Canon R8 Image Quality for Landscapes: BETTER than the 30MP Cameras?
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 5. 09. 2024
- The does-it-all R8: amzn.to/3B0BUNK
Essential R8-compatible kit:
My favorite camera sling bag for active use: amzn.to/3sWvwSY
The $11 WONDER STRAP: amzn.to/36rAOOW
2 batteries w/ backpackable charger: amzn.to/42wa1t1
Small tripod QR plate--get a pair & have a spare: amzn.to/44ZWqLS
Fast-write SD Cards: amzn.to/42NnWdC
I can't believe how little Canon held back in cleaving the new EOS R8 intro-full-framer from the guts of the marvelously high-tech R6 Mark II--so much so, that I had to test it and see for myself! After a hit-and-miss experience pitting the new arrival against my staple R7 and EOS R bodies photographing waterfalls, I bring my test samples into the studio for a revealing deep-dive into the cameras' imaging capabilities. If you're considering one of these for your next landscape photo adventure, you don't want to miss this essential info.
Enjoyed the discussion? Toss me a coffee at www.buymeacoff...
Where to stalk me, digitally:
Commercial: www.optiviz.media
Instagram: / mattramsey.gallery
Facebook: / mattramseyphotos
TikTok: / matt.tik
Affiliate links to other gear I recommend:
Featured for the summer: I love these high-quality, no-nonsense Hoya circular polarizing filters:
Uncoated: amzn.to/3sThqBR
With Protective Coating: amzn.to/3fkVdtJ
In My Bag:
Cameras.
amzn.to/3FDKEdn : The Canon EOS R is all about results: 30 megapixel mirrorless stills technology and 4k video at the enthusiast price point.
amzn.to/3PwArU3: Canon EOS R7: Great for wildlife. AMAZING for video.
Lenses.
amzn.to/30TEma9 : Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM
amzn.to/3FqaPnp : Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM II
amzn.to/3JfLsXI : Canon EF 135mm f/2 L USM (Renewed)
amzn.to/3qrAQNc : Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2
amzn.to/3qjaCw4 : Benro Tall Aluminum Tripod
amzn.to/3EoKHbx : Manfrotto 290 Aluminum Light Tripod
Stuff That Helps Me Make Videos.
Canon EOS R7 with versatile 18-150mm kit lens: amzn.to/3PwArU3
amzn.to/32ocSKd : Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM
amzn.to/3EhlteY : Rode Wireless Go audio transmitter/receiver
amzn.to/32vNSR7 : Manfrotto Compact Action Tripod
amzn.to/3H5iyI6 : The GoPro Hero 6 Black is that third camera I need sometimes.
More Recommended Accessories:
A good circular polarizer at the right price: amzn.to/3sThqBR
Coated version: amzn.to/3fkVdtJ
Best budget 3 Stop ND filter, IMHO: amzn.to/33CRAto
amzn.to/3pn3waP : A shockingly affordable gimbal head that just keeps going for me đ€Ż
amzn.to/3yPY9E4 :Adobe Creative Cloud-Access Lightroom, Lightroom CC, Photoshop and 20 GB of cloud storage for $9.99/month.
amzn.to/3FqbRQm : The 13â Macbook Pro with the M1 processor fits in any backpack and edits photos and videos for D-A-Y-S without recharging.
First off, testing like this is hard, so thank you for taking on this task. In relation to the r7, i agree that it will âmush outâ faster than the other two, it probably was a bit unfair to shoot it at f14 as you did with the other two, because of that crop sensor. it like would have been better to open up to compensate. Testing like this is hard. Thanks again!
I agree that the difference between the R7 and R8 in IQ is actually immaterial in real life. If you can do landscape photography with MFT you can certainly do it with an R7. I got the R7 for birds and I find the IQ so good I went and got a Metabones speedbooster for the wide stuff. If you want a true idea of noise:
1. Take the R7 shot with one stop lower aperture (say F8 vs F11).
2. Take the shot with the same equivalent focal length
3. Downsample the image from 34mpx to 24mpx
4. Now pixel peep
Yep, totally agree it's possible to get great results with any camera, just trying to highlight the differences for people considering the cameras, because there are definitely differences!
For landscapes you need to put into account that R7 has IBIS while the rest two do not have so you'll have more time for good shot on slow shutter speed. As for shadow recovery I shoot HDR images a lot and IBIS helps here too. Then the lenses, to resolve the sensors you need different lenses. Basically if the lens resolves let's say 18 MPs then put it either on 24 mpx camera or 45mpx there's no difference in final result.
Also, on R7 diffraction comes into play starting from F8, while on R8 from some F13 so there's a big difference too. The scenario and philosophy of shooting on R7 and full frame is different.
