G6 vs G5 samples.

Lucem · Sep 27, 2004

The people from BestBuy were kind enough and allowed me to take a couple of pictures with my G5 and their G6 show room model.
Exif.
1/30 sec, f/2.0
ISO 50 Full wide, and downsized to 3MP.
Center crop.

Pretty much the same. IMHO
This is G6

and G5

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DOF issue with G6. IMO. too deep. Weird, isn't.
I had to double check the aperture and yes it was f2 !!!!

More shallow with G5

Softcorner issue with my G5 or Canon G6 is cheating with the apertures to get better PF performance?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I took a deliberated uderexposed photo to see how the CCD is performing 'til the last drop of signal. The image was compensated using levels in photoshop from a 48bit color image out of PS RAW converter.
1/320 sec, f/2.0
ISO 50 Full wide, and downsized to 3MP.

CCD scan issue with G6 or is an Adobe RAW converter bug?
However notice how well controlled the blue blooming is.

No same problem with G5, look also at the blue sign.

Very intersting and weird.
Your comments are appreciated.

Thanks, Lucem.

Vlad \(^o^)/ · Sep 27, 2004

Hi Lucem,

IMHO, G6 image has better resolution. I can read "get smart" on G6 image and it's blurry on G5 image, extra 2MP

What about DR of G6? Have you made any conclusions?
Thanks for the input!!!
Vlad

Lucem · Sep 27, 2004

From this samples is.
That I'm gonna keep my G5.

Can't you see the G6 issues with extra large DOF and Sensor noise and scan lines?.

Dynamic range need more test, but from the samples I can tell G5 is a bit better.
The real shocker for me, and I have no explanation for is the DOF thing.

Canon might have done some changes to the lens in orther to be that different. So G6 can't produce shallow DOF as easy as G5.

So far the only obvious positives that the G6 has going for is the reduced PF and the faster AF speed.

Cheers,
Lucem

Vlad \(^o^)/ said:
Hi Lucem,
IMHO, G6 image has better resolution. I can read "get smart" on G6
image and it's blurry on G5 image, extra 2MP What about DR of
G6? Have you made any conclusions?
Thanks for the input!!!
Vlad

jim bennett · Sep 27, 2004

Kind of hard to tell much based on the size of these samples Lucem. Also, I wasnt clear on the intent of using a deliberately underexposed shot to check for CCD problems, being that in the real world you would never intentionally take a shot like that?

Jim

sueanne · Sep 27, 2004

Now from your thesis, I suppose you'll stick with your G5.

Now the test is to take people pictures in extreme lightings....

Great you could finally open the G6 RAW files

What did you do to get it working?

G6 still works great for me

sue anne
-----------------------------------

jim bennett said:
Kind of hard to tell much based on the size of these samples Lucem.
Also, I wasnt clear on the intent of using a deliberately
underexposed shot to check for CCD problems, being that in the real
world you would never intentionally take a shot like that?

Jim

Vlad \(^o^)/ · Sep 27, 2004

Yes, those lines are weird. As to DOF, have you seen dog picture in "G6 Portrait of unconditional love." topic? it is very nice, slightly blurred background looks fine. I find the amount of details saved in underexposed images are the same and PF is definitely worse for G5, known problem though. Personally, I would go with G6 or S70 ( we have only few pictures taken with s70, it is not very popular

)
Thank again,
Vlad

Lucem said:
So far the only obvious positives that the G6 has going for is the
reduced PF and the faster AF speed.

Cheers,
Lucem

Vlad \(^o^)/ said:

Hi Lucem,
IMHO, G6 image has better resolution. I can read "get smart" on G6
image and it's blurry on G5 image, extra 2MP What about DR of
G6? Have you made any conclusions?
Thanks for the input!!!
Vlad

Click to expand...

--
Q. what do I need these hugh files for..?

A.It's not about resolution, it's about memories preserved in each shot, every miniscular detail of it...

Lucem · Sep 27, 2004

jim bennett said:
Kind of hard to tell much based on the size of these samples Lucem.
Also, I wasnt clear on the intent of using a deliberately
underexposed shot to check for CCD problems, being that in the real
world you would never intentionally take a shot like that?

With that logic, a D-SRL will be the same as an Dicam since ppl will use ISO 50 all the time anyways.

