detail,sharpness, Canon or Nikon

Chepat

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jun 12, 2017
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Hi Guys,
Thanks for this forum, I know it will help me a lot in the future.
I am a web developer/designer and decided to get into photography in order to be able to provide the images for the websites that I create It saves my clients money and allows me to provide complete package deals.
I bought a Canon t5i to ease myself into it and eventually move up to a full frame...had the mark iv in mind.
he problem is, everywhere I look, and I have been doing a lot of research, the images from the Nikon 750 and the d810 are sharper and more detailed when tested properly with comparable lenses,etc.
I am very intelligent and not worried about learning curves with either full frame, what matters most to me is image quality.
Just wondering what others think on this subject who are not writing blogs with links to the equipment, therefore, not reliable conclusions.
Thanks in advance, Pat
 
Hi welcome to the site. All of the camera you mentioned 5D mk IV, D750 and the D810 will give you quality images that would work great for websites. But if you are worried about that, check out the 5Ds or the 5DsR. Both are 50mp cameras and can be gotten for cheaper than the Mk IV. I have heard of a few issues with the mk IV but it is still supposed to be a great camera.

Honestly, with all of these camera's it comes down to lighting the subject properly for the shot that you are wanting.
 
Technique and knowing how to use the equipment properly is usually the largest issue with not getting sharp/high IQ images with any camera. There's many threads about problems with how to get sharper images. Other than a few odd camera/lens issues it's usually the skill of the photographer, who mostly seem to jump up from cell phones/P&S and have a terrible time actually learning how to use their camera.
 
I think you're over-thinking the selection process. We could go into detail about the use or non-use of a low-pass (anti-aliasing filter to reduce the moiré problem) but at the end of the day you can get camera from either company with absolutely staggering resolution.

But in order to see that staggering resolution, you need to inspect the image at very close levels of detail... which isn't realistic on a web page. My 5k monitor has a total resolution of 14.7 megapixels.... a D750 is about 24MP; the 5D IV is about 30MP; the D810 is about 36MP, the 5Dsr is about 50MP.... and these are all way above the resolution of even the best monitors ... and that would assume you're using the entire screen instead of having images rendering on just a portion of the page and being limited to the size of the web browser window.

This means virtually anything you do is going to be down-sampled to a lower resolution... and probably by quite a bit.

I'm not sure where you're finding data on "sharpness" (what people refer to as "sharpness" is really quite a number of other factors). Generally you can get a camera to get a better score if the camera has higher resolution... but in all cases this assumes you're going to use top-end glass and that glass isn't cheap (e.g. the "cheap" lenses are typically in the $2000 and up price range.) Camera brand usually doesn't have nearly as much influence as lens choice. But again, your usage doesn't sound like the sort of area where you'd be able to notice the difference.

As Steve points out (astroNikon) the "knowing how" is the bigger factor in all of this. The cameras aren't magic... they just do what they're told.
 
I shot Canon crop sensor and full frame, Pentax and now Nikon crop sensor body's and on a sharpness level I can't tell a difference. The difference is in the quality of the glass, your techniques and settings and lighting etc. I would just make a list of cameras you like and then compare specs and features your getting for your buck.If you can find a camera store with the models you listed, look at those models and handle them for ergonomics then pick the one you like the best as your buying into a system not just a camera so go with what feels right or like the best. I agree with you are over thinking this,I have done this before and just leads to confusion.
 
Sharpness and detail is actually a very large subject. It's not just the camera and lens combination taking a picture and seeing the results. Many many factors are involved. Lots of variables involved in camera settings. It could also be mechanical. Your lens could be back or front focusing. Could be your tripod is too light (if your using one). Could be slow shutters and not having a steady or proper grip. Just taking a breath can change the position of the camera slightly. There is a reason bulls-eye and long range shooters pause their breathing at time of firing. Cameras are the same!