Also having lots of advanced technology in R7 and not utilizing it does not make sense, so unfortunately I did not get the best out of this test video to be frank. For making good comparison you need to have good understanding of how both cameras work while you most likely work with just FF
Shooting birds and wildlife daily with the R7 I run all of my c-raw files through DXO pureraw 3 before adjusting. I never have to think about noise. It's not an issue ever. I have a couple of shots taken at 20,000 ISO with a fast shutter speed to freeze motion and dxo removed the noise and grain from the image. I think I'm putting more pixels on my subjects than any of the full frame cameras.
The new AI NR in Lightroom is great too! What a great time to be a photographer! When it comes to noise I still feel like the less I start with, the less I end with. Maybe I should put that assumption to the test đ€
I'm currently split between picking R8 and Fuji X-T5. It seems like R8's full frame will work better for landscapes, but I think only practical comparison could really tell the difference.
Iâm considering R7 vs R8 for travel. I already have R5 and R10 (R10 for travel purposes). My wife is wanting the R10 so I will need another body. Iâm an awful pixel peeper so your comparison is exactly what I would
do. I think itâs the R8 from what I can see
Yeah if it was leisure use and image quality was the main concern, Iâd ABSOLUTELY be grabbing the R8!
Did you get the R8?
How did you find it compared to the R5?
I use an R5, but considering getting the R8 fit is light weight
@@EverythingCameFromNothing I rented an R8 for a couple of weeks. I liked it a lot eventually decided to get a new R6. I have an R5 but wanted a second cheaper body. In my opinion the R8 compared to the R5, is nicer because itâs smaller. The AF seems a bit better and the image quality isnât as good but very good nonetheless. I missed IBIS, but with stabilised lenses it was fine. It is a great small camera just remember that all cameras are compromised in some way.
@@mondujar279 Thanks for your insight!!
Thanks for the video. Never really been a fan of testing ISO by zooming in 200%, but it does serve its purpose. I shoot with 1DXâs and a R7, but Iâm a sports and wildlife shooter. One of these days, I eventually pick up a R6v2 or R5 (v2 when released). Take care.
Thanks, man! I assure you I didn't blow them up any larger than I print, but you are right that in smaller presentations they all look pretty dang good! Thanks for the chat!
@@MattRamseyTube lol. Iâm a sports photojournalist. I remember having images shot on 20Dâs being blown up life size. ;)
Great video getting right to business and providing some great links. If that bag is like mine, it has a hidden compartment that runs from the bottom of the bag vertically near the rain flap that can hold a small tripod as well. Cheers
does noise introduced by high ISO very by the lighting condition?
On the barns (or whatever those are) there appears to be thermal distortion meshing up the focus on those shots. Not sure what can be done there, but also best not to draw any conclusions here. None of the barn images seem to be free of distortion, as seem through youtube. Thatâs just a strange test, imo.
Hey, Anthony, thanks for your contribution! At around 17:00 I did confront the aperture issue without directly mentioning diffraction which, while something you and I would probably agree about (because it's a scientific fact đ) does seem to stir people up as though it was a controversy, but ya can't please all the people. But yes I totally agree that in multiple ways the R7 could have been shown the favor of adjusting the aperture to accommodate the optics and sensor size but I'm glad you've got a sense of how difficult it can be to execute this testing on-location even without all that extra accounting. After extensive use with the R7 I do feel confident in asserting that it is less sensitive for exposure recovery than the other two. As for the silos, I really meant for this test as a look at the noise difference across the ISOs, but I think on-camera and off-the-cuff my commentary probably did place a little too much emphasis on observing the detail level as well, as this was clearly not the right scenario to draw conclusions in that regard. Thanks again, I think that stipulation does really round out the discussion and, like you said, the tests are challenging, but together... đȘđȘđȘ
Don't really understand why would you pump up the ISO for landscapes? At least for me I never went over base ISO in years of landscapes I took with d600 back then because the dynamic range is what counts many times and it's better at base iso. It's necessary to use a tripod whenever the exposure time would get too long to hand hold but I think that is pretty standard for anyone seriously taking landscapes.
I congratulate you on your luck đ but I VERY often have to raise the ISO to freeze the motion of rustling foliage, flowing water, lightning, clouds, stars, the moon, and, of course, in those situations where a tripod isnât practicable, so I guess that info was for people with my kind of bad luck.
@@MattRamseyTube Well typically in landscape shots people don't want to freeze motion of water but they wish to smooth it out with a longer exposure so lowest possible ISO and ND filter if possible. "freezed" water like shortest possible shutter time doesn't usually look that nice in a landscape shot.
@@cyberfunk3793 even if you want to be super conventional and by-the-numbers with your landscapes, you still might want to capture the details of rapid water motion (think crashing ocean waves), and having good ISO performance can give you more options to be creative and capture the scene however you want.
