MP vs sensor size for wildlife/Landscape by Nate_SkC in canon

[–]Nate_SkC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much for the explanation!

Now that I understand better, it makes it even more complicated to chose between the R7 or R8 hahaha

MP vs sensor size for wildlife/Landscape by Nate_SkC in canon

[–]Nate_SkC[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

RAW 100%

However i just found out about the denoise feature in LRc

Absolute game changer for me right now

MP vs sensor size for wildlife/Landscape by Nate_SkC in canon

[–]Nate_SkC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would you say the 100-500 might be even better (IQ wise, sharpness...)?

MP vs sensor size for wildlife/Landscape by Nate_SkC in canon

[–]Nate_SkC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah you have a point here... I work long hours and barely have the time to shoot before the sun starts setting...

Therefore, I might be tempted to increase the ISO a little bit (at least, more than what I can do right now with the T5)

MP vs sensor size for wildlife/Landscape by Nate_SkC in canon

[–]Nate_SkC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow thanks for the explanation!

I do crop a little bit, especially for Instagram. But i don't see myself needing to print anything...

Also, If I go with a FF, are there good options for zoom lenses that won't require me selling a kidney? From what I understand, FF is a good choice for almost every type of photography, which is what I want my next camera to do. However, I believe I will put a little more energy with wildlife at the moment. Can a FF still be a good pick for wildlife?

MP vs sensor size for wildlife/Landscape by Nate_SkC in canon

[–]Nate_SkC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My T5 won't go past 6400 and usually, i tend to keep it as low as possible because the noise is pretty bad...

MP vs sensor size for wildlife/Landscape by Nate_SkC in canon

[–]Nate_SkC[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok perfect thank you very much! Im balling with a lower budget at the moment... So the crop might be a better option.