Reading mode: Light Dark

SD9 sample images on IR

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rich
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
R

Rich

Guest
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil is so cute when he gets mad :-)

Rich
 
From what I can tell, all the "major" reviewers have a friendly rivalry and provide links to each others' reviews for the readers.
 
Member said:
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample
box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say
the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil
doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil
is so cute when he gets mad :-)
Click to expand...
Phillip Askey is a lazy English gentleman!
 
Phil's camera hasn't arrived yet, so I can't do any name calling :p
Rich said:
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample
box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say
the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil
doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil
is so cute when he gets mad :-)

Rich
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
 
Hmm, I would not have expected that. That is not good camera mangement ;) To bad, I am exicetd about the review. U anyway do that, but take ur time with the camera. I rather like a great done test that a early test :).

Nick
Phil Askey said:
Rich said:
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample
box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say
the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil
doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil
is so cute when he gets mad :-)

Rich
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
--
Sometimes Slicknick, sometimes not so Slicknick
http://www.pbase.com/slick11nick/
 
I blew (lanczos) up the davebox images to 4500x3000 to compare them, much like they would be if they were printed 300dpi at 10"x15".

The D60 had fewer artifacts with similar resolution.

The reflective bell has multicoloured blooming or other strange colours in the center with the SD9, clean on the D60.

The micro color chart next to the davebox label has more artifacts in the SD9 version, which is a surprise.

Detail is very close - I would call it a draw.

Overall the D60 is producing a better image.

Peter
Rich said:
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample
box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say
the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil
doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil
is so cute when he gets mad :-)

Rich
Click to expand...
 
Crops from images on imaging resource.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SD9/SD9PICSA.HTM

Now you may think these are backwards, but look for yourself. Top crop is from SD9, bottom from d60 (that horrible bayer interpolated thing :-)

If you don't see any difference, look at where magenta strip meets Cyan strip.




Peter G said:
The D60 had fewer artifacts with similar resolution.

The reflective bell has multicoloured blooming or other strange
colours in the center with the SD9, clean on the D60.

The micro color chart next to the davebox label has more artifacts
in the SD9 version, which is a surprise.

Detail is very close - I would call it a draw.

Overall the D60 is producing a better image.

Peter
Rich said:
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample
box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say
the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil
doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil
is so cute when he gets mad :-)

Rich
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I just got word that it's in the country and should be with me by the end of today... Although unfortunately it's not first on my review list.
Phil Askey said:
Rich said:
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample
box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say
the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil
doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil
is so cute when he gets mad :-)

Rich
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
 
Phil Askey said:
I just got word that it's in the country and should be with me by
the end of today... Although unfortunately it's not first on my
review list.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
Hi Phil,

So what's next then?

Trevor
 
Purple fringing present in the IR shots. My purchase is on hold until I see a resolusion to this issue.
Rich said:
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample
box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say
the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil
doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil
is so cute when he gets mad :-)

Rich
Click to expand...
 
Am just glad I enjoy taking pictures that look nice and seeing a creation of where the camera sees what the mind wants it to see.. sorry but all these anal views of flaws in any of the dslrs is wearing a little thin. Can't wait until there are enough people shooting with the SD9 to see what they can create with their new camera and get away from pixel by pixel comparisons. They all have flaws or maybe I should say "characteristics", and not every dslr is suited for every person. Not sure why there are defensive remarks like the " bayer interpolation" one here. I don't think anyone has said the D60 is a bad camera in any way shape or form. Just the Foveon is trying a new approach to things. Flaws or not, I'll be curiuous to see how well the "auto" settings works on the Sigma software to create out of camera jpgs, leaving the untouched RAW files for post processing if desired. Could be a real time savings ( versus say a D60 ) for those wanting to take pictures that look good but not wanting to loose their life to the digital darkroom.
 
Hey Peter. Nice test, but....

Why did you pull your crop from the left edge of the image? Just asking a question. Is this the kind of thing that would improve with a different/better lens?

In other words, are the results you're demonstrating here dependent upon the lenses used or upon the sensor or the camera as a whole?

Seems you would rarely want to prove a point like this by pulling a section from the edge of the image in any camera.
Peter G said:
I blew (lanczos) up the davebox images to 4500x3000 to compare
them, much like they would be if they were printed 300dpi at
10"x15".

The D60 had fewer artifacts with similar resolution.

The reflective bell has multicoloured blooming or other strange
colours in the center with the SD9, clean on the D60.

The micro color chart next to the davebox label has more artifacts
in the SD9 version, which is a surprise.

Detail is very close - I would call it a draw.

Overall the D60 is producing a better image.

Peter
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101

I'm an uncle!!!

 
Phil Askey said:
Phil Askey said:
Rich said:
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample
box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say
the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil
doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil
is so cute when he gets mad :-)

Rich
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
--
Sometimes Slicknick, sometimes not so Slicknick
http://www.pbase.com/slick11nick/
 
Ulysses said:
In other words, are the results you're demonstrating here dependent
upon the lenses used or upon the sensor or the camera as a whole?
Click to expand...
These photos appear to be taken with the 50mm F2.5 macro lens (F4 1/90). This is about as good as a Sigma lens gets.
Member said:
Seems you would rarely want to prove a point like this by pulling a
section from the edge of the image in any camera.
Click to expand...
With a 1.7x crop, this not "the edge" of the lens image area by any stretch.

