Reading mode: Light Dark

SD9 & dRebel XT - two outdoor same lens tests

Go to last post
L

landshark320959

Well-known member
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
Location
US
Same basic workflow. Once again I thought the true colors lay right between the two AWB renditions. Both were trivial to correct, see below.
  • Shot with the same Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
  • AWB with no color wheel or WB adjustments
  • f/5.6
  • SPP sharpness setting = 0.0
  • Auto-contrast to both in PS CS
  • Interpolated/downsized using PhotozoomPro (photo, soft, no sharpening)




SD9 (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33544646-O.jpg
dR (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33545444-O.jpg
dR (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547027-O.jpg
SD9 (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547027-O.jpg

This set was MWB'd on a a grey rock by the gutter:





SD9 (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547013-O.jpg
dR (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547029-O.jpg
dR (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547027-O.jpg
SD9 (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547026-O.jpg

This is after a few minutes of color correction:

SD9:



dR:

 
Same basic workflow. Once again I thought the true colors lay
right between the two AWB renditions. Both were trivial to
correct, see below.
  • Shot with the same Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
  • AWB with no color wheel or WB adjustments
  • f/5.6
  • SPP sharpness setting = 0.0
  • Auto-contrast to both in PS CS
  • Interpolated/downsized using PhotozoomPro (photo, soft, no sharpening)




SD9 (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33544646-O.jpg
dR (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33545444-O.jpg
dR (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33544640-O.jpg
SD9 (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33545447-O.jpg

This set was MWB'd on a a grey rock by the gutter:





SD9 (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547013-O.jpg
dR (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547029-O.jpg
dR (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547027-O.jpg
SD9 (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547026-O.jpg

This is after a few minutes of color correction:

SD9:



dR:

 
1/You should shoot the DR with RAW.

2/I think each camera's default sharpness level is different . Like they talked about the Nikon D50 has higher in camera sharpening than the D70 etc ... So you should at least post process the files, sharpen the DR's RAW a little.

3/Also, I don't believe in shooting the SD9 with AWB, not so accurate. You should do both with manual WB.
landshark said:
Same basic workflow. Once again I thought the true colors lay
right between the two AWB renditions. Both were trivial to
correct, see below.
  • Shot with the same Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
  • AWB with no color wheel or WB adjustments
  • f/5.6
  • SPP sharpness setting = 0.0
  • Auto-contrast to both in PS CS
  • Interpolated/downsized using PhotozoomPro (photo, soft, no
sharpening)





SD9 (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33544646-O.jpg
dR (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33545444-O.jpg
dR (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33544640-O.jpg
SD9 (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33545447-O.jpg

This set was MWB'd on a a grey rock by the gutter:





SD9 (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547013-O.jpg
dR (3MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547029-O.jpg
dR (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547027-O.jpg
SD9 (8MP): http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33547026-O.jpg

This is after a few minutes of color correction:

SD9:



dR:

Click to expand...
 
DonP.2 said:
1/You should shoot the DR with RAW.

2/I think each camera's default sharpness level is different . Like
they talked about the Nikon D50 has higher in camera sharpening
than the D70 etc ... So you should at least post process the files,
sharpen the DR's RAW a little.

3/Also, I don't believe in shooting the SD9 with AWB, not so
accurate. You should do both with manual WB.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I care enough about AWB differences to spend time on it. Unless you shoot JPEG it's not an issue, and we can't.
 
landshark said:
DonP.2 said:
1/You should shoot the DR with RAW.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I had the same thought, but then what settings to use?

Here we have SPP sharpness = 0.0, dR sharpness = +1 (-2 to +2). I don't think the dR is at a particular disadvantage. At some point you have to pick some conversion settings since the cameras are fundamentally different. So why not let Canon decide by using the defaults? Is that really different than me deciding?

Plus, I think most in this forum can recognize digital sharpening from an optical baseline sharpness. The sharpened Canon example presented the first test, for example, had a level of artifacting than I think the Foveon-familiar would simply reject.
 
landshark said:
Same basic workflow. Once again I thought the true colors lay
right between the two AWB renditions. Both were trivial to
correct, see below.
Click to expand...
How often will you show us that same stuff again?
And why?

We all know,
  • advertising on -
you are converting Canon lenses to SA-mount
-advertising off-,
we all know the difference between Canon and Fovens sensors.

So, seriously, what is the reason for posting that again and again?

My guess:
Nothing else than this information - again and again:
landshark320959 said:
  • Shot with the same Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Click to expand...
That leaves only one purpose: You advertise here -again!
Phil, do you listen?

BTW: Yellow cast on Canon!