Is in the extremes where you know which is delibering the best performance. When all was left is hair splitting.

Is like testing a Car, the car is passed to extreme things, like crash test, high speed and acceleration tests.

Its only after taking the beast to the extrmes when you know its limitations and flaws.

Rather than that, I'd have liked to perform serious test with standard charts to measure noise and dynamic range.
But that was impossible, in that store.

Have you noticed the DOF differences, that is a more of a real world issue.

Lucem · Sep 27, 2004

sueanne said:
Now from your thesis, I suppose you'll stick with your G5.

Yes, I think so, unless my test are flawed.

sueanne said:
Now the test is to take people pictures in extreme lightings....

No is a combination, check the reason why in my previous post.

sueanne said:
Great you could finally open the G6 RAW files What did you do
to get it working?

The new Adobe Camera RAW, as We chat this morning.

The G6 is not officially supported so for the scanlines, it might be a bug in the RAW converter, who knows.

sueanne said:
G6 still works great for me

Yes, I've seen your great shots.
I like the G6 very much especially for the AF speed and the less PF.

But it also lose in some issues with respect to the G5 and for the most part the differences are not that much.

sueanne · Sep 27, 2004

Lucem keep your G5 and maybe the G7 will be more to your upgrade.

The AF speed and the less PF besides all the G features makes me happy and coming from A80, thats alot of improvement to me

Keep your tests going, I enjoy reading them. By the way, are you a scientist by nature?

sue anne
-----------------------------

Lucem said:
sueanne said:

Now from your thesis, I suppose you'll stick with your G5.

Click to expand...

Yes, I think so, unless my test are flawed.

Lucem said:

Now the test is to take people pictures in extreme lightings....

Click to expand...

No is a combination, check the reason why in my previous post.

Lucem said:

Great you could finally open the G6 RAW files What did you do
to get it working?

Click to expand...

The new Adobe Camera RAW, as We chat this morning.
The G6 is not officially supported so for the scanlines, it might
be a bug in the RAW converter, who knows.

Lucem said:

G6 still works great for me

Click to expand...

Yes, I've seen your great shots.
I like the G6 very much especially for the AF speed and the less PF.
But it also lose in some issues with respect to the G5 and for the
most part the differences are not that much.

Lucem · Sep 27, 2004

sueanne said:
Keep your tests going, I enjoy reading them. By the way, are you a
scientist by nature?

No, I'm just a procrastrinator by choice.
I shouldn't be wasting my time doing this 'test'.

But now I know what I want

And that is that I'd skip the G6.
So maybe a G7, Nikon 8800 or PRO2IS

see u,
Lucem

jim bennett · Sep 27, 2004

Well I understand the intent of stress testing things (which is part of my work actually) , just not sure the issues that show during the test will exhibit itself in the "real world" of taking everyday pictures. For example one of tests I run at work is a stress test that runs for 10 minutes. If I see a certain number of errors I know that the circuit may not be 100% perfect but depending on the application of the circuit those errors may be perfectly acceptable because the end user do not notice them.

But I agree that the raw converter you used may be to blame for some of the problems you see there. Regarding the DOF issue, I did notice that my G6 seemed to have a pretty large DOF although I didnt test it to any great degree.

Honestly if you were at square zero and had no camera I think the G6 would be a better choice over the G5, but being that you have a G5 I dont think the upgrade would make sense. When I compare picture quality alone between the A80 and the G6 I just didnt see a huge compelling difference especially considering that I rarely print above 8x10. Sure there are other advantages...., features, flash hot shoe, more MP, etc...

regards-

Jim

Lucem said:
jim bennett said:

Kind of hard to tell much based on the size of these samples Lucem.
Also, I wasnt clear on the intent of using a deliberately
underexposed shot to check for CCD problems, being that in the real
world you would never intentionally take a shot like that?

Click to expand...

With that logic, a D-SRL will be the same as an Dicam since ppl
will use ISO 50 all the time anyways.
Is in the extremes where you know which is delibering the best
performance. When all was left is hair splitting.
Is like testing a Car, the car is passed to extreme things, like
crash test, high speed and acceleration tests.
Its only after taking the beast to the extrmes when you know its
limitations and flaws.
Rather than that, I'd have liked to perform serious test with
standard charts to measure noise and dynamic range.
But that was impossible, in that store.

Have you noticed the DOF differences, that is a more of a real
world issue.

Geoff Bonner · Sep 27, 2004

I think you should do some more tests on the DOF issue to really make a determination. Who is to say that the G5 didn't focus lock as well as the G6 in that shot?

Lucem said:
The people from BestBuy were kind enough and allowed me to take a
couple of pictures with my G5 and their G6 show room model.
Exif.
1/30 sec, f/2.0
ISO 50 Full wide, and downsized to 3MP.
Center crop.

Pretty much the same. IMHO
This is G6

and G5

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DOF issue with G6. IMO. too deep. Weird, isn't.
I had to double check the aperture and yes it was f2 !!!!

More shallow with G5
Softcorner issue with my G5 or Canon G6 is cheating with the
apertures to get better PF performance?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I took a deliberated uderexposed photo to see how the CCD is
performing 'til the last drop of signal. The image was compensated
using levels in photoshop from a 48bit color image out of PS RAW
converter.
1/320 sec, f/2.0
ISO 50 Full wide, and downsized to 3MP.

CCD scan issue with G6 or is an Adobe RAW converter bug?
However notice how well controlled the blue blooming is.

No same problem with G5, look also at the blue sign.

Very intersting and weird.
Your comments are appreciated.

Thanks, Lucem.

Scott Skinner · Sep 27, 2004

Well, I never owned a G5 so I can't comment, but I am currious about the ISO 100 performance of the G5 compared to the G6. The ISO 100 perormance on the G6 is much better than the G2. It probably some sort of processing, but the effect is an overall improvement.

I used the ISO 100 a couple times this weekend. It was in some wierd circumstances and I did it just to see how the noise would show up. Maybe I should dig those shots out...

Anyway, I was wondering if that would be an issue for some to consider?

Lucem · Sep 27, 2004

Explanation, since the DOF for both should be the same.

However, I got a a solid focus lock (green frame) for both, using the portion of the picture that is shown above with the letters.
Both crops are part of the same picture.

I would try next using manal focus, when I've another chance in that store, since that difference shouldn't be there.

Geoff Bonner said:
I think you should do some more tests on the DOF issue to really
make a determination. Who is to say that the G5 didn't focus lock
as well as the G6 in that shot?

Geoff Bonner · Sep 27, 2004

Might be worth doing that. I understand that you would have made sure you had a focus lock on the same part of the picture, but that doesn't necessarily mean the G5 focused as it should have. Testing multiple times with different objects would tell the story.

Also, I would not really expect a G Series camera to have that shallow a DOF at the distance those letters are from the lens of your camera. Other reason to be suspicious. Give it another try and report back.

Lucem said:
Geoff Bonner said:

I think you should do some more tests on the DOF issue to really
make a determination. Who is to say that the G5 didn't focus lock
as well as the G6 in that shot?

Click to expand...

Man-Fai Wong · Sep 27, 2004

Lucem,

I don't see how you can reliably test DoF that way. How can you be sure that they each didn't end up w/ different focus distance for one thing? Or did you check for that in the exif and can safely trust the values found there? Offhand, I seem to recall that BreezeBrowser is able to extract the exif data for focus distance, but I've never been sure how accurate that value is.

Also, something else to remember about these Canon digicams. They only offer a relatively small number of focus steps. And if the G6 has somewhat different steps than the G5, then you won't be able to do an accurate test to compare.

Finally, if you're gonna test DoF and focus accuracy w/ any reliable precision, you need a better controlled test. Basically, you need the ruler test that they use in the DSLR forums -- primarily in the Canon 10D forum -- that's more accurate than what Phil Askey usually does.

From what I can tell, I'd first suspect that your shots between G5 and G6 did not actually lock focus at the same focus distance.

Man

Lucem said:
Geoff Bonner said:

I think you should do some more tests on the DOF issue to really
make a determination. Who is to say that the G5 didn't focus lock
as well as the G6 in that shot?

Click to expand...

--

Just another amateur learning to paint w/ 'the light of the world.' (John 8:12)
Motto for the season: 'Cameras are for making photos, not war...'
See my profile for more + some basic photog resources.
As usual, YMMV + caveat emptor.
Contact me at [email protected]
Indulge my fancies at http://www.pbase.com/mandnwong

Geoff Bonner · Sep 27, 2004

Actually, now that I look closer at your DOF subject, it doesn't appear you are the same distance from the subject. The letters are a different distance away from the gold graphic behind it. No gap in the G6 pic, and quite a gap in the G5 pic.

