Canon 80d worse than Canon rebel t3i

[yteln]

Hi,

I just got a brand new Canon 80D and took some test shots on the exact same settings as my old T3i (f/stop, shutter speed, ISO but also all the other settings I could manually set.. white balance, focus mode, exposure comp, flash exposure comp, image effects, auto correct image brightness off, one shot AF, metering mode, etc.). Also swapped the lense so that it was the same on both.I set both cameras to take L + raw and am comparing jpegs. 

I'd expect 80d win this comparison but t3i produced much nicer, brighter images. Even when looking at just LCD screen I could immediately tell that t3i photos are brighter and better looking, but then downloaded it on PC and confirmed that as well.

How's that possible? Either I'm missing something or my new 80d doesn't function properly since it's obviously a much better camera and with the same settings should produce superior images.

Any ideas what I may be missing, any hidden setting which might be causing it or is there anything I can do to figure it out?

Regards

[yteln]

Sure, you can see a comparison here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/161b7JrLDXR5ed7yS6oUAWu_4RyMIK1fj?usp=sharing 

I was focusing on bananas, 3 bottles of water and a guittar respectively. E.g. if you look at bananas t3i is clearly sharper. Of course there are also some photos where 80d wins (not by much) but overall I'd say it's a draw or the difference is tiny on CR2. On jpg imo t3i looks better even on big screen and definitely better on LCD of the camera. I understand this might be subjective, but I was expecting a bit more from the camera 3x the price of t3i so that's why I'm a tiny bit disappointed.

[ebiggs1]

" I understand this might be subjective, but I was expecting a bit more from the camera 3x the price of t3i so that's why I'm a tiny bit disappointed."

If you expected a 3 times better photo you are going to be very disappointed.  Every time! Improvements in DSLR tech is already advanced to where improvements come in slight to very slight increments.

I looked at a few of your samples.

"...jpg imo t3i looks better even on big screen and definitely better on LCD of the camera."

This you can not do.  The LCD may be set brighter and it is the LCD you like better, not the photo. Same for your monitor.  Keep in mind you can not view a Raw file. It has to be converted.  How you do that and by which converter you use can affect the resulting jpg by a lot. Conversely, when you shoot in jpg your camera converts the Raw file in its conversion routine.  I think you are confusing "brighter" with "sharper".  It is a common mistake most people make.

I would encourage you to do some research on post editing as it could be how you are doing it.  The ability to edit in Raw far exceeds what can be done with a camera converted jpg.  The 80D has very much more room to do these adjustments over an  T3i.

Besides the IQ improvements in the 80D keep in mind how many other features it has like wi-fi that cause a price increase but has nothing to do with IQ.

[yteln]

Yes I understand comparing image on LCDs doesn't make much sense. The only reason I mentioned that is cause when I'm shooting I like to show the images on the LCD screen to models and for them how it looks on the LCD screen is everything. They dont' have really a sense of how much image can be improved in post-editing so it's somewhat important so that it looks as good as possible on the LCD as well.

Anyways, let's leave the LCD aspect aside, I would be interested hearing your thoughts on the CR2 images themselves.

Also, good point about wifi and other functionalities. I guess the price increase is mostly for those extra features and IQ is not *that* much better. 

I was kind of expecting more after seeing some images from mirrorless sony a7 III my friend was taking. But that's again 2x more expensive than 80d itself so not a fair comparison either.

[ebiggs1]

"I would be interested hearing your thoughts on the CR2 images themselves."

OK, I can't do that because you can't view a Raw file which is what a cr2 is.  It has to be converted.  The samples on your site are conversions by whatever editor or viewer you used.   Can I d/l one or two of them and do the editing myself in PS?

"... I like to show the images on the LCD screen to models ..."

I do this also. I even use my laptop but I make sure they understand these are 'proofs' and not final production. You should do likewise.

[Tronhard]

File formats have evolved along with the hardware. Thus, both the characteristics of both RAW and JPG files have changed over time. By rights that should mean that they have got better, but a lot depends on what you view them on, and in the case of RAW what software you convert them on and how it is configured.

A photograph is created only in part in the camera, what happens in post production can have a profound impact on the image - just look at the work of Ansel Adams or Lee Miller to see their original and final releases.

[Peter]

---

@yteln wrote:

Sure, you can see a comparison here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/161b7JrLDXR5ed7yS6oUAWu_4RyMIK1fj?usp=sharing 

I was focusing on bananas, 3 bottles of water and a guittar respectively. E.g. if you look at bananas t3i is clearly sharper. Of course there are also some photos where 80d wins (not by much) but overall I'd say it's a draw or the difference is tiny on CR2. On jpg imo t3i looks better even on big screen and definitely better on LCD of the camera. I understand this might be subjective, but I was expecting a bit more from the camera 3x the price of t3i so that's why I'm a tiny bit disappointed.

---

If you lift the shadows in a raw converter you will see that 80D has much less colour noise than t3i has. 0095.CR2 vs 1044.CR2.

About focus it seems like 80D and your lens are front focusing (Micro adjust it later). You should start with Live view. Then 80D and t3i will set AF without issues in Live view. Is it an old Sigma lens or Tamron lens?

The image below shows dynamic range 80D (IMG_0097.CR2) vs t3i (IMG_1046.CR2).

[ebiggs1]

"If you lift the shadows in a raw converter you will see that 80D has much less colour..."

Of course, I believe the OP doesn't realize this. The Raw file has to be edited in post to a degree he/she thinks is right. The cr2 that the OP is using as a comparison is a jpg generated thumbnail from the Raw data.  It isn't a final product!

I asked for permission to d/l one or two of their Raw files to do the post myself in PS. I have not received that yet.

When a camera is set to record jpg it does so with all the in camera settings, picture style, etc.  A Raw file does not and is not effected by those. An 80D cr2 is going to have far more latitude than a T3i does.  But even that is not to say a T3i photo can look very good. It can.

[yteln]

Thank you all who chimed in, this is very helpful.

Yes feel free to download the raw files and please lmk your findings. 
Regarding the lens - it's yongnuo 50mm f2, not the greatest but it's just for comparison.

[ebiggs1]

OK I apologise right up front but remember you asked!

There is no lens correction in PS for a "yongnuo 50mm f2" lens.  It is junk. Get rid of it.

I d/l the first two of the guitar photos from each camera, The 80D and the T3i.  I stopped right there because both are so far out of focus to be unusable. Or the lens is so bad as to be unusable. There is absolutely no way to compare these shots.

For any meaningful results form either camera you need to get a decent lens.  Even the cheapest kit lens will do better than what you have. A best buy lens you might want to consider is the ef 50mm f1.8. At any rate shown is an example of the corrected editing in PS of one shot.  Other than extreme OOF you can see it is a pretty nice photo.

[ebiggs1]

Also keep in mind the above photo is the one you claimed is the best.  It is from the T3i.  Here is the one from the 80D.

Again extremely OOF or extremely poor lens. Impossible to compare or to say which is better or best.

BTW, LR reports 35mm, not 50mm, and f2 for 1/60 SS with ISO 100.  My correction added 1 full stop exposure.  Lens correction not possible since it doesn't exists in my version of LR and/or PS/ACR.