landshark320959
Well-known member
I hadn't seen that one, thanks. How did you resizeThe greens are interesting. I was expecting Canon's greens to be more vibrant in my side by side tests but I haven't really seen that materialize yet. What lenses?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
SD9 & dRebel XT - two outdoor same lens tests
- Thread starter landshark320959
- Start date
landshark320959
Well-known member
landshark320959
Well-known member
That was a 50 EX vs 50/1.4, the difference in those lenses alone on the same body will water your eyes. Plus it wasn't interpolated adaptively.
How many more deal (image) link references are people going to post here?
You seem to be making the case for new example -- because most of the previous test images -- are no longer there!
And that reality, might just be the point of this thread.
--
Peace.
========================
http://www.pbase.com/jarvic7/root
You seem to be making the case for new example -- because most of the previous test images -- are no longer there!
And that reality, might just be the point of this thread.
--
Peace.
========================
http://www.pbase.com/jarvic7/root
It's often useful to look at the extremes of your reasoning.
put a 50 on a 4x5 and then put a 50 on a 35mm half frame, then make a n 8x10 print -- and then compare the images?
And, this tap dancing around this color sharpness issues is getting funny.
there are many colorful displays of detail, take the watch for example.
the full sized images are there, and there are plenty of color areas to compare:
And you think that the Sigma 50mm macro is not sharp....
It's close, and an outstanding performance for a camera with 3.5mp photo.
--
Peace.
========================
http://www.pbase.com/jarvic7/root
I meant to put links, not full sized images in the previous post.
--
Peace.
========================
http://www.pbase.com/jarvic7/root
--
Peace.
========================
http://www.pbase.com/jarvic7/root
landshark320959
Well-known member
I meant the Canon 50/1.4 is a noticably stronger lens than the Sigma 50 EX. To equalize the FOVs on the same body, you need about 55 Sigma mms. Strange but true.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SigmaSD10/Samples/Compared/sidebyside/sd10.jpg
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SigmaSD10/Samples/Compared/sidebyside/eos10d-sd10size.jpg
Not much colorful detail there IMO, most of the intricate stuff involves black and/or white which is best case for a Bayer.
Definitely not as sharp as the 50/1.4.
Even more outstanding considering the lens delta.
and does SPP have a negative sharpening setting? If so you should set it on the most negative setting possible, the sdxx shouldn't need any sharpening.
--
Narrow depth of field ahead
Use extreme caution
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root
--
Narrow depth of field ahead
Use extreme caution
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root
armaco
Senior Member
Either you like it or not. We choose Sigma.
But before you criticize try it and print some samples to full A4 or A3.
Then come here to the forum and tell us about your experience.
Or ask an advice
But don’t spoil the forum with brainless messages.
We are here because we trying to learn from each other or just to view/present some of our work.
Get a life
Conclusion
Sigma provides more natural (Film like) look to our images with simple operation and instant preview (it’s a true Digital Film Camera).
No more no less.
The lenses are very nice to excellent (EX series).
So I need no more than true inspiration and time to use all that.
Have fun
K.S.
But before you criticize try it and print some samples to full A4 or A3.
Then come here to the forum and tell us about your experience.
Or ask an advice
But don’t spoil the forum with brainless messages.
We are here because we trying to learn from each other or just to view/present some of our work.
Get a life
Conclusion
Sigma provides more natural (Film like) look to our images with simple operation and instant preview (it’s a true Digital Film Camera).
No more no less.
The lenses are very nice to excellent (EX series).
So I need no more than true inspiration and time to use all that.
Have fun
K.S.
landshark320959
Well-known member
The post processing didn't change the constrast in a way you couldn't do in RAW, but I didn't want to RAW-process vs post-process - not entirely fair. The RAW conversions from today look very similar in both color and contrast straight out of the RAW processors.
It's actually surprising how close the same-lens color renditions are when manually WB'd in RAW. Including foliage. The biggest color difference from today's shots are blues in skys, the SD9's are a little too deep and the dR's are a little bit more too pale. It has me wondering if this isn't due to some sort of sensor induced polarization instead of straight blue sensitivity.
Images to follow.
It's actually surprising how close the same-lens color renditions are when manually WB'd in RAW. Including foliage. The biggest color difference from today's shots are blues in skys, the SD9's are a little too deep and the dR's are a little bit more too pale. It has me wondering if this isn't due to some sort of sensor induced polarization instead of straight blue sensitivity.
Images to follow.
They don't need any with a sharp lens. The dR really doesn't need any either unless you view its images interpolated way up to 8MP.
DaSonyGuy
Forum Pro
No, that was not my test, though I did conduct one of my own which had the same results.