@@MattRamseyTube Well I don't really wish to be conventional but I just fairly quickly found out that I didn't like how moving water appears in landcape photos if you try to freeze with fast shutter speeds. For example waterfalls etc. with fast shutter speeds it just doesn't look very appeasing to my eye and seems not to the eye of most people which is why long exposure with ND filters is so common in this domain.
That is how I found out about long exposure: started reseaching why other people's landscapes looked so different with nice and smooth water while mine looked "busy" and not so nice. But it's obviously a totally subjective thing and if you like that look, good for you. Where I personally like that kind of fast shutter speeds would be something like drops of water captured in macro or something like that, but not typically a whole landscape scene on the beach, river or something like that.
Thankyou for making this comparison. I just want to know how the noise in r7 comparing with r8. I still confuse which one i should have with my budget. R8 or r7. R7 interest me with ibis, shutter speed, body material and battery. But r8 have full frame that i realy want a full frame camera. I use canon 7d right now as a beginner. I just photos for fun or hobbies
if you wanted to preserve motion then why wouldnt you just lower shutter instead of raising iso?
Hey, BW - sorry if I wasnât clear, I meant freezing motion. đ
How much iso can you add before you start to see noise. When just shooting print that no one is going to zoom in on.
I didnât test that, but that might be something interesting to look at, thanks!
RP is way cheap right now, is it worth it for nature photography in 2023 ?
For the right price it could be a great option for nature photography - just keep in mind itâs a slow and somewhat delicate camera, so not the best option for wildlife and inclement weather.
Hi! What monitor do you use? excellent video!
I'm actually not sure, it's a 27" LG 4K monitor I got on sale... I'll try to get you more info next time I'm in the office. Cheers!
Thanks for the video Matt! How long have you been posting on CZcams?
My pleasure-Iâve been at it since 2019. Thanks!
@@MattRamseyTube im planning on renting the R8 next week to do another review video for my channel.
Your video gave me some ideas. Very cool.
@@TMVVisualMedia best luck with it, I dropped a sub and look forward to your findings! đ
@@MattRamseyTube gracias amigo! Likewise. Always cool to meet other CZcams creators.
Hello Matt đđŒ could you recommend what camera should I get for pet photography (cats) mostly indoor, still photography and in action. I was thinking about r8 or r 7 the price is almost the same, which one will suit me best?
I think Iâd rather shoot inside with the R8, it looks very nice in low light đ
@@MattRamseyTube thanks đđ»
Number of Focus Points 4897vs1053 for R6 ii vs R8
How much difference does this make?
I think that's a misconception based on the way Canon distinguishes the autofocus points into what parts of the sensor the processor can use to do focusing (the number you quoted for the R8) and what discreet zones can be selected by the user (the number for the R6). Review their tech specs to see that the focus systems are the same between the two cameras: www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/eos-r6-mark-ii?color=Black&type=New www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/eos-r8?color=Black&type=New
@MattRamseyTube Thank you! I couldn't find anything about that and it seemed like such a big difference. May purchase the R8 soon
Would you recommend the RF 24-105 L f/4 over the variable aperture version for landscapes with the R8?
Not necessarily-the L series is great for its weather sealing, but assuming youâre avoiding the elements, it only has a slightly better reputation for the image quality. Keeping in mind Iâve never used either lens, there are other factors to consider, like retention of value and the aperture, but strictly for landscape stills, Iâve *heard* the variable aperture can be pretty good. Search Gordon Laingâs channel for a tripartite comparison including the EF version as well.
@@MattRamseyTube I heard the corners were soft at 24mm on the non L? Iâm coming from a fixed lens G1X Mk3 so I donât know if pairing the R8 with the non-L 24-105 would be significantly sharper than the camera Iâve got to justify the upgrade?
@@scotthunter4 soft corners at wide angle is a problem with nearly every lens Iâve ever used đ but again I havenât used the 24-105âs yet and canât comment beyond the wealth of info thatâs available. For me it would be the L lens for its weather sealing and when you consider the resale price you basically get to use them for pennies a day.
@@MattRamseyTube Itâs a shame they donât do an L-version variable aperture mid-range zoom. I want the build quality and weather sealing without the bulk for hiking up mountains. Having constant aperture increases the size (and weight) of the lens considerably, and I tend to shoot most landscape scenes at f8-11 anyway
I ONLY SHOOT VIDEO......R7 or R8? the answer is VERY important to me cuz I'm gonna buy
Hey BBM--check out my video on just that topic: czcams.com/video/Wp2Ysvhg9gk/video.html / I like the R8 for pure output quality, but generally find myself picking up the R7 for all-day reliability, plus I love the steady image from the IBIS.
@@MattRamseyTube Fantastic! Love your vids. Very comprehensive. Thank you!