Insightful comments so far... at least about human nature!
WRT your question, the (very) short answer is that the a 50D RAW capture has more noise than the 40D at the pixel level. However, this is mitigated by two things:
1) Enhanced noise reduction in Canon\'s Digic IV procesing chain (including in DPP). This means that files out of the camera or DPP will show a bit less noise than 40D files at similar ISOs (though they may be slightly softened and less saturated by NR)
2) Increased resolution, which reduces apparent noise at reproduction size vs. a lower resolution camera
My own personal experience is that I can make pretty clean images with the 50D up to ISO 800 using Neat Image in post. ISO 1600 is quite usable if you can accept some noise / lack of fine detail at 100%. In certain light (very warm incandescent light, such as indoor household lighting at night), noise is substantially increased, and there is also some color inaccuracy. See this link for some analysis on the 500D sensor that, based on my experience, I think is applicable to the 50D as well:
Does this mean the 50D deserves all the \"hate\". Probably not. But Canon is clearly pushing the boundaries of current technology to reach this pixel count, with a few rough spots showing around the edges.
I suspect they are hearing the message that image quality at higher ISO speeds still matters even in the APS-C range...
Insightful comments so far... at least about human nature!
WRT your question, the (very) short answer is that the a 50D RAW capture has more noise than the 40D at the pixel level. However, this is mitigated by two things:
1) Enhanced noise reduction in Canon\'s Digic IV procesing chain (including in DPP). This means that files out of the camera or DPP will show a bit less noise than 40D files at similar ISOs (though they may be slightly softened and less saturated by NR)
2) Increased resolution, which reduces apparent noise at reproduction size vs. a lower resolution camera
My own personal experience is that I can make pretty clean images with the 50D up to ISO 800 using Neat Image in post. ISO 1600 is quite usable if you can accept some noise / lack of fine detail at 100%. In certain light (very warm incandescent light, such as indoor household lighting at night), noise is substantially increased, and there is also some color inaccuracy. See this link for some analysis on the 500D sensor that, based on my experience, I think is applicable to the 50D as well:
Does this mean the 50D deserves all the \"hate\". Probably not. But Canon is clearly pushing the boundaries of current technology to reach this pixel count, with a few rough spots showing around the edges.
I suspect they are hearing the message that image quality at higher ISO speeds still matter even in the APS-C range...
Aug 27, 2009 at 04:42 PM
Previous versions of garyvot's message #7461734 « The hate is strong in this one.... »
