Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2004 · My Digital Opinion.
  
 
Larry Carter
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · My Digital Opinion.


For what this is worth... I have nothing to back this up.

I've been right there when digital cameras first came out. What I've seen through the years has been interesting in terms of watching the changes and the development of the sensor. What I've learned is that the sensor technology has changed only in the physical terms ( the size and density of sensor pixels ). Some technology has changed in terms of noise ratio and dynamic range but I feel most of the noise reduction is done within the camera software and raw conversion software. But to me this leads us to bigger problems of detail retention. This problem was first noted in the D30 and now in the Mark II. It seems Canon has the most radical noise reduction method of all the manufacturers of cameras. I deeply feel that Canon's sensor is no better than the Nikon or any other manufacturer in terms of actual noise ratios per channel ( I'm talking pure sensor sensitivty without any camera software intervention) . I think Canon opted to go the smoothing route to sell more cameras and take the lead in the digital arena by user taste. It seems Canon has a better marketing scheme than Nikon. Is this better in terms of better images? I don't think so, and this is just my opinion. Reason I don't care for this is because I want total control of image quality, this is one of the main reasons I purchase the Canon 1Ds. This is another story . The main reason I went for dSLR is because the Consumer point and shoot cameras do everything for you and you can't do much else with the image.... baaahhhh! Anyways, my point is whatever make of dSLR camera you have you can have high quality images if properly prepared in terms of noise and color. And these newer so called low ISO noise cameras are almost to a point of being unprocessable in terms of detail. Give me a camera with detail and noise, and neat image software (properly used) and I'll give you some great looking shots hehehe...

Anyways... if your happy or unhappy, life passes us by at a fast pace. So be happy!
Larry



Jun 05, 2004 at 03:17 PM
jmcfadden
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · My Digital Opinion.


Larry

I have That camera it i called the D2H , what noise I have and there is some is not at all objectionable in the vast majority of the cases, in the cases I find it not to my liking I can run Noise Ninja and still have a file with a bit of *tooth* and life left in it or I can smooth it over to something akin to vasoline on the lens The images are easy to manage as the smaller file size of the sensor and the sharpness of the files out of the camera is a very nice thing indeed . There isn't a perfect camera yet , but I am pleased in most stiuations this one camera is doing a great job for me . I am glad you enjoy the 1Ds in a perfect world I would have both systems

J



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:08 PM
Ben Horne
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · My Digital Opinion.


I agree with your opinion. I think that Canon overdoes the noise processing on their CMOS based cameras. I really wish they would make this a user selectable option. One of my major gripes about the 10D is the fact that it cannot render very fine textures. That fine detail kind of melts away into a garbled digital mess. My primary example of this is the photo on http://www.steves-digicams.com that shows the indoor pool. The texture of the patio looks so overprocessed, and is lacking detail. The 10D will do the same thing to grass, or other fine detail. There should be a heck of a lot more detail on a 1:1 level, but it's simply not there.

It does make me wonder if all that noise reduction is necessary though. Maybe Canon is using it to hide otherwise objectionable image quality. Maybe there is a blotchy, noisy mess under all that noise processing, and the amount that's used in-camera is actually conservative?



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:24 PM
rebel300
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · My Digital Opinion.


Stated perfectly, all above posts...LMC54 knows first hand I've been trying my "A" off to get something exceptional in detail from the MK2. Me frustrated? Yup.
The Reb

Edited by rebel300 on Jun 05, 2004 at 09:28 PM GMT



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:27 PM
Larry Carter
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · My Digital Opinion.


jmcfadden wrote:
Larry

I have That camera it i called the D2H , what noise I have and there is some is not at all objectionable in the vast majority of the cases, in the cases I find it not to my liking I can run Noise Ninja and still have a file with a bit of *tooth* and life left in it or I can smooth it over to something akin to vasoline on the lens The images are easy to manage as the smaller file size of the sensor and the sharpness of the files out of the camera
...Show more

D2H is good! hey vasoline is good too I still shoot with a 1956 Nikon S2... does that count as using 2 systems? hehe
Larry




Jun 05, 2004 at 07:28 PM
Larry Carter
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · My Digital Opinion.


rebel300 wrote:
Stated perfectly, all above posts...LMC54 knows first hand I've been trying my "A" off to get something exceptional in detail from the MK2. Me frustrated? Yup.
The Reb

Edited by rebel300 on Jun 05, 2004 at 09:28 PM GMT



Good luck Lar.... those weird artifacts at the edges of the detail are totally confusing.
Larry



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:37 PM
nutek
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · My Digital Opinion.


Ben Horne wrote:
One of my major gripes about the 10D is the fact that it cannot render very fine textures. That fine detail kind of melts away into a garbled digital mess. My primary example


Ohh!!! So that is what is happening to my files. I have been taking more landscapy-shots with higher detail recently, but I have always been stumped why the grass always becomes a "garbled digital mess",even right out of the camera....



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:37 PM
Larry Carter
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · My Digital Opinion.


