15mp = empty magnification

Started Oct 3, 2008 | Discussions thread
Mikael Risedal
Mikael Risedal Veteran Member • Posts: 4,620
Re: John, you actually bought a 50D!

John .If you have 50d, then look at the sensitivity from 50d compared to 30d and 40d. I find it lower in 50d. 50d is less sensitiv if I compare the exposure values from the camera compared to 40d, and 5d. Same grey card and I get from 50d 1/500sec F 4 and from 40d 1/640 sec F4

I have found that I can "dig" out more details and more color information from 40d and from the deepest shadows .

I have have done a lot of comparison shoots and I find 50d noisier than 40d, even when 50d is down sampled to 40d picture size.

I also have trubel with 50d and 2800K light and 3200iso , I can not do a proper grey card balance, the blue channel looks week in 50d . I use qp-card . 50d shows color cast.

When the weather is right here in Sweden, a sunny day, I will send Emil, Ejmartin raw files from both 40d and 50d so Emil can evaluate the signal/noise from 40d compared to 50d. I have got instruktions from Emil.

To me and for now, with Camera Raw and DPP 50d the raw files looks noisier from 50d.

DPP also use a stronger noise reduction as default on the Raw files from 50d than on 40d , 5d.

John Sheehy wrote:

thw wrote:

When all cameras have live view, it will be much easier to properly
focus them all.

I am surprised that many reviewers including Imaging Resource do not
seem to put the latest technology to good use. Luckily, DPReview
is smart enough to recognize its usefulness.

I was just playing around with my new 50D in live
view mode, and was excited by the fact that I could nail focus
exactly where I wanted it with the zoom.

I am VERY keen on what you think of the camera especially with
respect to read noise and image noise in comparison to the XSi/450D.
For me, you are the most reliable source of technical info.

I don't have anything to measure 50D RAW noise objectively yet. I
could get the latest beta DNG converter, and make uncompressed DNGs
which will load into PS with trial and error in PS "raw" but PS is
not the best environment for dealing with RAW data. Subjectively, my
initial experience was that the banding seemed rather strong at ISOs
6400 and 12800 looking at zoomed-in review images, but part of that
is due to the fact that such exposures were never that bright in my
30D review, which I generally shot at 1250 and under-exposed, most of
the time, when I needed a higher exposure index. Looking at images
at home, full-screen in irfanview with Lanczos interpolation, the ISO
1250 - 3200 shots looked less bandier than my 30D, some with dark
green backgrounds (the worst!) that had little or no obvious banding.

Banding is something that can be dealt with to some degree by
converters, and has room for improvement over the camera's JPEGs.

As far as resolution is concerned, the 50D, as predicted, seems to
have a weaker AA filter than previous xxD cameras, and I do get a
little aliasing with sharp optics. I can see the ribbed lines in a
car's marker lights in one shot with my 90mm Tamron at f/4, meaning
that not only is 15MP not overkill, but the lens clearly warrants 50
or more MP for its best performance.

Of course, I am very upset that Canon doesn't have a TAv mode yet,
and that the RAW files have 14 bits with no other option, a total
waste of card and hard disk space. Some ISO 12800 RAWs are 31MB from
yesterday, and ISO 12800 really needs no more than about 15 to 20
levels per pixel, a colossal overkill in storage requirements. About
9.5 bits of incompressible noise, making RAW files about 4x to 5x as
large as they need to be. A full-res RAW with just enough precision
would be smaller than either sRAW size.

The LCD is a huge step up from the 30D's. The viewfinder is much
crisper, too.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow