Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: thierrylegros396 on December 31, 2008, 12:38:30 pm
-
Hi to all,
Now after a lot of shots and comparisons with my 400D, I really like my G10.
In good light conditions, the G10 outperforms the 400D.
Only above ISO200, the 400D is better.
But I've not tested or compared Dynamic Range.
Anyone has determined the maximum achievable DR using RAW files with Lightroom ?!
Happy New Year.
Thierry
-
Thierry,
Check out this comparison between the 400D and the G10:
http://tinyurl.com/8jcbug (http://tinyurl.com/8jcbug)
Cheers and Happy New Year,
Andrew
-
Anyone has determined the maximum achievable DR using RAW files with Lightroom ?!
Thierry, the dynamic range depends on what you deem as acceptable noise. If you put up with higher noise, the DR is larger. This depends on your personal preference, which in turn surely depends on the setting as well: you accept less noise in a landscape image shot in bright sunlight @ ISO 80 or in a portrait than in a night concert with very low light, shot @ ISO 800.
Look at for example the images on this site (http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_canon_powershot_g10_3.php). Select such from the JPEGs, which are available in raw as well, like the #31 in JPEG, the cook sitting outside (this is an ISO 800 shot).
Looking at the respective raw file reveals, that his left hand middle finger is close to the sixth stop, his forehead is @ 5.5, his nose is @ 6. (It is interesting, that the blue channel is the lowest, i.e. most noisy. Other, comparable images reveal, that the blue filter of the G10 is much stronger than in the Canon DSLRs.)
-
In good light conditions, the G10 outperforms the 400D.
I don't think there is any area, in which the G10 outperforms the 400D, except in the number of pixels. The 400D is at least two stops better in noise @ ISO 100, i.e. its DR is so much greater.
Converting the higher number of pixels into lower noise is the domain of other members of this forum.
-
A quantitative analysis of pixel level noise and S/N may be found here:
http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB3/viewtop...p;start=22#wrap (http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=141021&start=22#wrap)
-
A quantitative analysis of pixel level noise and S/N may be found here:
Emil, you wrote
has a kind of funky pattern in its spatial frequency content
I suggest you to carry out the Fourier transform on different raw channels. Pls post the result.
Happy New Year!
Added: Imaging Resources posted good raw files. The MacBeth squares of the MULTI series are partocularly suitable for this purpose, the color checker card is quite clean (the color checker card used in some other test series has been given to a puppy before to chew on).
-
I don't think there is any area, in which the G10 outperforms the 400D, except in the number of pixels. The 400D is at least two stops better in noise @ ISO 100, i.e. its DR is so much greater.
Converting the higher number of pixels into lower noise is the domain of other members of this forum.
Comparing "Out of the Box" G10 and 400D, in the field, the G10 is the winner in terms of resolution.
Why, because you can use ISO80 even in very low light conditions. G10 lens is better and faster than the 55-85 lens kit, and Image Stabilizer allows you to shoot even at 0.3 second !
But sure you are right that in good lightning at ISO100 the dynamic range of the 400D is largely superior !
Have a Nice Day.
Thierry