Reading mode: Light Dark

Another stupid DP2M/SD1M/SDQH comparison

Go to last post
tantalum181

tantalum181

Well-known member
Messages
126
Reaction score
206
Location
Longview, WA, US
Just got the SDQH yesterday, played with it a bit and decided to shoot off my deck this evening. I really don't think I know what I'm doing!

Same lens on the SD1M and SDQH, 17-50mm. ISO set to 200 on each. Exp Comp set to 0.0, tried to keep everything the same. Changed tripod mount (very difficult to make the angle the same for each camera). Set the lens to 50mm and manual focus.

As far as I know, there was no additional manipulation of the jpgs but sometimes things happen that I don't know about. Silly technology.



Still my gold standard, DP2M
Still my gold standard, DP2M



SD1M
SD1M



SDQH - uh, washed out? Not sure what is going on here.
SDQH - uh, washed out? Not sure what is going on here.



SDQH - Exp Comp at -1.7, much better. Has interesting effects when zoomed in to the trees blowing in the center.
SDQH - Exp Comp at -1.7, much better. Has interesting effects when zoomed in to the trees blowing in the center.



I like the SDQH feel, handling, viewfinder (right eye user). I will continue to read the online manual, seems to be much to learn.

Tried super duper definition mode, need to read more...

Other pictures taken today with the SDQH turned out pretty reasonable.



These expanded metal gratings at work I consider to be difficult photo subjects.
These expanded metal gratings at work I consider to be difficult photo subjects.

Well, as we say, this is one data point.

Bob

--
Look where you want to go. Don't look where you don't want to go.
 
Wow! It looks like the H blows away the others.

;)

Of course it could be a difference in the atmosphere from the days when you shot the photos with the Merrill cameras vs the day you shot the photo with the SD Quattro H, right?

I am surprised at how little has changed from one year to the next. I see the blinds in one of the windows look exactly the same. Interesting.

--
Scott Barton Kennelly
http://www.bigprintphotos.com
 
Last edited:
Scottelly said:
Wow! It looks like the H blows away the others.

;)

Of course it could be a difference in the atmosphere from the days when you shot the photos with the Merrill cameras vs the day you shot the photo with the SD Quattro H, right?

I am surprised at how little has changed from one year to the next. I see the blinds in one of the windows look exactly the same. Interesting.
Click to expand...
I withdraw my comment.

Regards,
Vitée
Capture all the light and colour!
http://www.pbase.com/vitee/image/98008547/small.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/vitee/galleries
 
Last edited:
Not stupid al all, thanks for posting.

It would be interesting if the Dp2M photo would be at f/6.3.

Jozef
 
tantalum181 said:
SDQH - uh, washed out? Not sure what is going on here.
SDQH - uh, washed out? Not sure what is going on here.
Click to expand...
Back to basics, Bob.

You used multi-segment metering, auto-exposure and auto-WB. The sd Quattro H screwed up royally in both shots.

The scene lighting value (LV or EV) looks like EV15, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value

From the first shot's settings of f/5.6 at 1/250 and 200 ISO, the stupid camera thought the scene was "deep shade" EV12, voila:

f/5.6 at 1/250 implies a scene EV of 13. Your use of 200 ISO lowers that to EV12.

From the Wiki:

600px-Exposure_Value_Scale_Visualized_as_Circles.png


I don't trust auto-anything . . . :-(

--
"What we've got hyah is Failyah to Communicate": 'Cool Hand Luke' 1967.
 
Last edited:
SigmaChrome said:
Scottelly said:
Wow! It looks like the H blows away the others.

;)

Of course it could be a difference in the atmosphere from the days when you shot the photos with the Merrill cameras vs the day you shot the photo with the SD Quattro H, right?

I am surprised at how little has changed from one year to the next. I see the blinds in one of the windows look exactly the same. Interesting.
Click to expand...
I withdraw my comment.
Click to expand...
Spoilsport . . ;-)
 
Scottelly said:
Wow! It looks like the H blows away the others.

;)

Of course it could be a difference in the atmosphere from the days when you shot the photos with the Merrill cameras vs the day you shot the photo with the SD Quattro H, right?

I am surprised at how little has changed from one year to the next. I see the blinds in one of the windows look exactly the same. Interesting.
Click to expand...
 
tantalum181 said:
Just got the SDQH yesterday, played with it a bit and decided to shoot off my deck this evening. I really don't think I know what I'm doing!

