Steve's Digi-Cams

CMan · Dec 20, 2006

Here are six identical images from different cameras on Steve's Digicam's. Unprocessed.

30D
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/30d/samples/IMG_8618.JPG

400D
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/rebelxti/samples/IMG_1559.JPG

D50
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/d50/samples/DSC_0136_NEF.JPG

D70s
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/d70s/samples/DSC_0492_NEF.jpg

D80
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/d80/samples/dsc_0937.jpg

D200
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/d200/samples/DSC_0320.JPG

Now, can anyone explain to me why the 6 MP Nikon's have the sharpest image under crop? The four other cameras; slightly soft with the 400D being (to my eyes) the best. But the D70s and D50; absolutely crystal. Is the 6 MP sensor in those two cameras really better in that way, or am I seeing things? Try cropping in on the door of the red building, or one of the window units on the other structure.

Don Simon · Dec 20, 2006

Well I can't say for certain but if you check the Sample Pictures page for each it looks like the processing e.g. sharpening was different, so I don't really know how comparable the images actually are. Other than that, I dunno, maybe a better tripod used for one? Basically what I'm saying is that comparisons of this kind aren't 100% useful even when they're done under the most controlled conditions... which these aren't.

CMan · Dec 20, 2006

I did a little more research; and I found that on the Nikon's the in camera sharpening was bumped up. I found a picture taken with the 400D that had the sharpening increased, and it was much better, so you are correct.

fmw · Dec 21, 2006

I didn't look at them because I'm on dial up this morning but, unless you are looking at raw files, they will tell you nothing about sensors. They will tell you more about software.

mysteryscribe · Dec 21, 2006

If they were all set at max software performance, I would be just as interested to know that as their purely hardware only capabilities.

For instance if a $500 camera at max software is very close to a $5,000 camera at max software, I would sure like to know it.

So maybe there should a both kinds of shots included.

CMan · Dec 21, 2006

Each camera has maybe, two or three shots of this subject. For raw to jpeg converts, it says, "RAW conv to JPEG, DPP Sharpness..." and then a number, sometimes 5 or 7, sometimes less.

The unprocessed (at least I think they are) JPEG's from all the cameras seem to come out soft, but when I take them into PS and bump up the sharpness just a notch, then they are just as sharp as anything.

So I guess I was putting more into this then I should have been; all it takes is 10 seconds of post processing. However, I agree with mysteryscribe; I'd like to see images from each camera that are guaranteed to be completely free of editing, processing or anything else, so I could see if a 5D really is that much better than a D50.

Big Mike · Dec 21, 2006

Don't forget about the differences in the lenses.

The 5D has a full frame (35mm) sensor...which gives it the advantage over any of those other cameras.

fmw · Dec 21, 2006

If they are jpegs then you aren't comparing sensors at all. You are comparing software designed to produce what the software writer considers to be best. My opinion is that sensors are sensors and they all work about the same way. There are differences in sensor size and pixel dimension which have whatever affect they have on images. But sensor quality is probably not an issue worth discussion, at least in my experience.

markc · Dec 21, 2006

In my opinion, if you are going to be spending the money on a 5D, you probably should be shooting RAW and doing all the processing in your own software anyway. I consider things like built-in sharpening to be added marketing fluff for cameras of that level. It belongs in the realm of the P&S where the camera decides everything for you, which is appropriate.

mysteryscribe · Dec 21, 2006

My opinion is..... drum roll...... I have no opinion (is that a first of what)

Don Simon · Dec 21, 2006

markc said:
In my opinion, if you are going to be spending the money on a 5D, you probably should be shooting RAW and doing all the processing in your own software anyway. I consider things like built-in sharpening to be added marketing fluff for cameras of that level. It belongs in the realm of the P&S where the camera decides everything for you, which is appropriate.

Ah but now we're getting into the RAW vs Jpeg thing again, and from past discussions it seems that even the pros can't reach a consensus on this (in fact it's often those who shoot professionally who claim to prefer the convenience of Jpeg). Personally I agree, I can't imagine shooting Jpeg unless I was either running out of space on the card or needed to print or upload the shots immediately without time for processing. But that doesn't necessarily mean that people who own and know how to use a high-end camera don't or shouldn't shoot Jpeg.

Anyway on the 'comparison' issue I agree that comparing Jpegs straight-from-camera tells you nothing about the sensor quality... but it does tell you about the Jpegs straight-from-camera, which could potentially be useful. But certainly not a way to tell if one camera is 'better' than another. Even when looking at files converted from RAW there's the matter of some converters getting more out of some camera's RAW files than others. Basically when you also factor in the different lenses, focus etc, what it comes down to is, the 'comparison shots that shows you which camera is better' ain't that great.

markc · Dec 21, 2006

Good point. If you need quick processing, it's nice to have. Some people rely on speed for their business. It still makes me cringe, though.

I agree on the troubles with trying to get a valid comparison.

Alex_B · Dec 22, 2006

Well, I just had a look ... and I cannot see ANY crystal clear image there! Maybe it is just me, but all the images show some sharpening halos ! With the D50 and the D70s being by far worst. Someone overdid the sharpening (that much for "unprocessed"). The D80, the 400D and the D30 apparently have the least sharpening applied and look best in terms of sharpening. The D200 looks kind of in between the two groups, but looking at those wires with the sky in the background, I would say also here sharpening has been overdone slightly.

It makes absolutely no sense to compare the images shown there ...
also outdoor shoots are always hard to compare anyway ...

CMan said:
Here are six identical images from different cameras on Steve's Digicam's. Unprocessed.

Now, can anyone explain to me why the 6 MP Nikon's have the sharpest image under crop? The four other cameras; slightly soft with the 400D being (to my eyes) the best. But the D70s and D50; absolutely crystal. Is the 6 MP sensor in those two cameras really better in that way, or am I seeing things? Try cropping in on the door of the red building, or one of the window units on the other structure.