ChrisDM wrote:
After owning just about every Canon body released within the last few years, and shooting with each of them professionally and extensively, I can assure you that those DXO graphs, specifically in terms of S/N and dynamic range (the two parameters I'm always most interested in), are very, very accurate to my experience. Specifically, my 1D3 shows a little less noise than my 1Ds3 at typical output sizes (which DXO puts at 8x12 which is perfect for me), the 40D is about a stop less than either of those two bodies, and the 5D is competing very, very well for its age.
But once again I'll stress, for the benefit of those with less experience coming to these threads trying to pick a camera body: In terms of IQ these cameras are more alike than they are different, and as the DXO graphs show, we're really just splitting hairs for the fun of it. However, as alike as all of these new camera bodies are in IQ, they are vastly different in features and should be chosen more based on their features (or lack of) than anything. For example, if you need 21 megapixels, your only choice is Canon. But if you need to shoot at 12000 ISO, until the 5DMk2 comes out your only choice is one of the Nikons. The 1 Seres AF is vastly superior, particularly in low light, than the 5D series bodies. And so on and so on. Choose the camera with the features that meet your particular shooting needs. And fortunately choosing any of the top bodies out today will provide you remarkable image quality provided you have the skills (and the camera features) to get the shot. And don't miss the forest for the trees when making your decision, as too many that come here to research do...!
Maybe I'm retarded, but my 5D doesn't seem to have the same noise that my 40D does, and it's not a competition either. My 5D beat the crap out of my 40D, took the 40D's lunch money and took the 40D's girlfriend out with the 40D's money.
RobertLynn wrote:
Maybe I'm retarded, but my 5D doesn't seem to have the same noise that my 40D does, and it's not a competition either. My 5D beat the crap out of my 40D, took the 40D's lunch money and took the 40D's girlfriend out with the 40D's money.
Where is the "worried" emoticon when one needs it.
Liquidstone wrote:
Out of camera jpegs have a lot of NR, but RAW captures are as detailed as (if not better than) my 40D and 20D shots at pixel level.
It's illuminating to use DPP 3.51 with the default NR settings set to "Apply camera settings" (a new feature). DPP detects and matches the in-camera JPEG NR settings, even for cameras that have no "high ISO noise reduction" settings (like the 5D). (The 5D applies some luminance sharpening by default to all JPEG images.)
Even with cameras that give you control of high ISO NR settings, like the 50D, there is still some nominal NR applied even if you change this setting to "disabled". To obtain the sharpest results in DPP, you must defeat the NR defaults in DPP altogether.
I mention this because if you do a fresh install of DPP 3.51 this may be the default setting. If you are unaware of it you will not see the sharpest output from your camera.
Most of us are familiar with Pogi Romy's art and craft.
However, don't be fooled into believing that his postprocessing skills are any less than his camera/lens proficiency. It takes both to get results of that caliber.
You hit it right on nail, mate.
Taking the photograph is only half the battle won; the other half is post processing.
In that sense, it does not differ from days of film photography.
Venus wrote:
Taking the photograph is only half the battle won; the other half is post processing. In that sense, it does not differ from days of film photography.
Except for the many pros of the film era who shot color transparencies....
