Beta 40D samples soft

I was impressed at first, but on closer look they seemed a bit soft in areas, even within depth of field focus points. I'm not going to spring for the 40D until road-tested for at least four months after its release. Other opinions?

I agree with you .. they seem soft and the details are not so good and the colors kinda washed out .. flat looking .
--
*******************
Canon 1D Mark II N
30D (18-55mm) Kit Lens
Canon 24-70 2.8L USM
Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS
Canon 100-400L IS
Canon 16-35L 2.8
50mm F1.4
Canon 580 EX
*******************

Someone needs to post some RAW files and we need to be able to download the latest DPP so we can play with them ourselves and see what's what.

A lot of the posted shots do look soft and washed out.

--
Jim H.

I've shot both side by side. Quality is about the same

--
http://www.pbase.com/garyp/slideshow&view=slideshow

Galleries at http://www.pbase.com/garyp

Tell me..honestly..in a 4x6 pic, would you notice any of this? Even an 8x10? Not sure exactly what you guys are shooting for but the pics looked just fine to me (save maybe the bottle pics). It seems that we can always find every single imperfection in a picture no matter how big or small. I for one am a pretty picky shooter and always crop 100% to see sharpness. I've finaly gotten over it and said: "you know what, printed or not, it looks just fine with a touch of sharpening if or when it's required".

I keep seeing posts about people completely doing a full "autopsy" on a picture and stating: "Ahh you see..look..soft corners. about 3 pixels wide...this camera is junk". (Of course I'm overdoing it a bit..but you get the point) Take a picture...and instead of sticking your face 2 inches from the monitor...take step back and say...Hey...not bad!. As far as noise, looks pretty tolerable to me..don't you think? I think I'd be happy with this camera...whenever I do decide to get one.

Just my rant folks...don't take it personally please.

--
-=* E.D. =-

Would like to see a raw of the little toy elk (?) shot at ISO 1600 - to see how this sensor will handle noise.

The bottle pics are nice but do not give enough fine details to see the performance clearly enough

The pictures also look fine to me, had the aperture been smaller you probably would have seen a sharper picture. Im not even sure why they even had it wide open on some of the pictures.

Some portraits would have been nice too.

Do you actually buy a camera to take photos with or spend your time pixel peeping? The beta samples look very good to me and I will be doing my own road test (read enjoying the 40D) whilst you are still pondering, but not for the same reasons.

Jaimo said:

I was impressed at first, but on closer look they seemed a bit soft
in areas, even within depth of field focus points. I'm not going to
spring for the 40D until road-tested for at least four months after
its release. Other opinions?

Click to expand...

Many (most?) of the shots were take near to max aperture for a reason. A lot of people who are interested in this camera want to know whether its noise performance has worsened in going from 8MP to 10MP on the same sized sensor compared with the 30D. The best way to gauge noise performance is to look at OOF areas in a shot, particularly dark areas. Which is why the shots were taken with a narrow DOF and lots of darkish OOF areas. QED.

Michael

You are now introducing the lens IQ into the mix.
Should be the same lens, stopped down to prob 5.6, on a tripod and
probably 3 shots each to take out AF errors.

D
--
'A bad idea in search of a good cause is..
just a bad idea' ... me

When you're used to looking on a monitor at images (no matter how small or large) for publication u can tell whether an image is soft or not. U could tell by looking at the lcd, for that matter. You could also tell whether it's high-res or low-res. Hope this helps.