Same lens on the SD1M and SDQH, 17-50mm. ISO set to 200 on each. Exp Comp set to 0.0, tried to keep everything the same. Changed tripod mount (very difficult to make the angle the same for each camera). Set the lens to 50mm and manual focus.

As far as I know, there was no additional manipulation of the jpgs but sometimes things happen that I don't know about. Silly technology.

Still my gold standard, DP2M
Still my gold standard, DP2M

SD1M
SD1M

SDQH - uh, washed out? Not sure what is going on here.
SDQH - uh, washed out? Not sure what is going on here.

I like the SDQH feel, handling, viewfinder (right eye user). I will continue to read the online manual, seems to be much to learn.

Tried super duper definition mode, need to read more...

Other pictures taken today with the SDQH turned out pretty reasonable.

Well, as we say, this is one data point.

Bob

--
Look where you want to go. Don't look where you don't want to go.
Click to expand...
Bob,

Enjoy your new sd Quattro H.

Your comparisons, in my opinion are not real comparisons at all. Each camera should have the same ISO, the same lens focal length, the same aperture (in AP mode) or the same shutter speed (in SP mode), be placed on a tripod pointing exactly at the same spot in each case in the exact same light to be anywhere near to a direct comparison.

I use the SD1M and the sd Quattro as well as the older SD15/SD14 and the metering is pretty much the same with all of them.

S
 
Ceistinne said:
Bob,

Enjoy your new sd Quattro H.

Your comparisons, in my opinion are not real comparisons at all. Each camera should have the same ISO, the same lens focal length, the same aperture (in AP mode) or the same shutter speed (in SP mode), be placed on a tripod pointing exactly at the same spot in each case in the exact same light to be anywhere near to a direct comparison.

I use the SD1M and the sd Quattro as well as the older SD15/SD14 and the metering is pretty much the same with all of them.

S
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree that this is not a real comparison. It is a first level look at what happens when I am let loose in the house.

However, I did learn some things:

1. Make sure the cameras are updated in both date and time. :)

2. Do more research on focal lengths and try to understand cropping lens/sensor differences.

3. Changing the tri-pod mount and getting it exactly the same angle requires more preparation.

4. Consider two separate tests (using the term loosely).

a. one test to make all settings exactly the same, iso, shutter speed, aperature, white balance(for final jpg), angle of view (lens cropping/focal lenght),

b. a different test for total camera "usability"

5. Whether anyone or myself even cares?

6. Use a much closer subject - I like what the foveon sensor does best with closer subjects - makes me smile.

7. Practice with each camera, VERY different button layouts, and preset most settings prior to performing said 'test'.

Need to get some lens time this summer/fall in preparation for San Antonio, TX and Moab, Utah trip later this year.

bob
 
xpatUSA said:


I don't trust auto-anything . . . :-(
Click to expand...
Oh come on Ted, in 10 years your car will be driving itself and you will be sitting in the back seat responding on your phone to Preview '-).
 
tantalum181 said:
Just got the SDQH yesterday, played with it a bit and decided to shoot off my deck this evening. I really don't think I know what I'm doing!

Same lens on the SD1M and SDQH, 17-50mm. ISO set to 200 on each. Exp Comp set to 0.0, tried to keep everything the same. Changed tripod mount (very difficult to make the angle the same for each camera). Set the lens to 50mm and manual focus.

As far as I know, there was no additional manipulation of the jpgs but sometimes things happen that I don't know about. Silly technology.

I like the SDQH feel, handling, viewfinder (right eye user). I will continue to read the online manual, seems to be much to learn.

Tried super duper definition mode, need to read more...

Other pictures taken today with the SDQH turned out pretty reasonable.

Well, as we say, this is one data point.

Bob

--
Look where you want to go. Don't look where you don't want to go.
Click to expand...
Hi Bob,

You do realize you are shooting the H in a less than full resolution mode don't you?

Your images are 19 megapixel 3:2 aspect ratio. To get the full resolution you should shoot it in the 25 megapixel mode...

Best regards,

Lin
 
Last edited:
tantalum181 said:
SDQH - Exp Comp at -1.7, much better. Has interesting effects when zoomed in to the trees blowing in the center.
SDQH - Exp Comp at -1.7, much better. Has interesting effects when zoomed in to the trees blowing in the center.

