Reading mode: Light Dark

SD9 & dRebel XT - two outdoor same lens tests

Go to last post
landshark320959 said:
I disagree, the only way to measure a sensor's resolving power is
by using the same lens from the same distance. If you put a zoom
lens on one but not the other, your helping that one, same goes for
moving it closer. FOV differences on top of measured resolving
power are easy for anyone to account for.
Click to expand...
Well that is a point that can go either way. Real life photography is based on the photographer planning a shot and using a certain focal length and a distance to frame that subject. For example if you would compare the 1DSII to the SD9 you wouldnt throw away all the additional sensor area on the 1DSII either. You'd frame the subject the same way and then get more resolution on the same image

Of course you can also go the route of using the same focal length lens and stand in the same spot but then you are effectively canceling out the advantage of the larger sensor.

In this case though it wouldnt make a huge difference as i said.
landshark320959 said:
landshark320959 said:
In real life you would generally do the same thing. You frame a
specific subject.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't buy a FF camera to frame the subject the same way. At
that point all you've bought was poor corners.
Click to expand...
Thats is silly. But whatever you think ...

--
Michael Salzlechner
http://www.PalmsWestPhoto.com
 
The chip has some issues in areas that are important to most photographers. Most film sold today is iso 400+.

People are not going to upgrade to digital and take a two stop loss.

The smaller chip merely served to magnify the problems (with smaller photo sites).

They should have put the large sensor in that camera (I hear that it only costs a buck or so to mass produce).

That would have been something.

--

Peace.

========================
http://www.pbase.com/jarvic7/root

 
Chunsum J Choi said:
OK, so you compare the SD9 and the DR using the same lens. what
really is the point behind it? I really do not see what is there to
accomplish here by doing so. Are you testing the lens? Are you
comparing the SD9 and DR? is this the exact same lens? why not
compare them with the Sigma 50mm? Why the DR and not the D20? what
about the D70 or the S3? and finally what importance does this test
have? How will it's results affect the rest of the world?

Please, enlighten me.

--
Chunsum.
Click to expand...
Heck, first you reacted with a lie in the previous message, then now you are asking for a point . If you don't see a point in doing this, then let others take a stab at it, cause we do see a point.
 
PalmsWestPhoto said:
PalmsWestPhoto said:
It isn't intuitive, but it is correct. The three channels sample
from mutually exclusive populations, so it doesn't matter if
samples topologically overlap or not. All that matters, from a
resolution POV, is the number of sensors in each individual RGB
exposure which are then embedded in the final composite RGB image.
In fact, when you print, the printers pixels/sub-pixels might not
be aligned the same way a monitor aligns them.
Click to expand...
No. As we all know it is not correct but if you want to believe
this go right ahead
Click to expand...
Really, the resolution of one channel doesn't increase resolution of another. It would be cool if it did.
PalmsWestPhoto said:
PalmsWestPhoto said:
It's already winning in terms of color resolution, with 3M color to
8M monochrome photosites.
Click to expand...
As i said it is in some areas resolving less and in some a little
more. That even though the FOV was favoring the SD image. At the
same time you get digital artifacts on the SD that you dont get on
the bayer
Click to expand...
Agreed, if you are talking about interpolated recorded pixels. The DR's interpolation engine is smoother. The optical resolutions (closer to optical in the DR's case) are both very clean.
PalmsWestPhoto said:
PalmsWestPhoto said:
Actually I think it is more a function of Canon slowly improving
the computational speeds of their cameras. The original 1Ds was
and is very expenisve and it was also very slow to operate in
review mode compared to the XT, assuming you count no
magnification/panning as a comparable review mode.
Click to expand...
No. The higher end cameras always had higher processing speeds. It
is simply a matter of money and marketing. The lower end cameras
have to have something less to a) cost less and b) not cut too much
into higher end bodies sales.
PalmsWestPhoto said:
The 10D was even slower, a lot like a P&S from the day. The 1DMK2
is a lot slower than 20D/XT when reviewing uncached images, and all
of these cameras are very slow compared to the circa-2002 SD9. The
reason for that is undoubtably fewer recorded pixels to manage, not
electronic slowness in some absolute sense.
Click to expand...
The SD has nice image to image review time but at the same time it
requires a full 10 seconds to write an image to a CF card where the
canon will write it in just over 1 second. Most timings on the SD
are pretty slow.
Click to expand...
True, but buffering is a different issue than reviewing/magnifying/panning.

