Reading mode: Light Dark

10D vs S2: revealing test

Go to last post
Given that these pictures are taken with the sun at a different angle it is hard to really judge. If you look at the angle of the shadows, you can see that the sun is at a substancially different angle in the S2 shot than in the 10D shot. SO, differences in shadows (and therfore contrast) can be mistaken for actual resolution differences. Look very carefully.
Ferenc said:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=4738693

No excuses, here, with lighting, framing, etc. There is no fix for
these differences. It is that simple.

Kind regards,

Ferenc
Click to expand...
 
Your pictures from the real world may not actually be showing anything about resolution, hence the talk about resolution charts. As you say, you aren't a professional tester, so your real world pictures and claims about S2 vs. 10D resolution probably should only be viewed with those limitations in mind.

Anthony
ron purdy said:
Ferenc said:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=4735529

Enjoy, and happy shooting,

Ferenc
ron purdy said:
http://www.pbase.com/ronno/10d_vs_s2
Click to expand...
--
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I'm sorry if you mentioned this somewhere else but what was the shutter speed and did you use a tripod? I ask because the s2 image looks less detailed at 100% than I'm used to seeing. here is a page with 100% details of S2 12MP Raws and Jpegs as well as a 6MP version conveted by Adobe Camera Raw sized up. Not the comparison you are making of couse but you can see more detail in the 100% crops from the S2 on my page and this is from a Nikkor 20mm lens hand held!

http://www.tariq.com/fujiacr.html

and at the bottom of this page, you can see the difference in detail between a Fuji Raw converted to Tiff vs a Jpeg output. I think you mentioned you shot jpegs-and jpegs are great-but to really see the best both cameras can offer, Raw is a neccesity(at least if you are trying to capture as much detail(resolution) as possible. This was with the Nikkor 50 1.8d on a tripod:

http://www.tariq.com/s2jpegVStiff.html

Tariq
Tariq.com
ron purdy said:
ron purdy said:
http://www.pbase.com/ronno/10d_vs_s2
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
ron purdy said:
http://www.pbase.com/ronno/10d_vs_s2
Click to expand...
Hey Ron,

Great post. Thanks. I read through some of the responses and I guess I have no eye whatsoever, but what I see is similar detail but the nod goes to the 10D and as far as color, the Fuji has a green color cast while the Canon is more blue. Again, my personal preference is for the 10D here too.

I don't have either camera. I have a D60 and 5700 (love em both) and I have owned an S1.

Thanks again for the post.

Ron
--
If you don't like the effect....don't produce the cause!
 
That does not look like more detail to me. Just larger detail, as you are far closer to the sujject. I do see tons of color artifacting/moire in your images though...
I also see very jagged lines in the "L" on the Late cup.
Tariq said:
http://www.tariq.com/fujiacr.html

and at the bottom of this page, you can see the difference in
detail between a Fuji Raw converted to Tiff vs a Jpeg output. I
think you mentioned you shot jpegs-and jpegs are great-but to
really see the best both cameras can offer, Raw is a neccesity(at
least if you are trying to capture as much detail(resolution) as
possible. This was with the Nikkor 50 1.8d on a tripod:

http://www.tariq.com/s2jpegVStiff.html

Tariq
Tariq.com
ron purdy said:
ron purdy said:
http://www.pbase.com/ronno/10d_vs_s2
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
...Now it seems that things are coming out clearer.

ALL brick areas, balconies' fences, as well as other areas of the second set of images are clearly more detailed, even if you are shooting in JPG and using on-board's sharpening engine. Turn them off, send them to me, and you will know what detail and resolution is all about.

I was particularly impressed on how the S2 rendered the upper front panels of the building, as well as the blind's of the windows right below it...
Completely absent in the 10Ds shot.

Just switch to RAW, and you will see how far the 10D will look, side to side to the S2.

Thanks for your time and effort,

Ferenc
 
I usually do not shoot RAW or TIFF with the S2 because it's slow when the buffer fills:
(from imaging resource:)

Cycle time, TIFF files 0.51/70.1
Buff clear 540(!) sec 0.59/28.5

Buff clear 173 sec TIFF mode files are enormous (37 MB), take a long time to write. Buffer gives 0.59 sec cycle time for first 7-9 shots, but buffer clearing can be ineffably slow with a slow card. Faster card is up to 3x faster. (Couldn't measure post-buffer cycle time on SmartMedia card, because 128Meg max size was too small to exhaust the buffer.)

It is impractical for me to use these setting, as I often shoot people, and waiting around for the camera is maddening.

I have also found that the pattern noise shows more in RAW/TIFF than it does in JPEGs.
Tariq said:
http://www.tariq.com/fujiacr.html

and at the bottom of this page, you can see the difference in
detail between a Fuji Raw converted to Tiff vs a Jpeg output. I
think you mentioned you shot jpegs-and jpegs are great-but to
really see the best both cameras can offer, Raw is a neccesity(at
least if you are trying to capture as much detail(resolution) as
possible. This was with the Nikkor 50 1.8d on a tripod:

http://www.tariq.com/s2jpegVStiff.html

Tariq
Tariq.com
ron purdy said:
ron purdy said:
http://www.pbase.com/ronno/10d_vs_s2
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Thank for the post, I have leant from reading the reactions. I'am not interested in the 10D, but will be looking at, S2 or D100. By the reaction and the informed response of this thread, I will post on the Nikoni forum that I'am a S2 owner and D100 quality is second rate because......... and sit back and learn. Touch a nerve and get a strong response.
--
Regards
Gazza
pbase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/gazzadownunder
 
I'm sorry, perhaps you completely overlooked the original question because you failed to answear. Tripod? Shutter speed? used in your test.

