Reading mode: Light Dark

NEW D1X vs. 10D - detailed test report inside

Go to last post
Doug Hanks said:
That isn't the only advantage the D1X offers. Just to name a few
1) AF speed 2) all around speed 3) build quality 4) flash synx 5)
list goes on
Click to expand...
So what - that was not the point of your original post - which was to provide a set of images that comapre the D1X and 10D - older expensive technology with new lower cost technology. If you mention the pro features such as above, then you MUST compare the D1x and 1D or 1Ds - in that case, I suspect the final analysis will be much more complex.

tony
 
Stefan Schott said:
No it doesn't. It's exposure metering, both with flash and
available light, is inconsistant and unpredictable and for the most
part underexposes. Hence, it is completely and utterly useless,
regardless of which mode it's in.
Click to expand...
Humm, flash is one area in which I think Nikon has a clear lead over Canon.

Colour quality between the two is a matter of taste - you can construct any image / test to support your choice as long as you ignore the other's point of view.

Other advantages vary and depend upon which one you bought - the Nikon buff says the D1x has better horizontal resolution and the Canon buff says the 1D has better vertical.

Sling mud as much as you wish - both systems are excellent in all ways.

I can even prove that the higher Nikon noise on the D100 at ISO 6400 better results than the Canon 10D - but I doubt that you would agree.

tony
 
tony field said:
Stefan Schott said:
No it doesn't. It's exposure metering, both with flash and
available light, is inconsistant and unpredictable and for the most
part underexposes. Hence, it is completely and utterly useless,
regardless of which mode it's in.
Click to expand...
Humm, flash is one area in which I think Nikon has a clear lead
over Canon.

Colour quality between the two is a matter of taste - you can
construct any image / test to support your choice as long as you
ignore the other's point of view.

Other advantages vary and depend upon which one you bought - the
Nikon buff says the D1x has better horizontal resolution and the
Canon buff says the 1D has better vertical.

Sling mud as much as you wish - both systems are excellent in all
ways.

I can even prove that the higher Nikon noise on the D100 at ISO
6400 better results than the Canon 10D - but I doubt that you would
agree.

tony
Click to expand...
--
'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Those Who Threaten It.'
 
tony field said:
beware - obviously the original images did not contain a full tone
set if "auto levels" has any effect on the image.
Click to expand...
The only image which contains a full tone set is one with blown highlights and black shadows. Any other image will improve subjectively with auto-levels.
tony field said:
Auto-levels will generally stretch the tones to occupy a greater
contrast range and adjust the colours as "it sees fit". You can
compare the effect of "auto levels" with "auto contrast" - in very
many cases they will yield different image results.
Click to expand...
Auto levels applies auto contrast to each color channel independently. Auto contrast stretches the contrast without changing the relative values of the different color channels.
tony field said:
In addition, if you increase the contrast with the "auto"
functions, the number of tone steps does not change - it simply
changes the value of each step. If you have only two tones in the
original scene, the "auto" functions will result in only two tones
  • but probably of dfferent values.
Click to expand...
Yup. Which is why if the test were fair/accurate, I would say the obvious conclusion would be that the D1X's dynamic range really really sucks. The subject is very low-contrast - a painting lit with even studio lighting. If the D1X naturally produces that much contrast with such a low-contrast image, there is no way it could capture the dynamic range in any sunlight scene.

I refuse to believe that's the case with Nikon's current top DSLR. So thus I choose to conclude that the Nikon's default processing applies some sort of auto-levels whereas Canon's does not. And that makes the comparison unfair.
tony field said:
Best image results are only obtaned when the are properly accounted
for in the initial exposure - this is post prevalent with JPG / TIF
images - raw can be a bit more flexible.
Click to expand...
No no no no no. The CCD or CMOS has a certain dynamic range, and a certain granularity of values it can detect within that dynamic range. If the camera's hardware does something akin to a built-in auto levels to make the JPEG/TIFF appear to have more contrast in a low-contrast scene, it is not producing a better image. It is just applying auto-levels to stretch out the sensor's data before it writes the JPEG/TIFF, whereas with the other camera you're applying auto-levels after it writes the JPEG/TIFF. The end result is (assuming same sensor dynamic range) the same degree of stretch and thus quality. The fact that one camera does it by default without your consent I consider a negative - very bad if you're trying to take multiple photos to stitch together for a panorama or mosaic since even using manual exposure to hold the exposure constant would be useless. I assume the Nikon has some way to override this irreversible behavior.

The initial exposure is irrelevant so long as it is the same for both cameras. A comparison of linear RAW files would give the best comparison, as I believe both cameras are rated at 12-bits per color.
 
Doug Hanks said:
The D1 series has a 200,000 (or somewhere around there) image
database inside the camera that compares the shot you're taking to
an image it already knows a lot about. It then applies custom
metering, colour and contrast to the image you take.

This is why the 10D looks pale while the D1X fills the board.
Click to expand...
As nice as that sounds, if you can't turn it off, it makes the D1X useless for any type of calibrated application (scientific or forensic documentation, panorama stitching, digital proofing) which needs the camera to produce the exact same color values given identical lighting, identical exposure, identical subject, but different composition.

This is Nikon's top DSLR. There has to be a way to turn it off. Turn it off and try your comparison again. Then it'll be a comparison of what information the hardware can pull out of the scene, not what sort of software processing the camera automatically does.
 
John Kim said:
tony field said:
Best image results are only obtaned when the are properly accounted
for in the initial exposure - this is post prevalent with JPG / TIF
images - raw can be a bit more flexible.
Click to expand...
No no no no no. The CCD or CMOS has a certain dynamic range, and a
certain granularity of values it can detect within that dynamic
range. If the camera's hardware does something akin to a built-in
auto levels to make the JPEG/TIFF appear to have more contrast in a
low-contrast scene, it is not producing a better image.
...
Click to expand...
I am not an expert in this area by any means - however, here is my guess...

The raw image has a dynamic range of 12 bits. I assume that the photosite well will be scaled over a maximum of 12 bits of information. I gather that about 50,000 to 100,000 max electrons are charged into each site.

This 12 bits is then comrpessed into 8 bits depending upon the contrast setting of the camera. I assume that the additional 4 potential bits of information will play a significant role in determining the number of tonal steps that will result during the scaling process. If this is correct, proper exposure should definitely result in a maximal number of overall tonal steps.

For example, if you significantly under-expose an image, there may be (say) 25 separate tones in the scene. If you have a proper exposure, you might see 255 tones, and if you over-expose, you may see only 30.

It seems to me that there is a direct relationship amongst exposure level, contrast setting and tone range.

tony
 
What a great test! I'll go and show it to all those people who want to spend thousands of dollars to use there DSLR as a point and shoot (which a lot of dpreview people seem to do...).

But, mostly worthless. The 10D looked MUCH better to me, I wonder if we were looking at the same image. The D1X looks grossly saturated, and exagerated. And, most D1X users I know tone down there images in Photoshop. With the 10D, it appears you get an excellent NEUTRAL image, prime for getting the best possible image from. If you have no intentions of connection your digital camera to your computer, and don't want to alter the "as-is" settings from the factory, then you probably should buy a S50 or somesuch.

Why don't you do a worthwhile test and shoot with both, trying to achieve the best image possible? That would be more interesting. The vertical resolution advantage of the 10D is enough for me. Oh yeah, and I like to take pictures at night too...

But then, I'm biased. I only have $2,000 to spend on a DSLR.
Doug Hanks said:
I'm sorry for the unfair comparison. It was a lack of my
familiarity with Canon lenses.

I have redone the rest with top-of-the-line prime lenses from both
sides of the fence.

http://www.radixphoto.com/d1x-vs-10d-50mm/

--
'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Those Who Threaten It.'
Click to expand...
 
Yakuza said:
What a great test! I'll go and show it to all those people who want
to spend thousands of dollars to use there DSLR as a point and
shoot (which a lot of dpreview people seem to do...).
But, mostly worthless. The 10D looked MUCH better to me, I wonder
if we were looking at the same image. The D1X looks grossly
saturated, and exagerated.
Click to expand...
You pretty much nailed this. One of my good friends has a D1X and he would KILL to get images that are not overly saturated and sharpened, so he can do it to his own taste... or even approach the quality of film.

Of course, you can turn down the over-saturation in PS, but it's impossible to remove what the in-camera sharpening has done, and that bothers these guys to no end. Of course the 1D is the more worthy comparison, and when that's done with good glass, for people who really know imaging (not the point-and-shoot crowd that the two Nikon trolls in this thread are apparently among), there's no contest. In fact, the D30/60 and 10D produce superior images without a doubt, and that apparently really bothers these Nikon zealots to come here and rationalize to a crowd that ain't buying it.

Somebody mentioned spending 10 seconds in PS to get the 10D image blowing away the D1X. Heck, I don't even have to touch PS with Capture One LE, and my photos are even cropped to perfection when conversion happens.

And if I wanted the look of the D1X with blown reds, over-saturated colors, and sharpening that you can't get rid of, I'd look at a Sony F707 and pay a couple thousand less for the same results. Gotta love these guys who expect a $3K digital SLR to be a point-and-shoot. Unbelieveable.

--
BryanS
 
Just because I don't reply instantly to your miserable thread at 4am my time?

There's no use speaking to any one of you - this has declined downhill. Now I'm labeled as a P&S user, although I have a semi-professional website and a professional business behind it.

Grow up, children.
BryanS said:
smoody said:
However, I'm looking forward to his reaction to this thread:
Click to expand...
He sure hasn't had much of an answer.

--
BryanS
Click to expand...
--
'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Those Who Threaten It.'
 
Doug Hanks said:
There's no use speaking to any one of you - this has declined
downhill. Now I'm labeled as a P&S user, although I have a
semi-professional website and a professional business behind it.
Click to expand...
OK, just answer the issues, then. Why do you expect saturation and sharpness spot on out of the camera as a criteria for purchase... when a few seconds over the time it takes for cropping (which you still have to do)will accomplish this better than the camera can?

And how do you manage to unsharpen the overprocessed images from the D1X... my friend who owns one would like to know.

I still say, this was one of the dumbest tests I've seen to date, and your history that blasts Canon (using foul language at that) shows what you intended to demonstrate. Too bad most people here saw through it.

--
BryanS
 
BryanS said:
OK, just answer the issues, then. Why do you expect saturation and
sharpness spot on out of the camera as a criteria for purchase...
when a few seconds over the time it takes for cropping (which you
still have to do)will accomplish this better than the camera can?
Click to expand...
I still have to do? Excuse me? How are you familiar with my workflow? My workflow consists of doing a batch RAW conversion to JPEG in Bibble and that's it - then it's FTP'd to my Linux server for production use.

I never open the images in Photoshop unless 1) my CCD is REALLY dirty and I need to fix some dust spots or 2) I REALLY like the shot and I messed up the exposure.

Such a rhetorical question. What professional WOULDN'T expect a professional camera to give professional results?
BryanS said:
And how do you manage to unsharpen the overprocessed images from
the D1X... my friend who owns one would like to know.
Click to expand...
Unsharpen the overprocessed images? What are you talking about?

Here is an image I shot recently -- this is straight from the camera, resized with NetPBM tools in Linux.

Sure doesn't look overprocessed and soft to me. Matter of fact no image I've submitted on my website or here looks overprocessed and soft.





--
'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Those Who Threaten It.'
 
I haven't labeled you a P&S person. I haven't put you down. I haven't judged you at all, but...if you're going to be completely fair and honest, you must admit that the image quality contained in the link below will be a problem for some people and the D60 is superior in this particular instance. If you're not able to do that, then your integrity here is shot and everyone who thinks you're biased and unfair will have their proof.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=4974516
                            • -- - - - - - - - - - - - SMoody
http://www.pbase.com/smoody
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
Doug Hanks said:
tony field said:
Stefan Schott said:
No it doesn't. It's exposure metering, both with flash and
available light, is inconsistant and unpredictable and for the most
part underexposes. Hence, it is completely and utterly useless,
regardless of which mode it's in.
Click to expand...
Humm, flash is one area in which I think Nikon has a clear lead
over Canon.

Colour quality between the two is a matter of taste - you can
construct any image / test to support your choice as long as you
ignore the other's point of view.

Other advantages vary and depend upon which one you bought - the
Nikon buff says the D1x has better horizontal resolution and the
Canon buff says the 1D has better vertical.

Sling mud as much as you wish - both systems are excellent in all
ways.

I can even prove that the higher Nikon noise on the D100 at ISO
6400 better results than the Canon 10D - but I doubt that you would
agree.

tony
Click to expand...
--
'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Those Who Threaten It.'
Click to expand...
 
Ya man, why don't you respond? At least this sample has a better sample image.
smoody said:
I haven't labeled you a P&S person. I haven't put you down. I
haven't judged you at all, but...if you're going to be completely
fair and honest, you must admit that the image quality contained in
the link below will be a problem for some people and the D60 is
superior in this particular instance. If you're not able to do
that, then your integrity here is shot and everyone who thinks
you're biased and unfair will have their proof.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=4974516
                            • -- - - - - - - - - - - - SMoody
http://www.pbase.com/smoody
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Click to expand...
 
I simply cannot submit to your whim -- I cannot verify your source. I've never seen a photograph that horrible from my D1X, even in the red channel.

I taken it upon myself to browse through my archive and find an image with multiple angles and diagnols - just to see how poorly the D1X stands because it has to interpolate its data.

Here is a 400% crop of an image with about 7 different angles and 4 different arcs.

You be the judge.


smoody said:
I haven't labeled you a P&S person. I haven't put you down. I
haven't judged you at all, but...if you're going to be completely
fair and honest, you must admit that the image quality contained in
the link below will be a problem for some people and the D60 is
superior in this particular instance. If you're not able to do
that, then your integrity here is shot and everyone who thinks
you're biased and unfair will have their proof.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=4974516
                            • -- - - - - - - - - - - - SMoody
http://www.pbase.com/smoody
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Click to expand...
--
'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Those Who Threaten It.'
 
well, that's that. i guess the discussion is done because he can't "verify the source."

we can't verify the source of your images either (or you as a source for that matter), so there's really no point in having this discussion because you have no credibility by your own rules of what defines credibility.

i'm glad we finally put an end to all of this.
                            • -- - - - - - - - - - - - SMoody
http://www.pbase.com/smoody
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
Good rebuttal, Stefan ::::rolls eyes::::

If you haven't shot with both, please stop deriding Doug for his efforts. If nothing else, I can attest to one thing: Doug's representation of the D1X's color, contrast, and sharpness (with sharpening turned off) is 100% genuine.

Seriously folks, if you don't have experience with these cameras, stop jumping to stupid conclusions based on your personal bias.
Stefan Schott said:
Doug Hanks said:
1) D1X yields great colours out of the box
Click to expand...
Bullocks!
Stefan Schott said:
Jesus I own both cameras, just like many
other people, and this is what I have to do.
Click to expand...
Because you clearly have no idea of what you are doing.

S.
Click to expand...
--
Len
What's a camera without a photographer? (touche, Ger Bee)
 
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