# Canon 90D questions?



## Raw photographer (Dec 23, 2019)

So i've been looking at the new 90D and well i'm thinking it might be a good camera for me, but the one thing i'm confused about is it's resolution. I currently use the Canon Rebel xs, and it's only a 10mp camera and it's very very outdated. So i'm wondering is the 32.5mp high resolution on the 90D to much for a lens i was using on a 10mp camera. I don't know how that works. 

Any help is very much appreciated.

P.S The lens a use is the 70-300 IS USM ii lens if that helps any.

Thanks again.


----------



## TWX (Dec 23, 2019)

Its resolution is 6960 x 4640.  Your current resolution is 3888 x 2592, so not quite twice the horizontal and not quite twice the vertical compared to what you're using now.

I too was using a Rebel XS until I fairly recently upgraded to a 77D at 6000 x 4000.

Possibly the biggest difference that the 90D and M6 Mark II offer compared to all other modern Canon APS-C offerings is full-frame 4K video without requiring a substantial crop, I believe with dual pixel autofocus.

The one thing in particular that I would suggest is that you get your hands on an M6 Mark II with electronic viewfinder before you buy the 90D.  I've been playing with my wife's M100 a bit and frankly, the mirrorless offerings are very good, the M100 is based on the same sensor and processor as my 77D and had I realized just how good, I might have gone mirrorless instead.  As an example, I take video of my family, and it would be nice to have an electronic viewfinder in video mode, instead of having to look down at a flip-over screen; I can either look at the action or I can look at the screen, but not both.  An EVF might allow me to steer the camera while still keeping an eye physically on what's going on.

Now, as for why I chose the 77D, it was basically the exact same size as the Rebel XS.  The 80D was a bigger camera body, the SL2 looked to be too small at the right finger grip.  The 77D was almost the same a what I was used to.  The T7i was ruled-out because it was the same price as the 77D and had a couple fewer features.


----------



## Raw photographer (Dec 23, 2019)

TWX said:


> Its resolution is 6960 x 4640.  Your current resolution is 3888 x 2592, so not quite twice the horizontal and not quite twice the vertical compared to what you're using now.
> 
> I too was using a Rebel XS until I fairly recently upgraded to a 77D at 6000 x 4000.
> 
> ...



Thank you, i have used my neighbors 77D before and it's great, but i do mostly wildlife photography plus lot's of birds in flight so with the 77D only shooting 6fps thats a big difference vs 10 fps on the 90D in my opinion. Plus with the 90D shooting 4K video thats a big deal for me as well. But in the end your paying for all of those little features and things, but the question i also keep asking myself is "Do i really need it". I can get the 77D with the 18-135mm for $1429.99  but if i choose the 90D i'll have to pay 1449.99 for just the body. Thats a lot of money for just a body. So i'm still bouncing around between the 90D, the 80D, 77D or possibly even the 7D mark ii. And as for the mirrorless cameras, i'm sticking to the DSLR's for as long as i can, watched numbers of videos online and they just aren't appealing to me yet.

Thanks again.


----------



## TWX (Dec 23, 2019)

I got my 77D body-only for $599, via a shop selling through Amazon.  Yes, it technically is one of those grey-market cameras that wasn't imported or distributed by Canon USA, but was brand new.  I picked up an 18-135mm nano-USM lens for $300 with the power zoom control mechanism included, used, but certainly not abused.  Only reason I bought that lens was for the video advantages the controller offers.

That price was a huge contributor to why I chose the camera I went with.  I already had an 18-55mm IS II, a 28-80(?) EF lens off of an old film camera, and an old Tamron telephoto zoom lens (80-210mm?) so I didn't feel the need to get another kit lens.  I wasn't aware that the 18-135mm was even available as a kit lens at the time I bought, but I probably still wouldn't have gone for it.  I did get the 24mm f/2.8 prime at the same time, which in hindsight I didn't really need and probably should have refrained from purchasing.  Live and learn.


----------



## photoflyer (Dec 27, 2019)

While 10 megapixels is low by today's standards, I would suggest looking at your total budget, what you like to shoot and then get the best lens you can afford first. Then perhaps look at a used body with a better sensor.

Flaws like chromatic aberration in a lower quality lens are just a lot clearer on a higher resolution sensor. And, better lenses are often faster, something for which megapixels cannot compensate.

Having said that, by all accounts the 90D is a very good camera.  In some ways it may be the never released 7D Mark III. The Mark II is used by many professionals. 

Among several bodies, I have a 50D, ten years old, and like it very much.


----------



## Original katomi (Dec 28, 2019)

As to your original question
There is no reason that you can not use your 70 300 lens the lens projects an image onto the film or sensor 
How much of that detail is recorded is down to the film or sensor 
Yes there a point where the camera is able to record more detail than the lens can produce. But I don’t think you are there yet. 
As others have said the new sensor will pick up more detail and more flaws both in the kit and your picture taking methods. What you lightly to suffer from with the higher resolution is defraction
Ok I have just done a little test 
Crop factor 1.6  lens @100mm 
On 10mp the appature of f10 is still not affected 
On 32mp it drops to 5.6
Using photographers friend 3 app
I use the canon 60d 70D and the 7d mk1
For me this the balance point between hi resolution vs the increase in defraction given my style  and interest of photography.


----------