--
--
Cheers
Günter

SD10-images website:
http://www.pbase.com/ghoerdt

Panorama website:
http://www.pbase.com/ghoerdt/panorama
 
Mobsie,

Do you own this forum or something ? Or do you own the Foveon technology ? Let us know which one. Cause you sure act like one.

The previous thread did generate some interesting discussion .

Why don't you go and start a new thread specifically for childish name callings. I bet you with many of your persona could show off some wild creativity. Now, giit, Mobsie. Hurry out the here.
ghoerdt said:
landshark said:
Same basic workflow. Once again I thought the true colors lay
right between the two AWB renditions. Both were trivial to
correct, see below.
Click to expand...
How often will you show us that same stuff again?
And why?

We all know,
  • advertising on -
you are converting Canon lenses to SA-mount
-advertising off-,
we all know the difference between Canon and Fovens sensors.

So, seriously, what is the reason for posting that again and again?

My guess:
Nothing else than this information - again and again:
ghoerdt said:
  • Shot with the same Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Click to expand...
That leaves only one purpose: You advertise here -again!
Phil, do you listen?

BTW: Yellow cast on Canon!

--
--
Cheers
Günter

SD10-images website:
http://www.pbase.com/ghoerdt

Panorama website:
http://www.pbase.com/ghoerdt/panorama
Click to expand...
 
PalmsWestPhoto said:
interesting tests

agree with the sharpening. The SD9 shot IMO is a bit oversharpened
the DR shot is a bit undersharpened but either way the DR shows a
little better detail
Click to expand...
I think the DR clearly wins by a little bit in Black on White, and clearly loses by a little in color. In some areas, like the orange flowers, the DR seems to lose by more than the 10/8 MP ratio would suggest. Maybe even by more than the 14/8 MP red/blue ratio would suggest, which theoretically should only increase resolution by about 20% or so.
PalmsWestPhoto said:
and the SD9 shows too many artifacts
Click to expand...
I agree at the 8MP interpolated level, though interpolated images from any camera is of questionable, if any, optical value. The DR certainly has a smooth interpolation engine and it's noise, just like it's signal, also seems to get diffused from possessing a higher number of lesser detailed photosites/pixels. It's smoothness at 8MP could also be due to a higher level of noise reduction.
 
Could you explain how you could derive 10/8 and 14/8 ? What do you use to measure ? Thanks.
landshark said:
PalmsWestPhoto said:
interesting tests

agree with the sharpening. The SD9 shot IMO is a bit oversharpened
the DR shot is a bit undersharpened but either way the DR shows a
little better detail
Click to expand...
I think the DR clearly wins by a little bit in Black on White, and
clearly loses by a little in color. In some areas, like the orange
flowers, the DR seems to lose by more than the 10/8 MP ratio would
suggest. Maybe even by more than the 14/8 MP red/blue ratio would
suggest, which theoretically should only increase resolution by
about 20% or so.
landshark320959 said:
and the SD9 shows too many artifacts
Click to expand...
I agree at the 8MP interpolated level, though interpolated images
from any camera is of questionable, if any, optical value. The DR
certainly has a smooth interpolation engine and it's noise, just
like it's signal, also seems to get diffused from possessing a
higher number of lesser detailed photosites/pixels. It's
smoothness at 8MP could also be due to a higher level of noise
reduction.
Click to expand...
 
DonP.2 said:
Could you explain how you could derive 10/8 and 14/8 ? What do you
use to measure ? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Sure,

SD9 = 10.3 MP (R+G+B)
DR XT = 8.0 MP (R+G+B)

SD9 = 6.9 MP (R+B)
DR XT = 4.0 MP (R+B)

In other words, the ratio of the resolution of the Red and/or Blue exposures embedded in the 3-exposure composite image.
 
Reason this doesnt match with real world results is obviously that you also have to take into account that allthough single colors the bayer sites are on different locations which gives them more information then the simple comparison you made.

It is kind of sad that foveon hasnt come out with something new in so long.

I would love to see a foveon with a little more resolution lets say 5 native MP and better control of fringing and the other artifacts. Then put it in a good body and all would be good.

--
Michael Salzlechner
http://www.PalmsWestPhoto.com
 
I'd hate to do these comparisons---when I look at these full-screen (not printed), I see more detail (resolution) and better acuity on the right side in favor of the SD9. On the left side, the SD9 seems to be blurry. The SD9 seems to hold highlight detail better in these photos (detail in the house trim and roof vents), while the shadow detail in the garage isn't there (based on the processing).

