{"id":938,"date":"2019-01-17T12:50:51","date_gmt":"2019-01-17T17:50:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/?p=938"},"modified":"2019-01-17T12:50:51","modified_gmt":"2019-01-17T17:50:51","slug":"lens-versus-body-definitive-answer-part-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/2019\/01\/17\/lens-versus-body-definitive-answer-part-1\/","title":{"rendered":"Lens Versus Body: The Definitive Answer (Part 1)"},"content":{"rendered":"

It’s one of the most commonly asked photography questions: Are you better off investing in a better lens or in a better camera? That is, which contributes more to image quality, the lens (glass) or the body (sensor)? Here’s a definitive, objective answer, based on real-world tests.<\/p>\n

In particular, I tested two bodies and two lenses.<\/p>\n

The bodies are the antiquated Canon EOS 30D from last decade, with its 8.2Mpix sensor (available used for about $150); and the modern Canon EOS 7D Mark II<\/a>, released a few years ago (about $1,000 used).<\/p>\n

The lenses are the consumer-grade Canon 75-300 f\/4.5-5.6 (about $75 used) and the pro-grade Canon 100-400 Mark II f\/4.5-5.6 “L”<\/a> (about $1,700 used).<\/p>\n

Obviously, the 7D Mark II \/ 100-400 “L” combination greatly outshines the 30D \/ 75-300. The interesting question is whether you’re better off with the pro lens on the outmoded consumer-grade camera or the consumer-grade lens on the pro camera.<\/p>\n

Here are the results from a day at the zoo, and it’s no contest.<\/p>\n

An Easy Test<\/h3>\n

The first test doesn’t demand much of the lens or the body. Here are the results:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Lions at the zoo. Canon 7D Mark II with consumer-grade Canon 75-300 lens. F\/8 at ISO 1000. 105mm. Processed from RAW in Lightroom.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\"\"<\/a>
Lions at the zoo. Canon 30D with pro-grade Canon 100-400 Mark II “L” lens. F\/8 at ISO 1000. 100m. Processed from RAW in Lightroom.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Not surprisingly, both combinations do a fine job. At screen resolution, the Canon 30D\/100-400 combo (second photo) is a little better than the Canon 7Dii\/75-300 version, but not much. Here’s a direct comparison:<\/p>\n

\n
\n \n<\/div>\n

A Harder Test<\/h3>\n

But in a harder test, the differences become more obvious:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Lion at the zoo. Canon 7D Mark II with consumer-grade Canon 75-300 lens. F\/8 at ISO 2000. 300mm. Processed from RAW in Lightroom.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\"\"<\/a>
Canon 30D with pro-grade Canon 100-400 Mark II “L” lens. F\/5 at ISO 1600. 300mm. Processed from RAW in Lightroom.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The 100-400 “L” lens produces a much, much better image, even on the Canon 30D:<\/p>\n

\n
\n \n<\/div>\n

Here you can see the stark difference:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Lion at the zoo. The pro lens (100-400 Mark II) on the left greatly outshines the consumer lens (75-300) on the right, even on a much older body (Canon 30D vs Canon 7D Mark II). Processed from RAW in Lightroom.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

And here’s a zoomed-in view:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Lion at the zoo. The pro lens (100-400 Mark II) on the left greatly outshines the consumer lens (75-300) on the right, even on a much older body (Canon 30D vs Canon 7D Mark II). Processed from RAW in Lightroom.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Even on the older sensor, the pro-grade lens produces so much more detail that by comparison the second image actually looks out of focus. It’s not. It just doesn’t have anywhere near the detail of the first.<\/p>\n

A Third Test<\/h3>\n

These shots of a crane, also at the zoo, tell the same story:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Crane at the zoo. Canon 7D Mark II with consumer-grade Canon 75-300 lens. F\/5.6 at ISO 500. 300mm. Processed from RAW in Lightroom.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\"\"<\/a>
Crane at the zoo. Canon 30D with pro-grade Canon 100-400 Mark II “L” lens. F\/5.6 at ISO 500. 300mm. Processed from RAW in Lightroom.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n
\n \n<\/div>\n

What about Camera JPGs (SOOC)?<\/h3>\n

So far we’ve seen RAW files processed in Lightroom. RAW files let you get the most out of an image, but not everyone wants to muck with their photos on a computer, so there’s value in comparing JPG files straight from the camera.<\/p>\n

The modern camera does a slightly better job here, but not nearly better enough to make up for the defects of the inferior lens.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Lion at the zoo. Canon 7D Mark II with consumer-grade Canon 75-300 lens. F\/8 at ISO 2000. 300mm. JPG from Camera.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\"\"<\/a>
Canon 30D with pro-grade Canon 100-400 Mark II \u201cL\u201d lens. F\/5 at ISO 1600. 300mm. JPG from Camera.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\n
\n \n<\/div>\n

The Takeaway<\/h3>\n

So there’s no doubt. A pro lens on a decade-old camera will give you better results than a consumer lens on a new camera. If you’re looking for better image quality, invest in a better lens, even if you have to sell your current body to do so.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Are you better off investing in a better lens or in a better camera? Here’s a definitive, objective answer, based on real-world tests. And the answer is clear.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":947,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,68,17],"tags":[20,22,30,151,33,149,150,47],"section":[],"destination":[],"series":[],"class_list":["post-938","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-gear","category-optics","category-photography","tag-canon","tag-canon-100-400","tag-canon-7d-mark-ii","tag-lens-vs-body","tag-nature-photography","tag-optics","tag-photography","tag-wildlife-photography"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/938","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=938"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/938\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":964,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/938\/revisions\/964"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/947"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=938"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=938"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=938"},{"taxonomy":"section","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/section?post=938"},{"taxonomy":"destination","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/destination?post=938"},{"taxonomy":"series","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/luxumbraque.com\/-\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/series?post=938"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}