how well the IQ of the Mark II will be (also compared to the 5Dc).

Anyway, the reason I opened this thread is because I read on a fair amount of bulletin boards (I know you can't believe anything written on them ;-) that the 5D has a more film like look than the 5DII (I don't talk about some magic or whatever what you can read as well). Now assuming that this forum posters, which say the 5Dc has this more film like look, aren't just some 5Dc owners which want to make their camera look better and are jealous of the 5DII owners, how can it be that they attribute this film like look to the pictures of the 5Dc?

The only reason I can imagine is that the 5Dc has the highest pixel size of all canon cameras (8.2µm), well together with the 1D II which has the same pixel size, and isn't true that you can read the same on the boards, that the 1D II has this film like look as well?

Can it be that simple?

[clemmb]

Hello! First the disclaimer: This thread shall start as a highly hypothetical I heard/read something somewhere and want to know what the people opinions on this site are about that, and then it must evolve into a thread with scientifically proven arguments...

So after owning a 5Dc for a (very) short period of time I was really impressed by the overall IQ of the pictures I took with the camera! Now I'll get me a 5DII and will be looking forward to see how well the IQ of the Mark II will be (also compared to the 5Dc).

Anyway, the reason I opened this thread is because I read on a fair amount of bulletin boards (I know you can't believe anything written on them ;-) that the 5D has a more film like look than the 5DII (I don't talk about some magic or whatever what you can read as well). Now assuming that this forum posters, which say the 5Dc has this more film like look, aren't just some 5Dc owners which want to make their camera look better and are jealous of the 5DII owners, how can it be that they attribute this film like look to the pictures of the 5Dc?

The only reason I can imagine is that the 5Dc has the highest pixel size of all canon cameras (8.2µm), well together with the 1D II which has the same pixel size, and isn't true that you can read the same on the boards, that the 1D II has this film like look as well?

Can it be that simple?

I have never heard it called a 5Dc? Is that for classic or something?
Anyway, I have both a 5D original, mkI if you will, and a 1DmkIIn. I do not feel either one is film like. They both have better IQ than my old 35mm and I would rather have the 1DmkIIn over any of the 1.6x crop bodies. I am looking forward to upgrading to a 1DsIII I hope. Just can't see affording a 1Dx as much as I would like to.

[dsiegel5151]

...5Dc owners which want to make their camera look better and are jealous of the 5DII owners...

^^^^^This is the answer. I love my 5Dc, but I love using my friend's 5DII even more (I am very jealous). It's a superior camera. Maybe people think it's more film like b/c of how grainy the images get when you push the iso. I would assume the 5DII is more diffraction limited b/c of the smaller pixels, but I've never directly compared the 5Dc and 5DII in this regard...

[Jon Ruyle]

The 5DII has more chroma and pattern noise relative to the amount of photon noise, which is definitely non-film like. But overall, the noise is so low that most would see this as an advantage rather than a disadvantage (after all, if you're going for film-like, use film).

I've used the 5DII and the 5Dc (I'll call it that, too), and I think the 5DII is at least as good in pretty much every way and superior in many ways.

I'm not sure the relevance of the large pixels in your post. Are you suggesting that might account for people saying the 5Dc is film like?

[criza]

I have never heard it called a 5Dc? Is that for classic or something?

Nope, c is for cool! Well, I know it's a 5D, so please excuse my semantic fault.

I would assume the 5DII is more diffraction limited b/c of the smaller pixels, but I've never directly compared the 5Dc and 5DII in this regard...

This is a good point, I should have thought about that as well. Thanks...

Another small point worth making is that when a higher megapixel file is printed to the same size as a smaller megapixel file that there are differences in the background blur and the DOF.

I read about this before! Did you do a comparison like that ever before?

The 5DII has more chroma and pattern noise relative to the amount of photon noise, which is definitely non-film like.

I guess you mean more than the 5D, or more than a film? This point sounds fairly "scientific", exactly what I was waiting for..

I'm not sure the relevance of the large pixels in your post. Are you suggesting that might account for people saying the 5Dc is film like?

Yes exactly. I am just assuming that there is a difference in the IQ in consequence of the different pixel sizes...But I also read that everything above 4µm makes no difference any more. So...

[Jon Ruyle]

I guess you mean more than the 5D, or more than a film? This point sounds fairly "scientific", exactly what I was waiting for..

I mean more than the 5Dc. One often sees ugly pattern noise before seeing much photon noise. But this is in part because the photon noise is so low (and, of course, because the read noise is not that low, but I doubt it is worse in absolute terms than the 5Dc).

But I also read that everything above 4µm makes no difference any more.

I'm not sure what this even means, but I tend to ignore this kind of statement. The best pixel size depends on too many factors for a statement like that to e meaningful. In any case, I think most people feel that the increased pixel count of the 5DII is a real advantage over the 5Dc.

[criza]

I had some time thinking about the statements in my starting post and your answers to it.

So let's forget about the pixel size! And let's forget about the film like look, well not entirely.
The main difference for me, after shooting with the 5D and the 5DII, are the colors! I don't know much about the technical aspects of how the colors get achieved on these two cameras. I just know it has to do with the AA filter in front of the sensor. And that the AA filter of (both?) Canon cameras cause a shift in the orange and red tones. I am looking forward to find out more about it myself, but I wouldn't mind if anyone here could sum it up in a further post. Thank you.

I haven't tried in post production to make the colors of a picture taken with 5DII look as it would had been taken with 5D, also because I haven't shot side to side comparisons, but I guess (don't knowing why) it would be impossible to achieve the exact same colors, if anyone knows better, please correct me.

For the record: I like the colors the 5D produces better than the ones of the 5DII, and I am not talking about white balance.