--
Erik
 
You think me that nefarious? ;-)

I wanted the fine grain colour chart. When I was clipping it out, I thought I should get the "Davebox" copyright in the image as well. The colour chart is my point of interest and it is just slightly left of center, not on a far edge.

This was the Sigma 50mm prime, which should be a good lens.

When looking at the colour chart, the d60 looks cleaner and has less edge artifacts than the Sigma. This was a surprise to me, this is one area I expected the Sigma to be better at. But also it has blooming problems in the bell. Otherwise looking at the legibility of finer text it is a about a draw.

I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE you to blow them both up to the same size (non native to each) and examine the whole image yourself.

Or maybe give someone a double blind and ask their opinion.

I have been saying all along that it is clear that a X3 image will crush the same size bayer image, but at around 2X pixels for the bayer, it evens out.

Here we have the same image source, production cameras, good quality lenses. IOW a fair comparison and IMO the D60 does better. Which is quite at odds with the claims from some with Fo-mania that you need a 12MP bayer cameara to equal a 3MP X3.

Peter
Ulysses said:
Why did you pull your crop from the left edge of the image? Just
asking a question. Is this the kind of thing that would improve
with a different/better lens?

In other words, are the results you're demonstrating here dependent
upon the lenses used or upon the sensor or the camera as a whole?

Seems you would rarely want to prove a point like this by pulling a
section from the edge of the image in any camera.
Peter G said:
I blew (lanczos) up the davebox images to 4500x3000 to compare
them, much like they would be if they were printed 300dpi at
10"x15".

The D60 had fewer artifacts with similar resolution.

The reflective bell has multicoloured blooming or other strange
colours in the center with the SD9, clean on the D60.

The micro color chart next to the davebox label has more artifacts
in the SD9 version, which is a surprise.

Detail is very close - I would call it a draw.

Overall the D60 is producing a better image.

Peter
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101

I'm an uncle!!!

Click to expand...
 
Erik Magnuson said:
These photos appear to be taken with the 50mm F2.5 macro lens (F4
1/90). This is about as good as a Sigma lens gets.
Click to expand...
Okay, thank you. That's what I was really getting at. Not at all a criticism of Peter G, whom I respect very much (he knows that).

I was wondering about the quality and effect of the lens here.

Not that this image is bad, but I was wondering if this is "as good as it gets".

--

Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101

I'm an uncle!!!

 
Peter G said:
You think me that nefarious? ;-)
Click to expand...
No, no, no. See my reply to Erik. :-)

His explanation, and your further words help me out.

Still, I'm not convinced by these D60> SD9 sets just yet. The reason being when you also check out the resolution charts from the SD9 and compare them to the D60, all of a sudden the D60 doesn't get a solid lead here.

And I think that conclusion isn't any different than we had from day 1. They compare "favorably" depending upon the comparison shot. No clear winner.

--

Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101

I'm an uncle!!!

 
Phil Askey said:
I just got word that it's in the country and should be with me by
the end of today... Although unfortunately it's not first on my
review list.
Click to expand...
Bump the SD-9 up your list Phil -- this is one of the most significant cameras to come out for some time and so deserves some special attention.

Terry.
Member said:
Phil Askey said:
Rich said:
I noticed on imaging resource that they've published their sample
box image from a production sd9 they just received in, I must say
the level of detail is impressive in such a "small" size. Hope Phil
doesn't mind me posting the info to 'another' website (though Phil
is so cute when he gets mad :-)

Rich
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
 
I agree that the Sd9 res chart looks better.(fuji S2 holds its own though). I think in siturations that have certain frequencies the D60 will be prone to more obvious artifacts, but overall it will have image quality that is better. Just IMO.

Also have a gander at the res chart in the davebox. The d60 for the most part has a more accurate representation. It blurs beyond nyquist, where
the SD9 produces some interesting patterns that aren't really there.

This is a debate that generally will never end. I try to keep an open mind. From what I have seen in the $2000 DSLR market I think the FUJI S2 is the overall image quality champ. Despite having argued against the "SuperCCD" in the past, but quite simply the S2 delivers the goods.

I try to look at each image on its merits alone. I really don't understand those who take any criticism of technology they didn't invent as a personal affront (not you but others in this forum).

I have seen many examples of issues with the first x3 camera:

Horizontal pattern noise in many situations.
Wierd blooming type artifacts.
And now something that looks like colour bleed.
And beyond that the bayer colours look cleaner and more consistent.

Bayer is not dead yet.
Ulysses said:
Peter G said:
You think me that nefarious? ;-)
Click to expand...
No, no, no. See my reply to Erik. :-)

His explanation, and your further words help me out.

Still, I'm not convinced by these D60> SD9 sets just yet. The reason
being when you also check out the resolution charts from the SD9
and compare them to the D60, all of a sudden the D60 doesn't get a
solid lead here.

And I think that conclusion isn't any different than we had from
day 1. They compare "favorably" depending upon the comparison shot.
No clear winner.

--

Ulysses
Repository of Some of My Stuff
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pictures.html?id=4291269101

I'm an uncle!!!

Click to expand...
 
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