Well, as we say, this is one data point.

Bob

--
Look where you want to go. Don't look where you don't want to go.
Click to expand...
What you got in the SDQH Image is noise. It´s the same effect you can see in the test scene here at DPR :

a3e0f879931345b69b045f864438115f.jpg




Rudi.
 
Rudi said:
tantalum181 said:
SDQH - Exp Comp at -1.7, much better. Has interesting effects when zoomed in to the trees blowing in the center.
SDQH - Exp Comp at -1.7, much better. Has interesting effects when zoomed in to the trees blowing in the center.

Well, as we say, this is one data point.

Bob

--
Look where you want to go. Don't look where you don't want to go.
Click to expand...
What you got in the SDQH Image is noise. It´s the same effect you can see in the test scene here at DPR :

a3e0f879931345b69b045f864438115f.jpg

Rudi.
Click to expand...
Hi, there is not much reason for what you see in that test chart to be applicable. OP is discussing out of camera JPEG files whereas the test chart is the DNG format file, which has one or two little characteristics of its own, plus, more significantly, the default ACR settings that DPReview use are biased for Bayer cameras and create artificial and unnecessary noise (and sometimes halos) in Quattro Foveon images.

What I would suggest for the OP when shooting JPEG with the Quattro is to turn the in-camera sharpening down to minimum. I think he will be pleasantly surprised. If he wants a touch of sharpening added he can do it in post with as much care as he chooses.
 
xpatUSA said:
SigmaChrome said:
Scottelly said:
Wow! It looks like the H blows away the others.

;)

Of course it could be a difference in the atmosphere from the days when you shot the photos with the Merrill cameras vs the day you shot the photo with the SD Quattro H, right?

I am surprised at how little has changed from one year to the next. I see the blinds in one of the windows look exactly the same. Interesting.
Click to expand...
I withdraw my comment.
Click to expand...
Spoilsport . . ;-)
Click to expand...
It's always better to not take credit for things that were unsaid.
 
TN Args said:
Rudi said:
tantalum181 said:
SDQH - Exp Comp at -1.7, much better. Has interesting effects when zoomed in to the trees blowing in the center.
SDQH - Exp Comp at -1.7, much better. Has interesting effects when zoomed in to the trees blowing in the center.

Well, as we say, this is one data point.

Bob

--
Look where you want to go. Don't look where you don't want to go.
Click to expand...
What you got in the SDQH Image is noise. It´s the same effect you can see in the test scene here at DPR :

a3e0f879931345b69b045f864438115f.jpg

Rudi.
Click to expand...
Hi, there is not much reason for what you see in that test chart to be applicable. OP is discussing out of camera JPEG files whereas the test chart is the DNG format file, which has one or two little characteristics of its own, plus, more significantly, the default ACR settings that DPReview use are biased for Bayer cameras and create artificial and unnecessary noise (and sometimes halos) in Quattro Foveon images.

What I would suggest for the OP when shooting JPEG with the Quattro is to turn the in-camera sharpening down to minimum. I think he will be pleasantly surprised. If he wants a touch of sharpening added he can do it in post with as much care as he chooses.
Click to expand...
OK - so what would you say to the corrected Image I´ve loaded up. If you compare the original and the version I treated a little in PSE7 what would be your explanation for the result I could achieve with a little bit of NR.
Rudi.
 
Last edited:
You applied a bit of NR and lost a bit of detail along with a bit of noise including colour noise? That's not in question. The question is whether the DPR test chart, of a Sigma DNG file with ACR processing, is showing the reason for the OP's JPEG files showing a bit of noise. As I explained, the noise is due to the default JPEG in-camera sharpening level, and he can adjust that.

The OP files should actually be showing a bit of blur in the distance because the focus point is too close. If the distance looks pin sharp it is due to the processing.

Also, I wish we were looking at ISO 100 files. If we want to discuss artefacts at the magnified level.

As an aside, to the OP, that overly-bright image has me confounded. I seriously wonder if you might have accidentally engaged AE Lock. Multi-segment metering is way better than that. Try some more and see if the issue persists. In fact, photograph a blank white wall with 0.0 exposure correction and see if the JPEG histogram in playback is in the middle of the scale.
 
I can't think how that conclusion follows from the discussion we just had. But they say there is a camera for everyone, so, good-o.
 
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