Ben Horne wrote:
I agree with your opinion. I think that Canon overdoes the noise processing on their CMOS based cameras. I really wish they would make this a user selectable option. One of my major gripes about the 10D is the fact that it cannot render very fine textures. That fine detail kind of melts away into a garbled digital mess. My primary example of this is the photo on http://www.steves-digicams.com that shows the indoor pool. The texture of the patio looks so overprocessed, and is lacking detail. The 10D will do the same thing to grass, or other fine detail.
...Show more

hehe yeah... no telling whats under the buttery smoothness...
Larry



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:38 PM
jmcfadden
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · My Digital Opinion.


Larry

this isn't a Nikon v Canon thing it is a "digital infancy" thing for me , I just basically "got lucky" when I made my choice of systems and work around any limitations they have.

But this is a Fact CMOS as a imager takes More NR to be as quiet as a CCD , hence canon's digic to answer these issues. Nikon with LBCAST has a sorta middle of the road approach , sharper than CMOS but a litle more native noise , but I for my part will take this and deal with the issues as I see fit.

I hope you know that for me the person is the most important thing , I have some issues too with my choice but lack of detail is not one of them

good to hear the Nikon is still going , it is even older than me

J



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:42 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 

        


jmcfadden
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · My Digital Opinion.


Larry

the Holy Grail for me is not absense of noise but expanded Negative film type dynamic range , the company that really delivers here will get my business , I would seel all my beloved Nikkor and get a canon if they delivered this for me

J



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:52 PM
Larry Carter
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · My Digital Opinion.


jmcfadden wrote:
Larry

the Holy Grail for me is not absense of noise but expanded Negative film type dynamic range , the company that really delivers here will get my business , I would seel all my beloved Nikkor and get a canon if they delivered this for me

J


there is one!!! the 1Ds actually has 2 stops more than film... but don't buy one just cause you said you would thats unfair!!!
Larry



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:54 PM
jmcfadden
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · My Digital Opinion.


Larry

i meant print film , wouldn't it be nice to overexpose by 2 stops and never see it in a print

J



Jun 05, 2004 at 07:57 PM
jmcfadden
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · My Digital Opinion.


Also Larry

digital is so linear, with velvia for instance even tho i consider it to be really a 3 to 4 stop film it is this film's sholder that makes it so amazing , why don't they build this sholder in somehow into the sensors , I know I am an idiot here but there is a lot of great things to love about the response of film to light esp in very high contrast situations , man you can ask velvia to hold together in backlit situations and still expose for the shadows , I still dream of this

J



Jun 05, 2004 at 08:01 PM
jeffH70
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · My Digital Opinion.


John,

Digital is anything but linear. To describe digital, the representation is discrete: the most common one is 0 and 1, there is no in between. Analog however, is linear and you do get the a more gradient result.

Jeff



Jun 05, 2004 at 08:18 PM
bouch
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · My Digital Opinion.


The CMOS/CCD sensor is linear to a first order approximation, that's what John is talking about. I suppose the photosites themselves aren't digital, but of course the camera takes discrete samples to store the image.

John, when I expose correctly (or maybe I should say appropriately) I'm able to draw the shoulder you're talking about in curves and get great results. Of course, I almost always work off of a tripod and take seperate exposures for highlights & shadows. I'm also the kind of guy who always worked with slide film and doesn't often find real high contrast images worth taking.

To build the shoulder into a digital camera you'd need some kind of optical compressor that could squeeze something like 3 stops of light into the top stop (does that make any sense?). I think it would have to be located behind the shutter.

BTW, completely agree with Larry's original post about noise-vs-detail. That's why I own a 1Ds.



Jun 05, 2004 at 11:27 PM
jmcfadden
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · My Digital Opinion.


Tony

thanks for clearing that up , I know of the curve thingy i have built them myself on occasion

wouldn't it be great to have a ND which you could see in the viewfinder and select the # of stops you wanted and slide it up and down in the camera , oh can't a guy dream anymore

J



Jun 05, 2004 at 11:48 PM
sdai
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · My Digital Opinion.


rebel300 wrote:
Stated perfectly, all above posts...LMC54 knows first hand I've been trying my "A" off to get something exceptional in detail from the MK2. Me frustrated? Yup.

Why would you bother with it ... Larry? even the very first person who blew the bubble on the Internet wouldn't touch it.

Back on topic ... yes, I agree 110% with Larry.



Jun 05, 2004 at 11:53 PM
Sectarian
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · My Digital Opinion.


Kodak's NR is radical...in fact it is just plain ugly. I don't buy into this theory on Canon noise reduction. Capture One extracts so much more detail from a 10D RAW file, as compared to Canon's FVU or PS CS that the only conclusion is the bayer interpolation for the 10D is somehow screwed up in FVU and PS CS. C1 rendered 10D files have more detail than I've gotten from any other 6MP camera, and I've never seen any sort of artifact...blooming, moire, banding or objectionable noise. IMO Canon CMOS files offer the best quality per megapixel.


Jun 06, 2004 at 01:14 AM







FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password