Canon image quality/rendering

Started 10 months ago | Discussions
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Canon image quality/rendering
10 months ago

I'm not a "fan" of any brand, but I found it interesting how at very first when I made the decision to switch to Canon (going FF), I looked up pictures with different lenses, to help me choose lenses, I found the way Canon renders an image a little unpleasant, but after a while I couldn't take my eyes off some pictures. I just love the way Canon renders images (I had forgotten how much I love it!) and I'm glad to be doing my shooting with a Canon again. It's just a different way of rendering from Nikon, Pentax and other brands (Nikon has great IQ but I don't like how Nikon renders images most of the time) and I absolutely love it. I found it interesting how at first it seemed to disagree with me, because the brand I'm switching over from renders images in a totally different (also pleasant, but different) way. Interesting how it's possible to get so used to the way my own camera renders images that it makes the way other cameras render images less pleasant. Anyone else experienced this?

Rick Knepper
Forum ProPosts: 10,340Gear list
Like?
Re: Canon image quality/rendering
In reply to canonagain123, 10 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

I'm not a "fan" of any brand, but I found it interesting how at very first when I made the decision to switch to Canon (going FF), I looked up pictures with different lenses, to help me choose lenses, I found the way Canon renders an image a little unpleasant, but after a while I couldn't take my eyes off some pictures. I just love the way Canon renders images (I had forgotten how much I love it!) and I'm glad to be doing my shooting with a Canon again. It's just a different way of rendering from Nikon, Pentax and other brands (Nikon has great IQ but I don't like how Nikon renders images most of the time) and I absolutely love it. I found it interesting how at first it seemed to disagree with me, because the brand I'm switching over from renders images in a totally different (also pleasant, but different) way. Interesting how it's possible to get so used to the way my own camera renders images that it makes the way other cameras render images less pleasant. Anyone else experienced this?

Started with Canon and began using both brands about three years ago. For me, other than Nikon rendering shadows more naturally (not as dark as Canon for a similar exposure), I can make images from both camera look very close.

Quite frankly, Nikon cameras have more photographer-friendly features, small and large, than Canon cameras - starting with Nikon not abandoning their legacy lenses. The next biggie (for me) is Nikon's willingness to drop the AA filter. The D800E's resolution doesn't hurt their cause either. Nikon was putting pro-level AF in their prosumer cameras years before Canon was willing to. These don't scratch the surface really.

However, for me, it's all about the lenses. Each brand has some very special lenses the other can't compete with (and no, I've had my fill of adapters).

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, shooting for pleasure. Just say NO! to MAIL-IN REBATES.
D800E + Zeiss 18mm f3.5 ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/w8fdru8roszwg8xoy5un
D800E + Zeiss 25mm f2.8 ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/zr8qngphdv11ro1q4asy
D800E + Zeiss 28mm f2 ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/9955wwgscuzie4dyph5k
D800E + Zeiss 35mm f2 ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/91z8dkrwp5yvzbhln6c2
D800E + Zeiss 50mm f2 Makro ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/w8fdru8roszwg8xoy5un
5D3 vs. 6D with 24-70 II f8 & f11 link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/6jcl8fsvy1neqbe4vpbe
5D3 vs. 6D with 24-70 II Landscape link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/sx1val7i16momunv90bv
6D + 40mm f2.8 STM landscape link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/5qe0he09shs34bl7h9rm
5D3 & 24-70 II versus D800E & 24-70G link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/fuac7zqd7h7n14wnf3v0
5D3 & 24-70 II @28mm VS. 5D3 & Zeiss ZF 28mm link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/lll7qcz1bbf0ur8j9h9z

 Rick Knepper's gear list:Rick Knepper's gear list
Nikon D3X Nikon D800E Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 6D Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Canon image quality/rendering
In reply to Rick Knepper, 10 months ago

You can get them to look close, but there are small things that don't match up, Canon has very different kind of noise from Nikon for example, I find Canon noise pleasant whereas Nikon noise leaves me cold. Probably not a big deal (or even noteworthy) from some, just something I pay attention to in addition to all the other things.

You're right, and I would have gone Nikon if I wasn't also interested in the video capabilities of Canon. We each make our own compromises I don't mind adapters, but I use native mount whenever I can, and native lenses whenever they're better than third party lenses. There are some great Canon lenses, but the truth is some third party lenses can beat some Canon lenses but L and non. But I agree, it's all about the lenses, the other stuff is secondary. Lenses are the thing that affects image rendering the most, the first step. Everything the camera does is just manipulate the light that came through the lens, it's the lens that shapes it in the first place.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Rick Knepper
Forum ProPosts: 10,340Gear list
Like?
Re: Canon image quality/rendering
In reply to canonagain123, 10 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

You can get them to look close, but there are small things that don't match up, Canon has very different kind of noise from Nikon for example, I find Canon noise pleasant whereas Nikon noise leaves me cold. Probably not a big deal (or even noteworthy) from some, just something I pay attention to in addition to all the other things.

You're right, and I would have gone Nikon if I wasn't also interested in the video capabilities of Canon. We each make our own compromises I don't mind adapters, but I use native mount whenever I can, and native lenses whenever they're better than third party lenses. There are some great Canon lenses, but the truth is some third party lenses can beat some Canon lenses but L and non. But I agree, it's all about the lenses, the other stuff is secondary. Lenses are the thing that affects image rendering the most, the first step. Everything the camera does is just manipulate the light that came through the lens, it's the lens that shapes it in the first place.

My adapter comment was aimed at Canon respondents in general who would be tempted to offer the adapter argument.

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, shooting for pleasure. Just say NO! to MAIL-IN REBATES.
D800E + Zeiss 18mm f3.5 ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/w8fdru8roszwg8xoy5un
D800E + Zeiss 25mm f2.8 ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/zr8qngphdv11ro1q4asy
D800E + Zeiss 28mm f2 ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/9955wwgscuzie4dyph5k
D800E + Zeiss 35mm f2 ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/91z8dkrwp5yvzbhln6c2
D800E + Zeiss 50mm f2 Makro ZF link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/w8fdru8roszwg8xoy5un
5D3 vs. 6D with 24-70 II f8 & f11 link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/6jcl8fsvy1neqbe4vpbe
5D3 vs. 6D with 24-70 II Landscape link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/sx1val7i16momunv90bv
6D + 40mm f2.8 STM landscape link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/5qe0he09shs34bl7h9rm
5D3 & 24-70 II versus D800E & 24-70G link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/fuac7zqd7h7n14wnf3v0
5D3 & 24-70 II @28mm VS. 5D3 & Zeiss ZF 28mm link to RAW Download
https://app.box.com/s/lll7qcz1bbf0ur8j9h9z

 Rick Knepper's gear list:Rick Knepper's gear list
Nikon D3X Nikon D800E Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 6D Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 16,057
Like?
Raw
In reply to canonagain123, 10 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

You can get them to look close, but there are small things that don't match up, Canon has very different kind of noise from Nikon for example, I find Canon noise pleasant whereas Nikon noise leaves me cold. Probably not a big deal (or even noteworthy) from some, just something I pay attention to in addition to all the other things.

I shoot RAW and PP noise reduction with Photoshop CC, Topaz DeNoise, and Nik's Define...so noise quality is basically the same regardless of brand or model...in the final product. For someone who uses predominately in-camera PP (JPEG) or little PP NR...  I can see what your saying, but more model than brand differences when shooting RAW

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Who doesn't shoot RAW?
In reply to Mako2011, 10 months ago

I can't remember when I last shot a jpg, I shoot everything in RAW But unless you keep your camera always within the "safe limits", you will encounter an image with synch a high dynamic range or such low light, that it will inevitably leave you with a choice of having noise in your images, or having unusable images left flat, mushy and liveless by excess NR. In those images, you can see the quality of the noise. Some people don't correct the noise in their images on purpose, it can have the same aesthetic function as film grain. Noise can add to an image, it doesn't always substract from it. Then of course there is the whole controversial "faking detail/sharpness with noise"...

Anyway. I pay attention to the quality of noise just like any other factors that make up an image, and I find the noise/grain and general rendering of Canon pleasant. That's all I meant. The noise is also preasant in some images on flickr that have clearly been processed to look their best, so it's not limited to jpgs. Like I said, some people leave it in on purpose. It's a stylistic choice.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 16,057
Like?
model
In reply to canonagain123, 10 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

I can't remember when I last shot a jpg, I shoot everything in RAW But unless you keep your camera always within the "safe limits", you will encounter an image with synch a high dynamic range or such low light, that it will inevitably leave you with a choice of having noise in your images, or having unusable images left flat, mushy and liveless by excess NR. In those images, you can see the quality of the noise.

Again, In post my NR workflow leaves the "quality" of noise pretty much brand independent and more a model factor than anything else.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: model
In reply to Mako2011, 10 months ago

okay, that's very well possible. I don't know your workflow, it's clearly different from mine. I also acknowledge the quality of noise might be just as much model-dependent as brand-dependent. I find sometimes luminance noise (not so much chroma noise) can be left untouched in certain parts of the image where it blends in with the texture I think it adds to the image) while selectively reducing (or completely removing) all noise in other parts of the image. I find that often gives me a very good result. But then probably everyone does NR selectively, whole-image NR is of limited use.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads