Pixel quality vs quantity

[ksmattfish]

I was looking at the review of the new Canon 50D at dpreview.com. For all the talk of better high ISO performance the high ISO raw file samples from the 40D look much cleaner than those of the 50D (at the link below, scroll down).

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/page18.asp

Now I understand that higher res is supposed to cover some of that up because the enlargement factor is less, but man! there's a pretty big difference at ISO 800 and higher.

In their conclusion they say the 40D beats the 50D in dynamic range and noise.

I'm curious as to what this means for the 5D MkII. It's got almost twice the resolution as the 5D, but will that make up for the reduced photo receptor size. I'm going to be looking at it hard before spending my moola. I need clean high ISO performance more than I need high resolution. I may be happily sticking with the obsolete, price reduced 5D mkI.

 

[keith204]

Interesting. A few weeks ago from online samples, I had been convinced that the 50D ISO was better than the 40D (which I own). Lately I saw some shots from a friend who has the 50D, and there was a heck of a lot of grain at 3200 and 6400. It does look like the 5DMKII will be quite a bit better, but the reason I'm on the list is mainly for upcoming video opportunities that will pay well if I am equipped. You bring a good point for people only needing a better still DSLR.

I will say that the higher resolution LCD on the 50D is SLICK, so that's something I look forward to on the 5D MkII

 

[lostprophet]

some test shots from 5D mkII
http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=138448

50D test shots
http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=139259

If you want good high ISO get a Nikon D700
http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=131894

 

[Village Idiot]

Well remember, the 5D MKII's 21mp ff sensor is 1.6x bigger than the APS-C sensors in Canon's lineup. I believe that I have read some where that the 5D MKII's sensor is equivalent to an 8mp 1.6x APS-C sensor as far as pixel size/density goes.

 

[Ls3D]

you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

 

[Village Idiot]

That would be a member's only page that he posted links to.

 

[Ls3D]

Ok thanks, I lost my members only jacket in 1994!

 

[Alex_B]

I'm curious as to what this means for the 5D MkII. It's got almost twice the resolution as the 5D,

It has got about 30% higher pixel resolution, not twice.
12.8 MP -> 21 MP gives you a factor of roughly 1.3 in pixel line resolution.

just to clarify.

 

[djacobox372]

Sensor size is more important to quality then the number of pixels, especially when it comes to high-iso noise performance.

 

[Dubious Drewski]

I'm telling you guys, High ISO performance always trumps megapixels when it comes down to overall quality.

 

[lostprophet]

here is the D700 shot

ISO 3200 100% crop

 

[Dubious Drewski]

I think it needs repeating: The above image is a 100% crop at ISO3200. See this is what I'm talking about! This quality is spectacular!

 

[Village Idiot]

I think it needs repeating: The above image is a 100% crop at ISO3200. See this is what I'm talking about! This quality is spectacular!

But what if you could shoot at 6400 ISO with the 21mp 5D and down size to 13mp and have the same quality? Technically, the 5D would have worse IQ at higher ISO's, but by using the MP advantage, you could downsize to what Nikon's D700 is shooting at and end up with an advantage because of more MP's.

 

[Dubious Drewski]

But what if you could shoot at 6400 ISO with the 21mp 5D and down size to 13mp and have the same quality?

Hmm, well what if we could? Could someone post such a photo? If this process could create a good looking shot, then I'd like to see it, for sure.