When you compare your pictures to theirs? Are you comparing apples to apples? Or do you have oranges? Are you using a tripod, remote release, additional lighting or light modifiers? Are they using tripod, remote release, additional lights or modifiers? What are they doing in post processing? Do they have a $1,000 program that sharpens the pictures for them? Sorry, rambling some. Point is, it can be the equipment. But many people never reach the limits of their equipment before upgrading (myself included).
 
Currently the Nikon D810 and Sony A7RII are best for image quality and sharpness in the FF segment but to be honest not by much more then Canon 5D IV
The truth is that the 5D IV is a very good camera, on the other hand the t5i is using a really old sensor and is limiting due to old technology but still even the t5i in the right hands can produce great images.
May factors need to be considered to produce good images, the main two are skills and glass.
With good glass and good skills you can create polizer winning pictures even with older tech cameras.
 
The Nikon D750 and the Nikon D810 are cameras frequently used by serious to expert shooters...so those two cameras are well-known for producing sharp,crisp, clear images--in huge part because they are often used by SERIOUS shooters. At web sizes, almost ANY 6-megapixel to 50-MP camera can make a fine,fine image with a skilled shooter, a decent lens, and some basically well-done photo post-processing in software.

YES, very high-megapixel and very shallow DOF images have a "look" that the smaller-sensor cameras cannot duplicate all of the time; conversely, there are situations where a SMALL-sensor digitial camera, like an iPhone or Galaxy, is the best tool.
 
Any of the big name brands produce equipment that can make high quality, high resolution photos. Indeed many times its hard to tell brands apart unless you're told which comes from what. Also, as said above, websizes are very generous to photography in the digital age and resizing with a proper method (sharpening in stages as you resize) can really make photos look very crisp and bring out the detail very well for web sized shots. So again this plays to your advantage.

It would be good to know what kind of photography you're hoping to produce. Most photographers are not masters of every area and will often only have a selection of genres/situations where they can really perform well time and time again; whilst other areas might take them longer or be more difficult or simply be areas where they don't have the right equipment.
In some areas the lighting gear is vastly more important than the camera or the lens and having the right lighting and the right control over it is a make or break aspect.
 
This may not apply as I use a Fujifilm camera but i found the better the micro contrast on a lens, the sharper the image. I see it big time if I zoom in and pixel peep at 100%. Not sure if my analogy is correct but that's what I see.
So I guess my point is, there is more to sharpness than DXO mark testing and sponsor testing sites.
 
The Nikon D750 and the Nikon D810 are cameras frequently used by serious to expert shooters...so those two cameras are well-known for producing sharp,crisp, clear images--in huge part because they are often used by SERIOUS shooters. At web sizes, almost ANY 6-megapixel to 50-MP camera can make a fine,fine image with a skilled shooter, a decent lens, and some basically well-done photo post-processing in software.

YES, very high-megapixel and very shallow DOF images have a "look" that the smaller-sensor cameras cannot duplicate all of the time; conversely, there are situations where a SMALL-sensor digitial camera, like an iPhone or Galaxy, is the best tool.

A web image can't come close to showing what a modern DSLR can do in terms of resolution. As Derrel says, anything will do as long as it has a competent lens. There is no need to change your camera or lens. Read up on depth of field. I shoot images for the web every day. Most images are tabletop size and are shot at f16 or f22. They render visually sharp even with web jpegs. You need better skills, not a better camera and lens.
 
for web output, it does not really matter.
If you really cared THAT much about quality, you'd simply put in a professional photographer as a line item.
 
Huge megapixel counts and very expensive full frame cameras with high quality lenses are a total waste for websites.
Lots of reasons to have great gear but photos for websites is not one of them.
A used Nikon D3100 can make photos better than a website can display. Certainly bigger file size than you'd want to use on a webpage.
 
I agree, a serious professional will use a Canon 1DX2, 5D4, 5DS, etc. but a Rebel T6i works just fine for "web output"
 
I agree, a serious professional will use a Canon 1DX2, 5D4, 5DS, etc. but a Rebel T6i works just fine for "web output"
False! Serious Professionals would use the new Hasselblad
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top