The SD9/10 is really showing its age in terms of buffer clearing speed, though it was very good for a 10MP camera at the time of release.
PalmsWestPhoto said:
it takes the SD9 more than double time to show a preview after
taking a picture for example. So if you want to look at pictures
taken previously the SD9 may be fast but if you want to take
pictures or look at the last one taken it is slow.

But that all wasnt supposed to be part of the discussion. This
discussion should have been simply about the difference between a
bayer sensor and a foveon sensor.
Click to expand...
I find it hard to ignore the faults of either camera. Both could/should be a lot better.
 
landshark said:
I disagree, the only way to measure a sensor's resolving power is
by using the same lens from the same distance. If you put a zoom
lens on one but not the other
Click to expand...
It deos exist more then one prime lens in the world.

Phil tests cameras even with different brands of lenses in his reviews.

Nikon vs Canon for instance.

Try 35mmFF 85mm prime vs a 50mm prime on a APS-C.

... or you can just buy a E-300 and out resolve the SD9 for high contrast detail. At same focal length of course ... But I would still not agree with you.
landshark320959 said:
I wouldn't buy a FF camera to frame the subject the same way. At
that point all you've bought was poor corners.
Click to expand...
Yes it must be steveSG9.

Hmmm, try Sigma DC lenses on APS-C vs 35mmFF lenses on 35mmFF sensor ...

--
Henrik
 
garvic8 said:
The chip has some issues in areas that are important to most
photographers. Most film sold today is iso 400+.

People are not going to upgrade to digital and take a two stop loss.
Click to expand...
I honestly don't know anyone who shoots digital above ISO 100 except in emergencies. That's why fast lenses are so desirable.
garvic8 said:
The smaller chip merely served to magnify the problems (with
smaller photo sites).
Click to expand...
If you mean Foveon's photosites, they are 9.1 µm wide, the full frame 1Ds has 8.8 µm sensors, the 1Ds Mk2 is 7.2 µm.
garvic8 said:
They should have put the large sensor in that camera (I hear that
it only costs a buck or so to mass produce).

That would have been something.
Click to expand...
CMOS chip are cheap to make, that's a key benefit. Especiallly the old .5 micron CMOS of the 1Ds era, which equates to early '486 fabrication technogoly. The newer Canon's are .25 micron fabrications, their very latest chips may be better. Foveon has been .18 micron since 2002.

Think about it, you can buy an entire motherboard with a more complex CMOS chip on board for well under $100 MSRP.
 
Henrik Andersson said:
landshark said:
I disagree, the only way to measure a sensor's resolving power is
by using the same lens from the same distance. If you put a zoom
lens on one but not the other
Click to expand...
It deos exist more then one prime lens in the world.

Yes it must be steveSG9.

Hmmm, try Sigma DC lenses on APS-C vs 35mmFF lenses on 35mmFF
sensor ...

--
Henrik
Click to expand...
Hello Henrik
Yes ofcourse it is Stevesd9 / Susie / George Preddy et. c.

You wanna know why he keeps coming up with all these pointless comparisons ?

Because he/she has started a small buissiness selling Canon f1,4/ 50 lenses converted to Sigma SA mount...
So he tries to get some free advertising here...
--
Frits Thomsen
See my pictures at
http://www.pbase.com/yoicz

 
Don,

If you do your search routine I'm sure you will find quite a few SD vs DR threads along with 10D, 20D heck even 1D and 1Ds.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=8262149
This one uses the same lens.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=3691486
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=9530041
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=6954182

But regadless of the lens, parameters, or time of day, these tests doesn't show anything truly meaningful to me.

--
Chunsum.

http://photography.chunsum.com
http://www.pbase.com/chunsum
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9
http://www.foveonx3.org
 
landshark320959 said:
I honestly don't know anyone who shoots digital above ISO 100
except in emergencies. That's why fast lenses are so desirable.
Click to expand...
If you really think that you dont know anything about photography

Obviously higher ISO's are required based on available light and required aperture / shutterspeed which are based on the subject you are shooting and the result you want

Now you lost a lot of credibility here ...

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

You keep pretending to be somebody. LOL. How do I know you talk to yourself here ? Easy, the same way you know about me. It's internet, for crying out loud. You can give me thousands of name. Why limit yourself to just 2 ?
SandyF said:
DonP.2 said:
Mobsie,

I don't get it either. You tend to talk to yourself quite often here.
Click to expand...
No, I don't talk to myself online, and the name is Sandy or Sandra.
I have one persona/user name and it is quite public with links and
photos. Yours?
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
Click to expand...
 
Mobsie,

Obviously you have lied, because none of those are from any "aliases" that you said, and none of those were done with the same lens Canon 50 1.4, none were using the new Digital Rebel 350 8MP.

Thanks for proving I was right.
Chunsum J Choi said:
Don,

If you do your search routine I'm sure you will find quite a few SD
vs DR threads along with 10D, 20D heck even 1D and 1Ds.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=8262149
This one uses the same lens.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=3691486
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=9530041
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=6954182

But regadless of the lens, parameters, or time of day, these tests
doesn't show anything truly meaningful to me.

--
Chunsum.

http://photography.chunsum.com
http://www.pbase.com/chunsum
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9
http://www.foveonx3.org
Click to expand...
 
PalmsWestPhoto said:
PalmsWestPhoto said:
I honestly don't know anyone who shoots digital above ISO 100
except in emergencies. That's why fast lenses are so desirable.
Click to expand...
If you really think that you dont know anything about photography

Obviously higher ISO's are required based on available light and
required aperture / shutterspeed which are based on the subject you
are shooting and the result you want
Click to expand...
Obviously if there is no other way to get the shot, degrading the image using a higher ISO is your only choice. But high ISO is no substitute for light, it always degrades the image.
 
DonP.2 said:
Mobsie,

You keep pretending to be somebody. LOL. How do I know you talk to
yourself here ? Easy, the same way you know about me. >
Click to expand...
Donnie, really? what names? or are you joking, in which case you left off the hahahaha. BTW, Here's a repost of my thoughts on credibility http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=14633800 It's clear to most Sigma forum users who has credibility (Chunsum, Laurence, spm, Guenter, Rick, David, lots of others I feel I know and respect, either in person or through their photos).
DonP2 said:
It's internet, for crying out loud.
Click to expand...
I feel I know and respect, even if only online. Yeah, that's the power of the Internet.
DonP2 said:
You can give me thousands of name (sic)
Click to expand...
It's amazing the extent to which a poster's posting history reveals information about him/her
DonP2 said:
Why limit yourself to just 2 ?
Click to expand...
I thought single user name IDs were part of http://www.dpreview.com rules? Or au contraire it's OK to bump threads and talk to yourself? Nah, and what a waste of time and effort.
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
 
PalmsWestPhoto said:
PalmsWestPhoto said:
I disagree, the only way to measure a sensor's resolving power is
by using the same lens from the same distance. If you put a zoom
lens on one but not the other, your helping that one, same goes for
moving it closer. FOV differences on top of measured resolving
power are easy for anyone to account for.
Click to expand...
Well that is a point that can go either way. Real life photography
Click to expand...
I think most FF buyers understand that FF is for wider angle photography, why else degrade the corners? Of course, Nikon doesn't think there is any really good reason to go FF, and I tend to agree. Decent ultra wide lenses are prevailent now. But this is a philosophy thing and to each his own
PalmsWestPhoto said:
is based on the photographer planning a shot and using a certain
focal length and a distance to frame that subject. For example if
you would compare the 1DSII to the SD9 you wouldnt throw away all
the additional sensor area on the 1DSII either. You'd frame the
subject the same way and then get more resolution on the same image

Of course you can also go the route of using the same focal length
lens and stand in the same spot but then you are effectively
canceling out the advantage of the larger sensor.
Click to expand...
Not really, you'll get a correspondingly higher FOV. Without that, a larger sensor only degrades optical quality by using the low quality partso of the image circle instead of the better middile.
PalmsWestPhoto said:
In this case though it wouldnt make a huge difference as i said.
PalmsWestPhoto said:
PalmsWestPhoto said:
In real life you would generally do the same thing. You frame a
specific subject.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't buy a FF camera to frame the subject the same way. At
that point all you've bought was poor corners.
Click to expand...
Thats is silly. But whatever you think ...
Click to expand...
Some, no doubt, buy FF without knowing why. That's why Nikon doesn't let it happen. Fortunately in this case the FOV difference is quite small.
 
Henrik Andersson said:
landshark said:
I disagree, the only way to measure a sensor's resolving power is
by using the same lens from the same distance. If you put a zoom
lens on one but not the other
Click to expand...
It deos exist more then one prime lens in the world.

Phil tests cameras even with different brands of lenses in his
reviews.
Click to expand...
To my knowledge, no one has ever tested these cameras using the same lens sample.
 
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