Canon T2i Image performance vs. Canon 40D

[The Stigenator]

Last night I had a shoot at the House of Blues on Sunset. I was shooting with my 40D and my friends Canon t2i.

The 40D had my Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and the t2i had my EF 50mm f1.4.

Both cameras were in Aperture Priority set at the fastest level, and even so the t2i seemed to be more sensitive to light and hence was running faster shutter speeds. (I hit 1/1250 on the t2i, most were in the 1/400 range, the fastest I got on the 40D was 1/320, but most were in the 1/60 - 1/100 range).

I pushed the t2i to f2.8 and it still yielded faster shutter speeds than the 40D at f2.8. In both cases the cameras were at ISO 3200.

When I moved the t2i to ISO 1600 it did not equiv-ate to the 40D. Which makes me think the t2i is more sensitive for the given conditions.

Granted this test would be better if I was using the same lens on both cameras, but I didnt have that luxury, I had a 50mm f1.8 with me but why use two 50mm lenses eh..

By the way I shot 20gb of pictures last night, sorting and editing is going to be a bitch

 

[jpeyton]

The T2i had a lens that was two-stops faster.

If the 40D was running 1/100s, two-stops faster would be 1/400s, which is exactly what you got.

The T2i should also be at least one-stop cleaner than the 40D at high-ISO.

 

[The Stigenator]

Jpeyton: you are right, the t2i was MUCH cleaner in noise than the 40D but I still think its more sensitive. At f2.8 it was running faster shutter than the 40D.

Funny thing i realized that my Canon SD960IS can read Canon CR2 files natively. I popped in the t2i's SD card and it promptly displayed it with no delay what so ever. Which means the SD960IS has the codec to write CR2 files its just disabled in the firmware. It obviously can read it.

 

[Cattykit]

"Which makes me think the t2i is more sensitive for the given conditions."

I think that probably is the case. What I know is that certain Canon cameras had different ISO ratings than the others. For an example, 5D's ISO 1250 was as high as 1600 of other Canon's and makers'.

 

[PurdueRy]

Jpeyton: you are right, the t2i was MUCH cleaner in noise than the 40D but I still think its more sensitive. At f2.8 it was running faster shutter than the 40D.

Funny thing i realized that my Canon SD960IS can read Canon CR2 files natively. I popped in the t2i's SD card and it promptly displayed it with no delay what so ever. Which means the SD960IS has the codec to write CR2 files its just disabled in the firmware. It obviously can read it.

No, every RAW image has an embedded JPG file which is what the camera displays on your T2i. When you put the card in your 960, it is reading the JPG, not the RAW.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Last night I had a shoot at the House of Blues on Sunset. I was shooting with my 40D and my friends Canon t2i.

The 40D had my Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and the t2i had my EF 50mm f1.4.

Both cameras were in Aperture Priority set at the fastest level, and even so the t2i seemed to be more sensitive to light and hence was running faster shutter speeds. (I hit 1/1250 on the t2i, most were in the 1/400 range, the fastest I got on the 40D was 1/320, but most were in the 1/60 - 1/100 range).

I pushed the t2i to f2.8 and it still yielded faster shutter speeds than the 40D at f2.8. In both cases the cameras were at ISO 3200.

When I moved the t2i to ISO 1600 it did not equiv-ate to the 40D. Which makes me think the t2i is more sensitive for the given conditions.

Granted this test would be better if I was using the same lens on both cameras, but I didnt have that luxury, I had a 50mm f1.8 with me but why use two 50mm lenses eh..

By the way I shot 20gb of pictures last night, sorting and editing is going to be a bitch

Unless one of the cameras is flat out lying about its ISO then this is not possible.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Well the only way you can be sure is if you are using the same lens on both cameras. Two different lenses at f/2.8 may be off slightly. The ISO sensitivities of various cameras also differ to some extent. If they are both off by 1/4 stop (which I would say is not out of the ordinary) then combined it could be a 1/2 stop difference, which would be very visible. I can't remember where, but I have read reviews/comparisons of lenses where the reviewer said something like "Lens X is 0.2 f-stop brighter than Lens Y at the same called f-stop." I have seen the same thing with body comparisons. "Camera X's ISO 100 is slightly more sensitive than Camera Y's ISO 100." etc.

You should also take into account the effect of vignetting. The 50mm at f/2.8 would show practically no vignetting at the corners of a crop body frame (less than 0.2 f-stop all the way through the crop frame). The 28-75mm, wide open, would show a visible amount, almost 0.5 f-stop at the corners of a crop frame, at 50mm focal length (see comparison tool at http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...LensComp=115&CameraComp=9&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2 ).

 

[Madwand1]

Granted this test would be better if I was using the same lens on both cameras, but I didnt have that luxury, I had a 50mm f1.8 with me but why use two 50mm lenses eh..

Your test is actually invalid because you didn't use the same lens. Every component has some room for error in the spec (including the sensor ISO as you're getting at), and a f/2.8 consumer zoom is more likely to be fibbing about f/2.8 than a prime f/1.4.

Simply switch the same lens between cameras to eliminate that variable.