Regards
DSG
--
http://sigmasd10.fotopic.net/
Just Looking
Veteran Member
Except that it makes no sense. There is no polarization direction that will always make skies bluer. Rotating the camera would completely change the color. Just silly words, no more.
j
j
landshark320959
Well-known member
How absurd to think that a piece of spinning glass is the only way the quantum properties of photons may affect something.
landshark320959
Well-known member
No substitue for what?
By that measure, lower ISO also degrades the image.
Dominic Groß
Veteran Member
the most negative actually blurs things, at zero there is some sharpening though.
--
http://www.pbase.com/dgross (work in progress)
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross_sd10
landshark320959
Well-known member
Digital Photo Pro did a better job with this scene. No postprocessing only RAW conversion. Both shots are manually WB'd to match my memory. Focal point is the highest flower in the center. The difference in perspective is due to camera height.
SD9 (3MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33753813-O.jpg
Exp 0.0
Contrast 0.5
Shadows -0.3
Highlites 0.0
Saturation -0.2
Sharpness 0.8
X3FL 0.0
dR XT (3MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33747789-O.jpg
Contrast +1, as shot
Saturation +1, as shot
Sharpness +5 (0 to 5)
SD9 (8MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33758078-O.jpg
Exp 0.0
Contrast 0.5
Shadows -0.3
Highlites 0.0
Saturation -0.2
Sharpness 0.8
X3FL 0.0
dR XT (8MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33747806-O.jpg
Contrast +1, as shot
Saturation +1, as shot
Sharpness +5 (0 to 5)
SD9 (3MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33753821-O.jpg
Exp 0.0
Contrast 0.5
Shadows -0.3
Highlites 0.0
Saturation -0.2
Sharpness -1.0
X3FL 0.0
dR XT (8MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33753828-O.jpg
Contrast +1 (as shot)
Saturation +1 as shot)
Sharpness 0 (0 to 5)
Breeze Browser (8MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33750712-O.jpg
Saturation High
Sharpness High
Contrast High
8MP 100% crops:
SD9 (3MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33753813-O.jpg
Exp 0.0
Contrast 0.5
Shadows -0.3
Highlites 0.0
Saturation -0.2
Sharpness 0.8
X3FL 0.0
dR XT (3MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33747789-O.jpg
Contrast +1, as shot
Saturation +1, as shot
Sharpness +5 (0 to 5)
SD9 (8MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33758078-O.jpg
Exp 0.0
Contrast 0.5
Shadows -0.3
Highlites 0.0
Saturation -0.2
Sharpness 0.8
X3FL 0.0
dR XT (8MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33747806-O.jpg
Contrast +1, as shot
Saturation +1, as shot
Sharpness +5 (0 to 5)
SD9 (3MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33753821-O.jpg
Exp 0.0
Contrast 0.5
Shadows -0.3
Highlites 0.0
Saturation -0.2
Sharpness -1.0
X3FL 0.0
dR XT (8MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33753828-O.jpg
Contrast +1 (as shot)
Saturation +1 as shot)
Sharpness 0 (0 to 5)
Breeze Browser (8MP) http://www.smugmug.com/photos/33750712-O.jpg
Saturation High
Sharpness High
Contrast High
8MP 100% crops:
landshark320959
Well-known member
A sobering example of the power of RAW file processing.
(for his own protection: it might be time to put DSG under suicide watch)
Using a tabbed browser (firefox, mozilla) its interesting to bring these images up under seperate tabs and flip back and forth.
It does seem that SD9 image is somewhat over sharpened or has it's contrast level set too high. Those yellows are, for the most part blown out, and the leaves seem to have a strange edge halo.
(this goes against your methodology, but...)
It might be interesting if you let a trusted member of this group (sorry, I'm too busy at the moment), have a crack at tweeking with the foveon raw file. Otherwise, I can hear some people here cry "Foul".
--
Peace.
========================
http://www.pbase.com/jarvic7/root
(for his own protection: it might be time to put DSG under suicide watch)
Using a tabbed browser (firefox, mozilla) its interesting to bring these images up under seperate tabs and flip back and forth.
It does seem that SD9 image is somewhat over sharpened or has it's contrast level set too high. Those yellows are, for the most part blown out, and the leaves seem to have a strange edge halo.
(this goes against your methodology, but...)
It might be interesting if you let a trusted member of this group (sorry, I'm too busy at the moment), have a crack at tweeking with the foveon raw file. Otherwise, I can hear some people here cry "Foul".
--
Peace.
========================
http://www.pbase.com/jarvic7/root
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum