# Noise on a 5D vs T2i



## K-amps (Feb 28, 2012)

I own a 5D and like it. 

A friend of mine has a T2i, and I was trying to explain to him how a FF sensor has less noise etc… we then conducted a test. I shot the same framing on ISO 3200. 

Both Cameras had a 50mm f1.8mk.ii snapped on. (however the T2i had a Canon calibrated one on it): For some reason I had my EV set at +2, not sure how much it affected the noise level. (Maybe I need to re-take the test)

Both were shot in RAW; converted in LR4 with standard settings, no PP except cropping.

From the results… it seems both Sensors seem to show similar or comparable levels of noise. The AWB is a bit off but that should not affect Noise grain…

What do you guys think?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 28, 2012)

Yes, the EV makes a difference. Also, since you framed identically, the the subject is covering a lot more pixels on the high-density 18 MP APS-C sensor than on the low-density 12 MP FF sensor. Since the crops you show have the subject sized identically, that means the T2i image has been downsampled a lot more, which masks the effects of noise in the image.


----------



## triggermike (Feb 28, 2012)

Both are similar - the T2i seems very slightly smoother?

Remember, the T2i is using newer technology than the original 5D so the FF vs Crop argument is a little skewed. I bought my wife a T2i recently and was quite impressed with it's higher ISO performance (given it's price tag.) With a little noise reduction software, got very usable 3200 and acceptable 6400 images!


----------



## K-amps (Feb 28, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yes, the EV makes a difference. Also, since you framed identically, the the subject is covering a lot more pixels on the high-density 18 MP APS-C sensor than on the low-density 12 MP FF sensor. Since the crops you show have the subject sized identically, that means the T2i image has been downsampled a lot more, which masks the effects of noise in the image.



Thanks John;

1) Will try without the Ev
2) Should I be at the same distance while shooting to get same noise grain size? (to get same framing, I move forward using the 5D) or do I need to move back some more?


Maui5150: Never gonna happen.... unless it is a lens or sensor. ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 28, 2012)

K-amps said:


> 2) Should I be at the same distance while shooting to get same noise grain size? (to get same framing, I move forward using the 5D) or do I need to move back some more?



Ultimately, it doesn't matter - or it matters a lot. The reality is that there's not a good way to effectively compare the noise. The closest you're going to get is to do what you've done (move the camera to compensate for the crop factor and achieve the same framing), then compare both images without resizing them. Yes, the T2i image will 'look bigger'. The other option is the more standardized way that testers like DxO use, which is to print everything at a fixed size.

This issue gets to the heart of the argument over whether more MP are inherently bad. The converse to what you're finding is that people who moved from a 40D to a 7D (or 60D) think the new camera is noisier, so the smaller pixels must be bad. But the reality is, if you downsample the 18 MP image to the 10 MP of the 40D, there' not really different. The only reason smaller pixels are inherently bad is the effect of diffraction.

You're also running the test with two very different sensor generations. I've done a similar comparison of the 5DII to the 7D (similar in age, and the 7D is the same sensor as the T2i), and I find that when you don't change framing, but rather crop the 5DII image to that of the 7D AoV, the 5DII has slightly less noise, and the 7D is slightly sharper. Mainly a wash. But if I change the distance (or zoom a lens) so I'm capturing the same framing with the full sensor in both cases, the 5DII wins for both noise and sharpness.


----------



## Axilrod (Feb 28, 2012)

This is kind of an unfair comparison, the original 5D is 6 years old whereas the T2i is only a few. I used to have a T2i and you can't even compare the noise with a 5DII, the 5DII handles it much better.


----------



## K-amps (Feb 28, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> This is kind of an unfair comparison, the original 5D is 6 years old whereas the T2i is only a few. I used to have a T2i and you can't even compare the noise with a 5DII, the 5DII handles it much better.



Perhaps, but I own a 5dc not a 5d2, and I am making a case for myself if it is worth upgrading to a 5d3 since I don't make money off photography... Looking at the results... it tells me it is time to upgrade ;D


----------



## awinphoto (Feb 28, 2012)

Lest we forget to mention different generations of technology... 3200 ISO is/was the breaking point on the classic 5d whereas the technology of the t2I can more easily handle the high ISO... Like saying 2012 Kia has a stronger engine than a 90's mustang... different generation of technologies


----------



## K-amps (Feb 28, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> Lest we forget to mention different generations of technology... 3200 ISO is/was the breaking point on the classic 5d whereas the technology of the t2I can more easily handle the high ISO... Like saying 2012 Kia has a stronger engine than a 90's mustang... different generation of technologies



Yes, and the Mustang owner needs to know if it is time to buy a Kia.


----------



## awinphoto (Feb 28, 2012)

K-amps said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Lest we forget to mention different generations of technology... 3200 ISO is/was the breaking point on the classic 5d whereas the technology of the t2I can more easily handle the high ISO... Like saying 2012 Kia has a stronger engine than a 90's mustang... different generation of technologies
> ...



Well in this test, if High ISO is a deal breaker... the kia would preform as you are accustomed to with the classic, but if you get the 5d2 or 5d3 when it comes out, you can expect even better performance.


----------



## kubelik (Feb 28, 2012)

interesting to see how much sharper the 5D image is than the T2i image is by default ... mirrors my own experience shooting the 5D Mark II alongside my wife's T2i.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Feb 28, 2012)

I too own a 5Dc and a 7D and I am planning to get a 5D3 once the dust settles down providing the reviews are favorable.
First of all because of the FF. From what I shoot, the lack of crop suits me better. Secondly, while at low ISOs, the 5Dc is hands down better than the 7D, at higher ISOs they behave fairly the same but both perform worse that the 5DIIs that I rent from time to time. Thirdly, the response time and operation lag of the 5Dc feels almost painful in comparison to the newer cameras. 
But having said that, I still LOVE the images that the 5Dc produces and for me an upgrade will more of a convenience rather than necessity. And heck, there is also the 5DII that if it will drop in price will be one hell of a perform for the money. Both new and on the used market.


----------

