A quote from the article:
"This tech-speak, says Chuck Westfall, Technical Advisor at Canon USA, adds up to the 50D performing better at higher ISO settings than the 40D, despite the new camera's smaller pixels (4.7µm for the 50D vs 5.7µm for the 40D). Purchasers of the 50D, says Westfall, can expect noise levels to be roughly 1 to 1.5 stops better in the high ISO range. For example, this means that a photo shot at ISO 3200 on the 50D is expected to have similar noise characteristics to one shot in the ISO 1100-1600 range on the 40D."
I read that article along with the rest of us here back when it came out.
How does that support your contention that the noise levels are the same except for when noise reduction is turned on?
It clearly states that the new sensor is a reason. Other articles mention other electronics as contributing factors as well.
Find an article that says the only reason why the noise from the 50D is lower is because of NR being turned on.
And remember that the 40D has two options, high NR, and no NR. The 50D is more sophisticated with four levels. The first of which is "off".
Jim Victory wrote:
And what in hell does that have to do with anything?
You could also say it is only in the eye of the beholder. What I think a picture should look like is not what you would think a picture should look like. You apparently don't have the brain matter to discuss something rationally without some inane comment.
What a pinhead!
You're calling him a pinhead?
If you go to some respected sites, you will get the same opinion from those who run the sites.
The technology is a way to get where we're trying to go. It shouldn't be an end in itself.
Besides, can't we disagree without the negative statements about those we disagree with?
Mel Gross wrote:
I read that article along with the rest of us here back when it came out.
How does that support your contention that the noise levels are the same except for when noise reduction is turned on?
It clearly states that the new sensor is a reason. Other articles mention other electronics as contributing factors as well.
Find an article that says the only reason why the noise from the 50D is lower is because of NR being turned on.
And remember that the 40D has two options, high NR, and no NR. The 50D is more sophisticated with four levels. The first of which is "off". ...Show more →
I came to that conclusion by testing the two cameras using various settings of NR on and off. I didn't need to read an article to tell me when I can see it with my own eyes. What Chuck Westfall states is simply not true.
I forgot you don't have either camera so I'm wasting my time even discussing it. I'm sure you know better based on what?
Since this is a 5DMKII thread I won't waste my time anymore on the subject. By all means when you have tested the two cameras side by side please post your results in the 50D thread.
Jim Victory wrote:
I came to that conclusion by testing the two cameras using various settings of NR on and off. I didn't need to read an article to tell me when I can see it with my own eyes. What Chuck Westfall states is simply not true.
I forgot you don't have either camera so I'm wasting my time even discussing it. I'm sure you know better based on what?
Since this is a 5DMKII thread I won't waste my time anymore on the subject. By all means when you have tested the two cameras side by side please post your results in the 50D thread.
Well as far as I am concerned...I like the 50D... But it isn't 1-1.5 stops better in high ISO regardless how you process it. At least from my last 3 weeks of using it. I just went from 1.0.1 to 1.0.3 a little while ago... Not sure if that will have any bearing or not..
Time will tell if my feelings change on the subject. Regardless, I am pleased overall with the 50D.
Mel Gross wrote:
I read that article along with the rest of us here back when it came out.
How does that support your contention that the noise levels are the same except for when noise reduction is turned on?
It clearly states that the new sensor is a reason. Other articles mention other electronics as contributing factors as well.
Find an article that says the only reason why the noise from the 50D is lower is because of NR being turned on.
And remember that the 40D has two options, high NR, and no NR. The 50D is more sophisticated with four levels. The first of which is "off". ...Show more →
but that is the reason
people have compared pics both jpg and raw, i have myself, and it really looks only about the SAME and that after resizing 50D down to 40D size.
anyway, it's 99% for sure within +/- 1/2 stop of 40D noise at the image level
it just is NOT a 1-1.5 stop higher performing sensor at either pixel or per image level. The only way it is 1-1.5 stops better is if you only shoot jpg and do no PP and rely soley on the DIGIC NR engines, i haven't compared there, but it might be true in that limited case.
i've seen some claims that the 50D is between the same to 1/2 stop worse the pixel level and you can trasnlate that into the per image level.
there are so more detailed RAW analysis tests being started up
one test on light collecting efficiency had the 50D something like 1/2 stop worse than the 40D at the photosite level and essentially equal at the per image level.
I've gone back 15 pages and can't find it, but I think someone was wanting to know how the 5D Mark II shutter sound compares with the original. Perhaps when DPR do a review they'll look into it in more detail, but for those interested, I stumbled across this clip :
george malamis wrote:
This is the 5DII thread so why don't you guys go to the 50D thread and post there so that other people looking for that information can find it.
photogenix wrote:
I've gone back 15 pages and can't find it, but I think someone was wanting to know how the 5D Mark II shutter sound compares with the original. Perhaps when DPR do a review they'll look into it in more detail, but for those interested, I stumbled across this clip :
If that video is correct, the original 5D sounds cheaper but much faster than the MKII
Those comparing the 40D to the 50D may want to remember that there is only one year difference between those models. It would be interesting to compare the 20D to the 50D to see the per pixel noise comparison as this may be a better indication of the difference between the 5D and the 5DII.
skibum5 wrote:
but that is the reason
people have compared pics both jpg and raw, i have myself, and it really looks only about the SAME and that after resizing 50D down to 40D size.
anyway, it's 99% for sure within +/- 1/2 stop of 40D noise at the image level
it just is NOT a 1-1.5 stop higher performing sensor at either pixel or per image level. The only way it is 1-1.5 stops better is if you only shoot jpg and do no PP and rely soley on the DIGIC NR engines, i haven't compared there, but it might be true in that limited case.
i've seen some claims that the 50D is between the same to 1/2 stop worse the pixel level and you can trasnlate that into the per image level.
there are so more detailed RAW analysis tests being started up
one test on light collecting efficiency had the 50D something like 1/2 stop worse than the 40D at the photosite level and essentially equal at the per image level. ...Show more →
Can you find those tests?
Whoops! Some people are getting fussy about any discussion over something that is not named 5D mkII.
For those, this discussion is related. The reason is that some are saying that they don't think the 50D is quieter than the 40D, and therefore, it's possible the 5D mkII isn't really quieter that the old 5D.
Why talk about the 40D/50D, because they have different megapixels? With the 5DII having a very similar albeit improved 1DsIII sensor, why not use the known DsIII IQ as the basis for any discussion of what the 5DII might be and a possible improvement to the 5D rather than include two cameras that are otherwise not relevant? Right now, the discussion is how pixel size, and NR can affect IQ. So you have two different cameras with two different sensors that you are trying to compare with two other cameras with two different sensors and tring to draw any meaningfull conclusion. And then rather than hash out uprezzing or downrezzing photos, make a print that would be the largest you would expect to print and see how the 5D compares to the DsIII/5DII.
george malamis wrote:
Why talk about the 40D/50D, because they have different megapixels? With the 5DII having a very similar albeit improved 1DsIII sensor, why not use the known DsIII IQ as the basis for any discussion of what the 5DII might be and a possible improvement to the 5D rather than include two cameras that are otherwise not relevant? Right now, the discussion is how pixel size, and NR can affect IQ. So you have two different cameras with two different sensors that you are trying to compare with two other cameras with two different sensors and tring to draw any meaningfull conclusion. And then rather than hash out uprezzing or downrezzing photos, make a print that would be the largest you would expect to print and see how the 5D compares to the DsIII/5DII....Show more →
Uh, we're kinda waiting for the mkII you know.
Make that large print for us now, so we can end this.