ALSO,

You looked at the wrong page for the "scientific" comparison of a Fuji JPEP vs. a Fuji RAW. The page you are referring to compares the Fuji RAW converter engine to the Adobe Camera Raw plug-in. Although there is a Jpeg on that page which does show some great detail. That's why the link was http://www.tariq.com/fujiacr.html where fujiacr stands for fuji adobe camera raw. And you are correct. There is some artifacting but "tons" is a gross misstatement. You are also correct in saying that the jpeg image is a larger detail of the cup which actually goes to FURTHER the argument that the RAW 100% detail image on the far left has more resolution than the jpeg on the far right - thanks for pointing that out!

But here is the PROOF of higher resolution from a Fuji Raw file vs. a Fuji Jpeg which I also posted below and you did not make reference to in your post:

http://www.tariq.com/s2jpegVStiff.html

This was set up on a tripod, same exact exposure within seconds of each other.

Tariq
Tariq.com
ron purdy said:
Tariq said:
http://www.tariq.com/fujiacr.html

and at the bottom of this page, you can see the difference in
detail between a Fuji Raw converted to Tiff vs a Jpeg output. I
think you mentioned you shot jpegs-and jpegs are great-but to
really see the best both cameras can offer, Raw is a neccesity(at
least if you are trying to capture as much detail(resolution) as
possible. This was with the Nikkor 50 1.8d on a tripod:

http://www.tariq.com/s2jpegVStiff.html

Tariq
Tariq.com
ron purdy said:
ron purdy said:
http://www.pbase.com/ronno/10d_vs_s2
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Tripod: yes
they were shot at f 8.0 at 1/350 sec.

Also, I explained elsewhere why I am not particularly interested in RAW/TIFF with this camera. The S2 is too slow for my style of shooting when I use anything other than JPEG (slow writes from buffer).
See quote below:

I test my cameras in order to determine which camera is best for a particular use, and I test them according to the way that I am most likely to use them. I do not have the time or resources to test every facet of my cameras. If you are more likely to use TIFF or RAW, then you will find little useful information in my JPEG comparison.
Tariq said:
ALSO,
You looked at the wrong page for the "scientific" comparison of a
Fuji JPEP vs. a Fuji RAW. The page you are referring to compares
the Fuji RAW converter engine to the Adobe Camera Raw plug-in.
Although there is a Jpeg on that page which does show some great
detail. That's why the link was http://www.tariq.com/fujiacr.html
where fujiacr stands for fuji adobe camera raw. And you are
correct. There is some artifacting but "tons" is a gross
misstatement. You are also correct in saying that the jpeg image
is a larger detail of the cup which actually goes to FURTHER the
argument that the RAW 100% detail image on the far left has more
resolution than the jpeg on the far right - thanks for pointing
that out!

But here is the PROOF of higher resolution from a Fuji Raw file vs.
a Fuji Jpeg which I also posted below and you did not make
reference to in your post:

http://www.tariq.com/s2jpegVStiff.html

This was set up on a tripod, same exact exposure within seconds of
each other.

Tariq
Tariq.com
ron purdy said:
Tariq said:
http://www.tariq.com/fujiacr.html

and at the bottom of this page, you can see the difference in
detail between a Fuji Raw converted to Tiff vs a Jpeg output. I
think you mentioned you shot jpegs-and jpegs are great-but to
really see the best both cameras can offer, Raw is a neccesity(at
least if you are trying to capture as much detail(resolution) as
possible. This was with the Nikkor 50 1.8d on a tripod:

http://www.tariq.com/s2jpegVStiff.html

Tariq
Tariq.com
ron purdy said:
ron purdy said:
http://www.pbase.com/ronno/10d_vs_s2
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Robert Whiteman said:
ron purdy said:
http://www.pbase.com/ronno/10d_vs_s2
Click to expand...
Might want to look closer at the samples here:
http://www.pbase.com/image/14851857

S2 is getting more detail in the shadow areas where the 10D is
going soft. The 10D seems to have a bit more contrast which makes
it LOOK sharper at first glance, but upon closer inspection...the
10D is blurring out the low-level details. Just look closer!
Click to expand...
Along with a kick in the saturation dept.
davidbogdan
 
ron purdy said:
Buff clear 173 sec TIFF mode files are enormous (37 MB), take a
long time to write. Buffer gives 0.59 sec cycle time for first 7-9
shots, but buffer clearing can be ineffably slow with a slow card.
Click to expand...
you obviously have little experience with the S2 and clearly have an agenda

no one would use a TIFF file when RAW gives more information, allows for much greater lattitude in post processing and writes 12 MB files

if the kind of photography you are doing requires you shoot > 7-9 rapid succession images, the S2 isn't for you ...and you have my condolences
about your agenda

seems you want to demonstrate the Canon superior to the S2, with almost the zeal of a salesperson with a lot of cameras in stock

you aren't exactly preaching to the choir here & I must say, having looked at your images, you really haven't made a compelling argument

that's not to knock the Canon DSLR line, but I think the S2 superior and certainly excellent value (I particularly like the fact that I can use Nikkor lenses of almost any vintage on my S2)
--
pbase & dpreview supporter
Fuji forum member since 5/2001
http://www.pbase.com/artichoke
 
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