Reading mode: Light Dark

surprising compare alha100/nikon D80 pictures

Go to last post
Yes NR, with less detail as a consequence ... you can't have it both ways with this 10MP camera's.

Give me the Sony I prefer iso 100 to 400 which are razor sharp, Canon and Nikon went after the noise, me, I want details ...
The noise you can get rid of in PP
 
If you start to look at the image like the TiVo pillow. Sony shows threads.. Nikon looks almiost painted on.

Look at the dress on the poster...

All that smooth area is lost detail no program will ever rediscover. If you need something larger than a shapshot.. the Sony will take some PP, but you get to choose the sharpening amounts and the NR system.

The Nikon has a nice NR system and just as pixel peeping noise is not the best test, pixel peeping NR.

But Sony is leaving it in the photographers hands to PP. that is up to the buyer to decide what they like.

It's not magic, just two different ways to deal with noise.

------------
Ken - KM 5D
Sigma Trinity 10-20, 24-135 f2.8-4.5, 70-300 APO DG
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
 
at the A100's images. Even the lower Iso images have excessive sharpening (giving the appearance of being more sharp), but with halos. Now I know some will say "what halos?" If your being honest, you'll see them.

The D80 is not sacrificing detail at all. Again, if your honest, you'll see the detail in the D80's images, even the ISO3200 images. Take an ISO3200 image from the D80 and an ISO1600 image from the A100, clean them both up, and see where you end up.

Please don't beat me. Just calling it, like I see it. Sony's got some homework to do, but they are very capable. Can't wait to see the 7D replacement.

Regards...

Russ
yves Van den Broek said:
Yes NR, with less detail as a consequence ... you can't have it
both ways with this 10MP camera's.
Give me the Sony I prefer iso 100 to 400 which are razor sharp,
Canon and Nikon went after the noise, me, I want details ...
The noise you can get rid of in PP
Click to expand...
--



Greater is He that is within me, than he who is in this world...
 
Personally, I think the D80 overdoes the NR. How else can you explain the extreme softness. Look at the white lettering on the bottle.

To my eye the Canon does the best job of retaining sharpness and avoiding or removing noise.

No question, the a100 is noisy, but comaring it to the D80 I don't see a clear winner. One has low noise but is mushy. The other has lots of noise but is sharper. So, how does Canon do it? And... how would the Pentax do in this comparison? Those are the questions that interest me.

Jim Peterson
a happy a100 owner
 
R Johns said:
at the A100's images. Even the lower Iso images have excessive
sharpening (giving the appearance of being more sharp), but with
halos. Now I know some will say "what halos?" If your being
honest, you'll see them.

The D80 is not sacrificing detail at all. Again, if your honest,
you'll see the detail in the D80's images, even the ISO3200 images.
Take an ISO3200 image from the D80 and an ISO1600 image from the
A100, clean them both up, and see where you end up.

Please don't beat me. Just calling it, like I see it. Sony's got
some homework to do, but they are very capable. Can't wait to see
the 7D replacement.

Regards...
Click to expand...
Honestly I see come CA effects towards the edge of the image.. but looking at places like the Tea box... NO halos...

If you can't see the loss of thread detail especially in the red and yellow.. you are the prefect Nikon owner.. Nikon has agressive NR.. That means loss of detail. Canon is still best...low noise and better detail.

If I were just about IQ at ISO 1600 I would buy a Canon..

------------
Ken - KM 5D
Sigma Trinity 10-20, 24-135 f2.8-4.5, 70-300 APO DG
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
 
revdocjim said:
Personally, I think the D80 overdoes the NR. How else can you
explain the extreme softness. Look at the white lettering on the
bottle.

To my eye the Canon does the best job of retaining sharpness and
avoiding or removing noise.

No question, the a100 is noisy, but comaring it to the D80 I don't
see a clear winner. One has low noise but is mushy. The other has
lots of noise but is sharper. So, how does Canon do it? And...
how would the Pentax do in this comparison? Those are the
questions that interest me.
Click to expand...
Canon has taken what is by default a noisier CMOS system and uses the fact that you can deal with each pixel direclty as you read it apply NR.

CCD doesn't allow for that... you read rows of data all through the same DAC and can do the pixle by pixel adjustment Canon pulls off. At least not now.. I am sure Sony and other are working on ways of doing more inteligent NR than the Nikon smooth it all systems.

Images from the nuCore people who do the chip don't look any more promising... the NR is also Detail reduction.. where sublte gradients are merged into water color effects.

--
------------
Ken - KM 5D
Sigma Trinity 10-20, 24-135 f2.8-4.5, 70-300 APO DG
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
 
the Canon does look the best. no question. it also looks like it was taken with a better lens too. its focal length is 50mm (as was the Nikon... both primes?) while the A100 is at 20mm, which must have been the kit lens.

these are no doubt JPEGs taken with the default settings, so if the A100 is looking too sharpened, you could drop it down one setting too.
 
Ken_5D said:
Honestly I see come CA effects towards the edge of the image.. but
looking at places like the Tea box... NO halos...

If you can't see the loss of thread detail especially in the red
and yellow.. you are the prefect Nikon owner.. Nikon has agressive
NR.. That means loss of detail. Canon is still best...low noise
and better detail.

If I were just about IQ at ISO 1600 I would buy a Canon..

------------
Ken - KM 5D
Sigma Trinity 10-20, 24-135 f2.8-4.5, 70-300 APO DG
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
Click to expand...
--Yeah, if only the Canon wasn't in the Canon's body...

Well, these are JPGS. Would be nice to get ahold of some RAW files.

The Kit lens on the D80 does appear to be less sharp than the KL on the A100. Concerning halos; just look at the red "Melinda's" text and you'll see the pronounced halos in the A100's shot.

