Head-to-head comparison 1DsMII and XTi (400d)

[Canon_Bob]

As requested by Loupey a while back. Here's a direct comparison of my 2 cameras going head to head. This is by no means a scientific comparison, but I think gives everyone a good field comparison. I set both cameras in AV mode, f/8, ISO 400. The lens of choice was the Canon 100-400L, locked at 360mm. I used my bird feeder/blind for this comparison, and simply swapped the camera bodies out and shot a nearly identical series with each using the exact same lens. shutter speed was 1/200 (chosen by both cameras). Absolutely NO post processing was done other than crops. All crops were done off the "uncropped" JPG files below. I tried to choose the sharpest images from each series and each camera, but wanted to be sure I had similar poses as well. Enjoy!

1DSMII - Uncropped image:


XTi (400d) - Uncropped image:


You can clearly see the significant difference in "crop factor" from the above images. Now for the 33 percent crops:

1DsMII - 33 Percent Crop:


XTi (400d) - 33 percent crop:

[Canon_Bob]

Comparison continued:

1DSMII - 50 percent crop image:


XTi (400d) - 50 percent crop image:



1DsMII - 67 percent crop image:



XTi (400d) - 67 percent crop image:

[Canon_Bob]

And finally, the 100 percent crops:


1DSMII - 100 percent crop image:


XTi (400d) - 100 percent crop image:

[paulnj]

great comparision! Bob, while obviously the king of all DSLR's shows a greatly superior image, I also see how the XTI fairs quite well too.

[Canon_Bob]

Exactly. I always see the threads in forums of this versus that, and usually just roll my eyes. One would certainly expect a $7000.00 camera to outperform an $800.00 camera, but as this comparison shows, the XTi holds up quite well until you get into the "professional" level of nit-picking detail. I think the XTi is one of the best camera values out there, and I don't hesitate to shoot mine right along side the 1DsMII when I need a 2 lens configuration.

While there is definitely a noticable difference in image quality at the top end of the spectrum, I think the biggest differences between the two come into play with other features outside of picture quality. The 1DsMII focuses MUCH faster, has some additional metering options that are really nice, Holds up better than anything I've ever seen at high ISO, Uses a dual card configuration for rapid changouts or simultaneous backups, and is far more rugged and weatherproof for professional use. Whenever I'm asked what the biggest difference is between the 1DsMII and some other model, I usually say that when other cameras have gone home for the day due to low light or bad weather, I'm still shooting with that beast.

As for whether those additional features and slight difference in image quality are worth an additional $6000.00 or not, I guess that's up to the individual. To me, they are. I'd buy the new 1DMIII right now if I didn't need a bigger lens more at this time. That'll have to wait until next year (besides, they'll probably release the successor to the 1DsMII sometime next spring). I love mine, and don't regret buying it one bit. However, I love the XTi too!

[Loupey]

Thanks for the demo, Bob!

It's nice to be able to see the actual difference. Equipment reviews are a great source of info, but to be able to actually see the final product is icing on the cake.

I think Canon does a great job of covering the entire market with their various models and price points. One can certainly buy exactly what is demanded - but one can also overbuy if the demand doesn't require it.

[Canon_Bob]

You're welcome Loupe. I agree that many times people buy higher-end gear for the wrong reasons. As I hope others see in this comparison, the XTi does quite well. I'm betting that if we threw the 5d into the mix, you probably wouldn't see the difference between it and the 1DsMII until you started looking at crops over 100 percent (which I avoid doing anyway).

At the end of the day, it's the Photographer, and the lens quality that are MOST responsible for the outcome of the image. The camera helps, but it's not as significant as people like to think. The 1DsMII is a great piece of equipment, but in the hands of a lousy photographer, it just takes lousy shots with lots of detail.

[Loupey]

The camera helps, but it's not as significant as people like to think.

Still, I keep forgetting that, in this day and age (boy that makes me sound old ), the camera is BOTH camera AND film.

I still find it difficult sometimes to not revert to thinking back 20 years ago when I used to tell everyone: "buy the cheapest camera possible and the most expensive lens" After all, a camera was just a black box back then.

Although our cameras now come with a lifetime supply of film, that just means we have to be extra careful with what "film" we want to prepay.

[Canon_Bob]

I'm there with ya. I spent a good portion of my photographic life living as ASA 25, and shooting at night with a stopwatch!

[readingr]

You're welcome Loupe. I agree that many times people buy higher-end gear for the wrong reasons. As I hope others see in this comparison, the XTi does quite well. I'm betting that if we threw the 5d into the mix, you probably wouldn't see the difference between it and the 1DsMII until you started looking at crops over 100 percent (which I avoid doing anyway).

At the end of the day, it's the Photographer, and the lens quality that are MOST responsible for the outcome of the image. The camera helps, but it's not as significant as people like to think. The 1DsMII is a great piece of equipment, but in the hands of a lousy photographer, it just takes lousy shots with lots of detail.

I guess this comparison dispells the megapixel myth and shows its the way they implement the pixels is what counts.

Thanks for the comparison, I was planning on comparing my Powershot Pro 1 with the 5D. Won't that be fun.

Roger

[drg]

Surprised there's as much obvious Dynamic Range fall off in these samples from the XTi.