Reading mode: Light Dark

D2x & 1Ds Comparison

Go to last post
T

Ted_Pedersen

Active member
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
Location
Seattle, US
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon 1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments). The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds up well.

Sincerely,

Ted

D2X EXPOSURE:
50mm f1.8 AF
1/50 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
D2X RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Low contrast
Color mode II (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

1DS EXPOSURE:
85mm f1.8D
1/100 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
1DS RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Standard (default) tone curve
Color mode 4 (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

Approx. 3MB each:

http://www.tpedersen.com/D2x_1Ds/
 
Ted_Pedersen said:
The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.
Click to expand...
This tracks fairly well with everything I have read on the Canon forums, as well as the pure math. The 1Ds2 has been reported widely by respected Canon shooters as having very little resolution advantage over the 1Ds. This also tracks with Bjorn's tests and other thoughtful tests.

Thanks for posting.

--
Best regards,
Jonathan Kardell
'Most cameras and most lenses are better than most photographers.'
 
well done. more proof we are getting into diminishing returns kind of thing here.

on a sidenote, I also found it interesting that Alkit here in the city has not lowered the rental price of the old 1ds, BOTH old and new 1ds rent for the EXACT same price.
 
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.

Sincerely,

Ted

D2X EXPOSURE:
50mm f1.8 AF
1/50 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
D2X RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Low contrast
Color mode II (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

1DS EXPOSURE:
85mm f1.8D
1/100 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
1DS RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Standard (default) tone curve
Color mode 4 (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

Approx. 3MB each:

http://www.tpedersen.com/D2x_1Ds/
Click to expand...
--

Interesting. I read on the Canon forum that Chasseur d'Images had done an ISO comparison test and noted that Canon's ISO ratings tend to be low, while Nikon's tend to be high, which would explain the differences in exposure required. But a full stop? No wonder the Nikon d2x has good noise performance!

Fabian Gonzales
http://www.goldengateimages.com/
 
Pixel peeping at its finest! I nearly went blind on a 21.3" monitor at 1600 resolution seeing ANY real difference. I am glad you picked two top lenses. This pretty much goes along with what I have seen also. I think the resolution difference between the SLR/n, 1Ds II, 1Ds, and D2x really becomes a moot point for most of us. Now it becomes a matter of skill in shooting and post - and good glass used appropriately. I really do feel we are reaching the point of seriously diminishing returns.

Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
 
Very informative, thanks for taking the time and effort to post...
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.

Sincerely,

Ted

D2X EXPOSURE:
50mm f1.8 AF
1/50 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
D2X RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Low contrast
Color mode II (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

1DS EXPOSURE:
85mm f1.8D
1/100 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
1DS RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Standard (default) tone curve
Color mode 4 (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

Approx. 3MB each:

http://www.tpedersen.com/D2x_1Ds/
Click to expand...
--
Regards,

David F.
Melbourne, Australia.
http://www.pbase.com/davexl/travel

 
Ted_Pedersen said:
Ted_Pedersen wrote:
Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras.
Click to expand...
Yes hello Ted,

That's a nice test. The 1DS uses 8.8 micron pixels compared to the D2X's 5.5 micron pixels, with an area ratio being more than a factor of 2x higher for the Canon; giving it more than 2x higher light collecting ability at a given F# and equalized FOVs. This explains the 1 stop exposure difference you see.

Take care,

Chris
 
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.
Click to expand...
All thing considered no clear winner in resolution. It's too close to call.

I do see a difference in DR. I don't know how the cameras were set for contrast but the D2x has clipped some of the whites and the 1Ds has a good margin with no detail loss. The D2x is close to clipping the sky while the 1Ds isn't even close but the distant shadow areas are more open on the 1Ds while the D2x is darker in those same areas. D2x = higher contrast.

On a sunny day the differences would be more pronounced IMO. I'm seeing this in most if not all of the outdoor images posted here from the D2x. This is a concern for me.

I think Nikon has one area that needs attention, better DR.

Other than that (it's not a small thing) I'd say Nikon has a high-resolution option for F-mounts. Better suited perhaps for more controlled lighting situations though.

One thing I do agree about, no real significant gain in resolution after 6-8 MP and almost none after 11 MP. Also, full-frame offers no real advantage, even for wide-angles due to good available lenses and problems with edges in full-frame models. I'll stick with croped sensors.

Robert
 
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.

Sincerely,

Ted

D2X EXPOSURE:
50mm f1.8 AF
1/50 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
D2X RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Low contrast
Color mode II (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

1DS EXPOSURE:
85mm f1.8D
1/100 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
1DS RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Standard (default) tone curve
Color mode 4 (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

Approx. 3MB each:

http://www.tpedersen.com/D2x_1Ds/
Click to expand...
--
(See profile for equipment I own -- questions welcome.)
 
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.

Sincerely,

Ted

D2X EXPOSURE:
50mm f1.8 AF
1/50 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
D2X RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Low contrast
Color mode II (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

1DS EXPOSURE:
85mm f1.8D
1/100 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
1DS RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Standard (default) tone curve
Color mode 4 (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

Approx. 3MB each:

http://www.tpedersen.com/D2x_1Ds/
Click to expand...
 
Bill Hughlett said:
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.

Sincerely,

Ted

D2X EXPOSURE:
50mm f1.8 AF
1/50 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
D2X RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Low contrast
Color mode II (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

1DS EXPOSURE:
85mm f1.8D
1/100 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
1DS RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Standard (default) tone curve
Color mode 4 (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

Approx. 3MB each:

http://www.tpedersen.com/D2x_1Ds/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
D2X looks slightly sharper in the center, Canon looks slighly sharper on left edge. ("jeep")

The cameras are close enough that the difference in lenses could account for what we see.

Overrated Nikon ISO is consistent with recent Chasseur d'Images article.

Your test portends what we will see in Phil's tests, namely that the 1Ds2 resolves more than the D2X, and by an amount that it would be expected to according to it's 4MP advantage,
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.

Sincerely,

Ted

D2X EXPOSURE:
50mm f1.8 AF
1/50 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
D2X RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Low contrast
Color mode II (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

1DS EXPOSURE:
85mm f1.8D
1/100 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
1DS RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Standard (default) tone curve
Color mode 4 (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

Approx. 3MB each:

http://www.tpedersen.com/D2x_1Ds/
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/duncanmcklowd
 
Ted_Pedersen said:
Bill Hughlett said:
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.

Sincerely,

Ted

D2X EXPOSURE:
50mm f1.8 AF
1/50 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
D2X RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Low contrast
Color mode II (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

1DS EXPOSURE:
85mm f1.8D
1/100 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
1DS RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Standard (default) tone curve
Color mode 4 (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

Approx. 3MB each:

http://www.tpedersen.com/D2x_1Ds/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
(See profile for equipment I own -- questions welcome.)
 
fabgo said:
But a full stop? No wonder the
Nikon d2x has good noise performance!
Click to expand...
Good? I cannot see it is too good, even with its "tuned" ISO settings.

In Canon terms it would be less than acceptable, specially for a 5000USD camera. Considering the ISO difference, even the 1ds Mark 1 should have lower noise.

regards, Bernie
 
Very nice !

have tyou tried the E-300 with 50/2 ?
similar pixel size to the D2x....
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.

Sincerely,

Ted

D2X EXPOSURE:
50mm f1.8 AF
1/50 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
D2X RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Low contrast
Color mode II (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

1DS EXPOSURE:
85mm f1.8D
1/100 sec., f7.1
ISO 100
--------------------------------------------
1DS RAW EXPORT SETTINGS:
No sharpening
Standard (default) tone curve
Color mode 4 (Adobe RGB)
Custom white balance

Approx. 3MB each:

http://www.tpedersen.com/D2x_1Ds/
Click to expand...
 
Robert Whiteman said:
Ted_Pedersen said:
I was recently did a comparison between the Nikon D2x and a Canon
1Ds (original model). I used a 50mm f1.8 on the Nikon and 85mm
f1.8 on the Canon. This produced similar sized images on their
respective CMOS sensors. Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras. I converted RAW files to 16 bit tiffs and then saved
them as level 11 jpegs (no sharpening or exposure adjustments).
The two files are very similar; try opening them in PS, then
sharpen each one using 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold. The D2x seems
to have a slight edge in resolution, although the old Canon holds
up well.
Click to expand...
All thing considered no clear winner in resolution. It's too close
to call.

I do see a difference in DR. I don't know how the cameras were set
for contrast but the D2x has clipped some of the whites and the 1Ds
has a good margin with no detail loss. The D2x is close to clipping
the sky while the 1Ds isn't even close but the distant shadow areas
are more open on the 1Ds while the D2x is darker in those same
areas. D2x = higher contrast.

On a sunny day the differences would be more pronounced IMO. I'm
seeing this in most if not all of the outdoor images posted here
from the D2x. This is a concern for me.

I think Nikon has one area that needs attention, better DR.
Click to expand...
Are you sure you're really talking about DR. I would have thought that a consideration of the tone curve settings in each shot/camera would revel that we may well just be talking about default tone settings. So Nikon have a contrastier default tone setting. I don't think that is a real deal breaker, since Nikon provide several other tone settings, plus a custom toner setting for those that can venture past the defaults.
Robert Whiteman said:
Other than that (it's not a small thing) I'd say Nikon has a
high-resolution option for F-mounts. Better suited perhaps for more
controlled lighting situations though.

One thing I do agree about, no real significant gain in resolution
after 6-8 MP and almost none after 11 MP. Also, full-frame offers
no real advantage, even for wide-angles due to good available
lenses and problems with edges in full-frame models. I'll stick
with croped sensors.

Robert
Click to expand...
--
Geoff B
http://users.bigpond.net.au/isc/
 
cpw said:
cpw said:
Ted_Pedersen wrote:
Oddly enough, there was a 1-stop
difference in shutter speed to get near equal exposures with the
two cameras.
Click to expand...
Yes hello Ted,

That's a nice test. The 1DS uses 8.8 micron pixels compared to the
D2X's 5.5 micron pixels, with an area ratio being more than a
factor of 2x higher for the Canon; giving it more than 2x higher
light collecting ability at a given F# and equalized FOVs. This
explains the 1 stop exposure difference you see.
Click to expand...
No - it does not.

The ISO standard is all about calibrating things so that ISO 100 requires the same exposure regardless of camera implementation.

Canon is fairly self consistent, so ISO 100 on the D30 with 9.9 micron pixels gives the same exposure as ISO 100 on the 20D with 6.4 micron pixels.

I don't know if anybody has checked the Nikon line.

If Nikon is consistent across their line, then the issue would seem to be interpretation of ISO 12232:1998.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
How did you get the colors to match so closely? As the EXIF is missing from the 1Ds photo, I am not yet convinced that they were shot with different cameras...(they are so close.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top