Jim
 
PalmsWestPhoto said:
Reason this doesnt match with real world results is obviously that
you also have to take into account that allthough single colors the
bayer sites are on different locations which gives them more
information then the simple comparison you made.
Click to expand...
Actually, both cameras use unique x/y locations for each pixel/sensor in each color channel. The practical difference is the DR's sites are smaller, which allows them to be aligned/wedged next to one another. But the x/y resolutions in each color channel doesn't get higher due to interweaving them.

On a different nore, the smaller sites certinaly don't seem to hurt the DRs noise levles, but I think the SD9 does show a little more dynamic range.
PalmsWestPhoto said:
It is kind of sad that foveon hasnt come out with something new in
so long.
Click to expand...
It certainly doesn't help.
PalmsWestPhoto said:
I would love to see a foveon with a little more resolution lets say
5 native MP and better control of fringing and the other artifacts.
Then put it in a good body and all would be good.
Click to expand...
I think that's about the right number. I appreciate the lower bandwidth, if nothing else, it makes everything inthe system run significantly faster and is a lot more storage friendly. After 5MP-X3, I'd like to see them stop increasing MPs and switch to concentrating on pixel quality.

The extra bandwidth also affects image playback and examination speed, where the DR is always 2-3 steps/2-3 seconds behind your fingers. The SD9 is very quick on its feet by comparison. I think that is important, image review is the essence of digital.

As for the body, the SD9 is too different than the DR to compare. It was a $2000 MSRP price point DSLR in 2002 dollars. That's about where it's build quality fits in today, very similar to an S2 Pro body.
 
JLK said:
I'd hate to do these comparisons---when I look at these full-screen
(not printed), I see more detail (resolution) and better acuity on
the right side in favor of the SD9. On the left side, the SD9 seems
to be blurry. The SD9 seems to hold highlight detail better in
these photos (detail in the house trim and roof vents), while the
shadow detail in the garage isn't there (based on the processing).
Click to expand...
After looking closer, I think you are right the DR focused about 2-3 feet deeper then the SD9. The house on the left is maybe 20 feet farther away in slant range. This was an f/5.6 test which is the sweetspot for the lens IMO, but the shallower DOF proably didn't help.

Both were AF'd on the left corner of the roof eve over the middle door (i.e. dead center). The DR is in centerpoint-only AF. Both cameras viewfinders are more or less useless for evaluating this degree of focus. The DR's viewfinder is slightly brighter but also a little less crisp, cancels out
 
landshark320959 said:
Actually, both cameras use unique x/y locations for each
pixel/sensor in each color channel. The practical difference is
the DR's sites are smaller, which allows them to be aligned/wedged
next to one another. But the x/y resolutions in each color channel
doesn't get higher due to interweaving them.
Click to expand...
This is incorrect. The foveon has 3.whatever m physical photosite locations with differnt x/y locations wheras the DR has 8.whatever m phyiscal photosite locations with different x/y locations.

The bayer sensors obviously see only one color at each site but use neighboring sites to interpolate the other colors as well as detail.

If the foveon would have the same number of physical site locations it would trounce the DR in detail.
landshark320959 said:
On a different nore, the smaller sites certinaly don't seem to hurt
the DRs noise levles, but I think the SD9 does show a little more
dynamic range.
Click to expand...
Well that seems to be one of the issues at foveon that they need to work on. The Polaroid sensor showed that even more.
landshark320959 said:
I think that's about the right number. I appreciate the lower
bandwidth, if nothing else, it makes everything inthe system run
significantly faster and is a lot more storage friendly. After
5MP-X3, I'd like to see them stop increasing MPs and switch to
concentrating on pixel quality.
Click to expand...
Well bandwidth is actually a problem. The foveon needs a high bandwidth because it is 3 times the information (if compared to the same number of physical site locations) and there is no dedicated hardware to do a lot of the processing as there is for bayer sensors.
landshark320959 said:
The extra bandwidth also affects image playback and examination
speed, where the DR is always 2-3 steps/2-3 seconds behind your
fingers. The SD9 is very quick on its feet by comparison. I think
that is important, image review is the essence of digital.
Click to expand...
I havent played with the rebel but i think this is more a limit imposed by canon on the low cost body. Higher priced bodies are very fast.
landshark320959 said:
As for the body, the SD9 is too different than the DR to compare.
It was a $2000 MSRP price point DSLR in 2002 dollars. That's about
where it's build quality fits in today, very similar to an S2 Pro
body.
Click to expand...
Obviously the rebel is a body meant for a lower price bracket.

--
Michael Salzlechner
http://www.PalmsWestPhoto.com
 
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