Lucem said:
The people from BestBuy were kind enough and allowed me to take a
couple of pictures with my G5 and their G6 show room model.
Exif.
1/30 sec, f/2.0
ISO 50 Full wide, and downsized to 3MP.
Center crop.

Pretty much the same. IMHO
This is G6

and G5

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DOF issue with G6. IMO. too deep. Weird, isn't.
I had to double check the aperture and yes it was f2 !!!!

More shallow with G5
Softcorner issue with my G5 or Canon G6 is cheating with the
apertures to get better PF performance?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I took a deliberated uderexposed photo to see how the CCD is
performing 'til the last drop of signal. The image was compensated
using levels in photoshop from a 48bit color image out of PS RAW
converter.
1/320 sec, f/2.0
ISO 50 Full wide, and downsized to 3MP.

CCD scan issue with G6 or is an Adobe RAW converter bug?
However notice how well controlled the blue blooming is.

No same problem with G5, look also at the blue sign.

Very intersting and weird.
Your comments are appreciated.

Thanks, Lucem.

Lucem · Sep 27, 2004

You were right.
I went back to the EXIF files with BreezeBrowser and checked the focus distance.
G5 says 66m and G6 0.49m ??.
And the same across all the pics I took that day.
However,the focus subject was like at 3m distance from both cameras.
Strange since 0.49 seem like too short and 66 to long.
But that might be related to the EXIF inaccuracy for that setting.
Next time it'd have to be Manual Focus.

So never mind the difference in DOF.

I think the reason was different focus points, despite I made sure both lock at the same point.
And It might be due that G6 is using a new AF system.

Man-Fai Wong said:
I don't see how you can reliably test DoF that way. How can you be
sure that they each didn't end up w/ different focus distance for
one thing? Or did you check for that in the exif and can safely
trust the values found there? Offhand, I seem to recall that
BreezeBrowser is able to extract the exif data for focus distance,
but I've never been sure how accurate that value is.

Also, something else to remember about these Canon digicams. They
only offer a relatively small number of focus steps. And if the G6
has somewhat different steps than the G5, then you won't be able to
do an accurate test to compare.

Finally, if you're gonna test DoF and focus accuracy w/ any
reliable precision, you need a better controlled test. Basically,
you need the ruler test that they use in the DSLR forums --
primarily in the Canon 10D forum -- that's more accurate than what
Phil Askey usually does.

From what I can tell, I'd first suspect that your shots between G5
and G6 did not actually lock focus at the same focus distance.

Man

Lucem said:

Geoff Bonner said:

I think you should do some more tests on the DOF issue to really
make a determination. Who is to say that the G5 didn't focus lock
as well as the G6 in that shot?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--

Just another amateur learning to paint w/ 'the light of the world.'
(John 8:12)
Motto for the season: 'Cameras are for making photos, not war...'
See my profile for more + some basic photog resources.
As usual, YMMV + caveat emptor.
Contact me at [email protected]
Indulge my fancies at http://www.pbase.com/mandnwong

Lucem · Sep 27, 2004

Geoff Bonner said:
Actually, now that I look closer at your DOF subject, it doesn't
appear you are the same distance from the subject. The letters are
a different distance away from the gold graphic behind it. No gap
in the G6 pic, and quite a gap in the G5 pic.

That I made sure.
I was from the same distance.
The explanation is rather in the two cameras using two different AF points.

A Manual focus should have been the solution, but with such clear and contrasty subject, I thought that was not necesary.

Geoff Bonner · Sep 27, 2004

Tks Lucem.

Lucem said:
Geoff Bonner said:

Actually, now that I look closer at your DOF subject, it doesn't
appear you are the same distance from the subject. The letters are
a different distance away from the gold graphic behind it. No gap
in the G6 pic, and quite a gap in the G5 pic.

Click to expand...

That I made sure.
I was from the same distance.
The explanation is rather in the two cameras using two different AF
points.
A Manual focus should have been the solution, but with such clear
and contrasty subject, I thought that was not necesary.

G6 vs G5 samples.

Senior Member

Active member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Active member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts