Previous page Next page

Resolution Chart Comparison (JPEG and RAW)

Images on this page are of our standard resolution chart which provides for measurement of resolution up to 4000 LPH (Lines Per Picture Height). A value of 20 equates to 2000 lines per picture height. For each camera we use the relevant prime lens (the same one we use for all the other tests in a particular review). The chart is shot at a full range of apertures and the sharpest image selected. Studio light, cameras set to aperture priority (optimum aperture selected), image parameters default. Exposure compensation set to deliver approximately 80% luminance in the white areas.

What we want to show here is how well the camera is able to resolve the detail in our standard test chart compared to the theoretical maximum resolution of the sensor, which for the charts we shoot is easy to work out - it's simply the number of vertical pixels (the chart shows the number of single lines per picture height, the theoretical limit is 1 line per pixel). Beyond this limit (which when talking about line pairs is usually referred to as the Nyquist frequency) the sensor cannot faithfully record image detail and aliasing occurs.

This limit is rarely attained, because the majority of sensors are fitted with anti-aliasing filters. Anti-aliasing filters are designed to reduce unpleasant moiré effects, but in doing so, they also reduce resolution (the relative strength and quality of these filters varies from camera to camera). In theory though, a sensor without an AA filter, when coupled with a 'perfect' lens, will deliver resolution equal to its Nyquist limit. Therefore, even though it may be effectively unattainable with normal equipment in normal shooting situations, an understanding of a sensor's theoretical limit provides a useful benchmark for best possible performance. Nyquist is indicated in these crops with a red line.

On this page we're looking at both JPEG and Raw resolution. For a (more) level playing field we convert the latter using Adobe Camera Raw. Because Adobe Camera Raw applies different levels of sharpening to different cameras (this confirmed) we use the following workflow for these conversions:

  • Load RAW file into Adobe Camera RAW (Auto mode disabled)
  • Set Sharpness to 0 (all other settings default)
  • Open file to Photoshop
  • Apply a Unsharp mask tuned to the camera, usually 100%, Radius 0.6, Threshold 0
  • Save as a TIFF (for cropping) and as a JPEG quality 11 for download
JPEG (5184 x 3456) 4.9MB RAW (5184 x 3456) 4.7MB

Vertical resolution

JPEG
RAW

Horizontal resolution

JPEG RAW

The 600D's JPEG engine is again giving identical results to other Canon SLRs that use the same sensor. This means that it does a pretty good job of representing the captured data, clearly showing distinct lines up to around 2500 l/ph but with very few artefacts beyond that point. Processing with Adobe Camera Raw and then applying a little sharpening reveals finer detail up to nearer 2700 l/ph but with false color artefacts appearing around the frequency that the JPEG engine cuts out. It's about the performance you'd expect to see from an 18MP camera.

Previous page Next page
1151
I own it
84
I want it
128
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 8
BradMark

Pretty good review, thanks.

0 upvotes
KonradDC

I have had this camera for over 2 years. The video works very well for exposure, especially in difficult lighting areas. The problem is the focus is slow and hunts. It is best to use it in manual mode and with fairly fast lenses. This was an upgrade to EOS 350, but I only use 2 of the lenses I used before with the 600D - Canon EF 50mm 1.8 and Sigma 70-300 mm. Photos are good and the lens profile works well with the Canon lenses I have. Profile does not work with non-Canon lense like my sigma 17-70 2.8-4 and the 70-300mm. I have also bought a Canon 10-18mm wide angle lens to add to the 18-55 is and 55-250 is lens, plus the lenses mentioned earlier.
I had to buy Nissin flashes as the Sigma 500 flash is not compatible, even after being sent to Sigma for a fix.
The worst issue is the slow focus in live view. Fast lenses are better, but it is best to go manual or use the view finder. I was think of getting the 700D, but not sure if it is worth it, even with the upgrades.

0 upvotes
reanim888

Great camera for shooting still photos. The quality is superb and low-lighting is a breeze (as soon as you get used to working the correct settings).
The main reason I chose the T3i was for the 1080p video is offers. The video quality is great, but there are a few things to be aware of.
You'll want to get a memory card rated at a 10 for speed, and make sure it's a good-quality brand. If you scrimp on the card you'll forever be hitting yourself when the video recording repeatedly stops for no apparent reason. I have been through three cards that don't cut it (three different brands). Make sure you shell out the money for a quality card or you won't be able to record the data fast enough for 1080p (particularly in bright lighting or when you have a light source in the background--like a TV or lamp).
Enjoy!

1 upvote
qosmioamit

This is my first DSLR as well and I think it functions very well. I use the kit lens and additionally I bought a telephoto zoom lens 55 to 250mm (f4 to f5.6) and a prime 50mm (f1.8). The camera gives me reasonably sharp shots. It does not have as many focus points as a competitive Nikon D3200. I post process with Aperture and then the pictures look even better!

1 upvote
LuFra72

This is my first DSLR, coming from two previous Canon PowerShot cameras and a Minolta 35mm SLR. For my purposes (not professional) this camera has been outstanding. I mainly wanted a camera that allowed me to take better family and vacation photos and one that would allow me to learn about shooting manually. I also feel confident that lens purchases I make for this camera will be supported on better Canon cameras should I see the need for it in the future.

0 upvotes
Empies

Even for an amateur camera very well. Of course, for a good job requires additional configuration. Plus, the lens plays an important role. That the work of the unit, I want to note the high processing shots. Good sharpness and color rendition. In general, a good camera. And not expensive!

0 upvotes
keekimaru

Canon t3i 600D

This new piece of kit is very similar but quite a few dollars cheaper. The specs are similarly very close, with one exceptional difference: the new baby is 240 grams lighter in weight, made from stainless steel and polycarbonate resin with glass fibre. Which says a lot: pros like cameras with a dab of weight while the amateur fraternity goes kinky for models that don’t lower the shoulders.

Read More http://webcamerawebcamera.com/detail.php?id_detail=33

0 upvotes
VizuaLegend

So All In All., Im Looking Between This &The Rebel SL1 For Video... I Would Like To Kno Which Would Be Best For The Task &Video Editing ...

0 upvotes
Total comments: 8