Also, look at the catchlights (of the umbrellas) in each of the camera's shots. You can't tell they're even umbrellas in the A100's ISO 1600 shot, but then look back up at the D80's ISO 3200 shot to compare some real detail.

Russ



Greater is He that is within me, than he who is in this world...
 
R Johns said:
at the A100's images. Even the lower Iso images have excessive
sharpening (giving the appearance of being more sharp), but with
halos. Now I know some will say "what halos?" If your being
honest, you'll see them.
Click to expand...
I must take issue with that. I routinely interpolate my file up to 50mb for picture library use, normally using ACR 3.4 directly (but the process is similar to bicubic in Photoshop). The A100 is the most halo-free camera for processing a raw file, so far. My 7D and 5D (Dynax) show a distinct secondary line which can not be got rid of and may appear next the light/dark boundaries, always as a halo of bright pixels on the dark side of the boundary. It's present even at minimum sharpness. The A100 files, in contrast, don't show any sharpening artefact line and it's possible to use some ACR sharpening without problems. You can't use any level of ACR sharpening, even a modest 10 or so, on 7D/5D files without emphasising this unwanted camera sharpening artefact.

If you are talking about JPEGs, the Sony can be turned down to minimum sharpness. I'm shooting with the D80 and the A100 side by side at the moment and the D80 is considerably softer, that's true, in JPEG form. The raw file generally has as much detail to be recovered as the Sony, and less noise - the lower noise is not just NR on JPEGs, there is a marked difference in the raw files too. However, the detail recovered is of lower contrast and extremely fine structures like fabric textures are more easily lost on the D80.

I've not made my mind up yet as to whether I would want Sony to match Nikon's in-camera processing or not. I've tried the Nikon on all its levels of NR and even with NR turned off, it's doing a lot of NR! But the A100 does not even offer the option of controlling the degree of NR. What I would really like is both the Sony process and the Nikon process in a single camera - or maybe the Sony process at ISO 80-200 and the Nikon process from 250 to 3200.

David
 
It is also worth noting that the Sony image was underexposed by one stop compared to the Nikon (both 1/125, Sony = f8, Nikon f5.6). So perhaps we should be comapring the Sony ISO 800 with Nikon 1600?

I ran both images through Neat Image using the Auto Profile. The resulting output images were very similar.

--
Steve
 
Its mushy at high ISO. That seems to be Nikons approach, use extremely strong noise reduction and hope people are too stupid to notice that their pictures are actually worse.
--
--The artist formerly known as The Krakken
 
Ken_5D said:
revdocjim said:
Personally, I think the D80 overdoes the NR. How else can you
explain the extreme softness. Look at the white lettering on the
bottle.

To my eye the Canon does the best job of retaining sharpness and
avoiding or removing noise.

No question, the a100 is noisy, but comaring it to the D80 I don't
see a clear winner. One has low noise but is mushy. The other has
lots of noise but is sharper. So, how does Canon do it? And...
how would the Pentax do in this comparison? Those are the
questions that interest me.
Click to expand...
Canon has taken what is by default a noisier CMOS system and uses
the fact that you can deal with each pixel direclty as you read it
apply NR.

CCD doesn't allow for that... you read rows of data all through the
same DAC and can do the pixle by pixel adjustment Canon pulls off.
At least not now.. I am sure Sony and other are working on ways of
doing more inteligent NR than the Nikon smooth it all systems.

Images from the nuCore people who do the chip don't look any more
promising... the NR is also Detail reduction.. where sublte
gradients are merged into water color effects.
Click to expand...
That surprised me too - It thought they did, but apparently it is something Samsung have built.

I was impressed by thenoise on the K100 - we will just have to wait to see how the K1- does.
Ken_5D said:
--
------------
Ken - KM 5D
Sigma Trinity 10-20, 24-135 f2.8-4.5, 70-300 APO DG
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
Click to expand...
--
Regards,
DaveMart

'Just a wildebeast on the plain of life'
Please see profile for equipment
 
D80 it's good controling noise, I don't think is just NR software. But as others have noticed, sharpness is poor on D80 and even at ISO100.
From ISO 100 to 400 Sony images are very good.
Without doubt Canon have the best of both worlds.
 
...

Just apply Neat Image or Noise Ninja to the A100 shot and you'll get an image just as good as the D80's and with more details.

Nikon D80 ISO 800



Sony A100 + Neat Image



... Lucas

--
Always having fun with photography ...

 
When people use wine bottles to compare the effects of noise and noise reduction on an image. I know some people shoot inanimate objects like wine bottles, but it seems to me, that these tests need a significant overhaul, as they do very little to tell us about how the camera reacts at these high ISO's when faced with fine spatial detail, like hair, fur or feathers. Most people who use high ISO do so on moving subjects, otherwise, just use AS and call it a day.

And so it strikes me as as fairly archaic to be comparing ISO settings and effects on inanimate objects when most people use it on moving subjects.
--
--The artist formerly known as The Krakken
 
lcmacedo said:
...

Just apply Neat Image or Noise Ninja to the A100 shot and you'll
get an image just as good as the D80's and with more details.

Nikon D80 ISO 800



Sony A100 + Neat Image



... Lucas

--
Always having fun with photography ...

Click to expand...
--
Always having fun with photography ...

 
R Johns said:
The Kit lens on the D80 does appear to be less sharp than the KL on
the A100. Concerning halos; just look at the red "Melinda's" text
and you'll see the pronounced halos in the A100's shot.
Click to expand...
It's just your fan't opinion and a talk not supported by facts.

A100's lens 18-70 is not bad at all, but isn't a champion of sharpness either. And samples on dp can not show the difference at lense performance at this resolution. However, pp results are visible on those samples clearly.

--
http://www.pictures2.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