DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

Started Nov 8, 2011 | Discussions
PhilM oz Senior Member • Posts: 1,350
RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

Below are 100% crops from the G12, SX30 and SX40 RAW files at ISO 1600.

I tried to size each shot so that the crops came out roughly the same size (to compare results at a pixel level).

Loaded in Lightroom and all noise reduction turned off (the color cast on the SX30 is due to the color profile in CHDK - still trying to get this one right).

Zoom in to compare at full size.

SX30:

SX40:

G12:

Phil.

Canon PowerShot G12 Canon PowerShot SX30 IS
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ijustloveshooting
ijustloveshooting Veteran Member • Posts: 3,003
surprisingly sx40 is the best of all ....

impressed by high iso performance of this little cam...

 ijustloveshooting's gear list:ijustloveshooting's gear list
Fujifilm X-A1 Sony a7 II Sony a7R IV Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS +17 more
Steen Bay Veteran Member • Posts: 7,418
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

Very interesting, thanks for posting. Your comparison confirms that the small 1/2.3 BSI-CMOS sensor in SX40 is doing a pretty good job. It seems to match the larger 1/1.7" CCD sensor in G12 at pixel level, even though the SX40 has 2mp more than the G12.

dave_bass5
dave_bass5 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,342
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

Ok, im probably going to look stupid but i didnt think the SX40 did raw.
Is this using CHDK or something like that?
--
Dave.

Gallery @
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davebass5/
http://davepearce.smugmug.com

Videos @ http://www.vimeo.com/user464364/videos

 dave_bass5's gear list:dave_bass5's gear list
Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM Canon PowerShot S110 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS M50 +10 more
Steen Bay Veteran Member • Posts: 7,418
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

dave_bass5 wrote:

Ok, im probably going to look stupid but i didnt think the SX40 did raw.
Is this using CHDK or something like that?

Yes, CHDK was mentioned in the OP.

OP PhilM oz Senior Member • Posts: 1,350
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

dave_bass5 wrote:

Is this using CHDK or something like that?

Yes, I'm working on CHDK for it.

Early days yet; but I got RAW working so I thought people might be interested in the comparison.

Phil.

dave_bass5
dave_bass5 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,342
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

PhilM oz wrote:

dave_bass5 wrote:

Is this using CHDK or something like that?

Yes, I'm working on CHDK for it.

Early days yet; but I got RAW working so I thought people might be interested in the comparison.

Phil.

Ok, thanks guys. Like i said, i will sound stupid. I completely missed the CHDK comment. Sorry.

Not wanting to derail the thread but how is LR3 handling the SX40 raw files? How does it cope with the lack of lens correction etc.

Im tempted to get a SX40 for my holiday and would love to shoot raw as that would fit in with my current work flow.

Cheers. Nice to see people fixing Canons errors and thanks for posting the comparisons.
--
Dave.

Gallery @
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davebass5/
http://davepearce.smugmug.com

Videos @ http://www.vimeo.com/user464364/videos

 dave_bass5's gear list:dave_bass5's gear list
Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM Canon PowerShot S110 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS M50 +10 more
IceKold New Member • Posts: 8
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

OP post the same pics but dont do RAW on the SX40 I just want to compare keep the other 2 pics the same. And what other features is CHDK working on for the SX40??

Vince Doran Regular Member • Posts: 239
YeeHaaa! CHDK is getting close!

Fervently hoping you guys can figure out a way to unlock the burst mode from the current all-auto status, believe that was Canon's dumbest move on the SX40.

Looks to me like the edges remain just a little better defined in the G12, but the SX40 is doing amazingly well compared to the SX30. This is particularly interesting because when I look at fine detail preservation between the two in JPEGs, the SX40 is better, but not as much better as these raw samples, so I wonder if Canon is doing even more NR on the 40 than it needs too. In fact, a NR-OFF setting would have been great, but it may be that Canon is doing some NR on-chip. Might explain some of the leap in the raw.

Any case, thanks to you and ERR99!

Simon97
Simon97 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,443
Re: surprisingly sx40 is the best of all ....

Looking in the white letters. The SX40 has lots of chroma noise vs. the G12. The G12 is much better here and is a bit less noisy over all.

The 14 and 16mp sensors are crummy. Not surprised seeing a 12mp BSI sensor beat them, but the 1/1.7" sensor? Nope. Sometimes you just can't beat the larger sensor.

 Simon97's gear list:Simon97's gear list
Canon PowerShot ELPH 360 HS Panasonic Lumix DC-G100
Dale Buhanan Veteran Member • Posts: 4,280
The SX30 and SX40 don't have RAW

I assume you meant jpg from those cameras, but the comparison is still valid and impressive. I own all three cameras. Thanks for posting these.

I know that CHDK is available for the SX30 and adds RAW to that camera, but I don't believe that CHDK is available for the SX40 yet. At least is wasn't last time I checked. Perhaps you got a very early release??
--
kind regards
Dale

 Dale Buhanan's gear list:Dale Buhanan's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon G1 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon PowerShot SD500 Canon PowerShot G5 +35 more
Dale Buhanan Veteran Member • Posts: 4,280
New (CHDKversion is available for SX40 I see

I have now updated myself and see the Phil was using a very early release of CHDK to get RAW out of the SX40. Well done, Phil. Better information than I had originally thought. I must download and try it.
--
kind regards
Dale

 Dale Buhanan's gear list:Dale Buhanan's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon G1 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon PowerShot SD500 Canon PowerShot G5 +35 more
PaulRivers Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

I downloaded the above pics to my computer to compare them.

The sx40 definitely looks like an improvement over the sx30 - the sx40 has more detail, less noise, and less fuzziness.

The g12 is better than the sx40 but not by as much and not by as large of an amount - the g12's colors are slightly less vivid, but it also has almost no color noise while the sx40 still has some noticeable color noise. The g12 appears to have a tiny bit more detail but it's a very, very small improvement.

While the g12 is better than the sx40, it's by a small margin, while the sx30 to sx40 difference is big enough to be a real difference (and mean neither is night and day but you might be able to see the sx30 to sx40 difference in monitor sized pics).

I had gotten the impression that the sx40 was definitely better than the sx30, this certainly confirms that...

PaulRivers Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

PhilM oz wrote:

dave_bass5 wrote:

Is this using CHDK or something like that?

Yes, I'm working on CHDK for it.

Early days yet; but I got RAW working so I thought people might be interested in the comparison.

Any...idea about the 300hs and CHDK? I know a couple of people have mentioned that for a very small, very pocketable camera, the 300hs seemed good - except that there aren't any manual controls.

Also curious if the s100 is ever supported if you might have any idea whether we could get manual control over the shutter speed - though 1080p is obviously reduced resolution, and a higher shutter speed it opens up some interesting possibility for taking video to capture just the right moment in a photo. The drawback of that now is that the 1/24 shutter speed of 24fps video leads to come significant blur if there's any action in the scene. Just a curious question.

OP PhilM oz Senior Member • Posts: 1,350
Re: New (CHDKversion is available for SX40 I see

There are currently two people working on CHDK for the SX40 (ERR99 and myself). We have different camera firmware versions - his is 1.00f and mine is 1.00g.
The version posted on the CHDK forum is an early alpha for 1.00f from ERR99.

I hope to merge our efforts over the next few days so our combined version can progress to the beta stage.

Phil.

OP PhilM oz Senior Member • Posts: 1,350
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

PaulRivers wrote:

Any...idea about the 300hs and CHDK? I know a couple of people have mentioned that for a very small, very pocketable camera, the 300hs seemed good - except that there aren't any manual controls.

Don't know if there is any active development on this yet - keep an eye on the CHDK forums.

Also curious if the s100 is ever supported if you might have any idea whether we could get manual control over the shutter speed - though 1080p is obviously reduced resolution, and a higher shutter speed it opens up some interesting possibility for taking video to capture just the right moment in a photo. The drawback of that now is that the 1/24 shutter speed of 24fps video leads to come significant blur if there's any action in the scene. Just a curious question.

Hard to say. There is a script available to add manual exposure control to video and it works on some cameras; but tends to be unstable (if you decrease the shutter speed below the video fps the camera will probably crash). I built this into the IXUS 310 using touch screen controls - again it works; but will sometimes crash.

Phil.

PaulRivers Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

PhilM oz wrote:

PaulRivers wrote:

Any...idea about the 300hs and CHDK? I know a couple of people have mentioned that for a very small, very pocketable camera, the 300hs seemed good - except that there aren't any manual controls.

Don't know if there is any active development on this yet - keep an eye on the CHDK forums.

Also curious if the s100 is ever supported if you might have any idea whether we could get manual control over the shutter speed - though 1080p is obviously reduced resolution, and a higher shutter speed it opens up some interesting possibility for taking video to capture just the right moment in a photo. The drawback of that now is that the 1/24 shutter speed of 24fps video leads to come significant blur if there's any action in the scene. Just a curious question.

Hard to say. There is a script available to add manual exposure control to video and it works on some cameras; but tends to be unstable (if you decrease the shutter speed below the video fps the camera will probably crash). I built this into the IXUS 310 using touch screen controls - again it works; but will sometimes crash.

Phil.

Gotcha, thanks for the info you know on the subject.

voz Regular Member • Posts: 372
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

PhilM oz wrote:

Yes, I'm working on CHDK for it.

Early days yet; but I got RAW working so I thought people might be interested in the comparison.

Exciting. I've never owned a "super zoom", but the combination of a decent sensor and CHDK support might very well push me to buy one.

Good work!

OP PhilM oz Senior Member • Posts: 1,350
Re: RAW @ ISO 1600 - SX30 v SX40 v G12

dave_bass5 wrote:

Not wanting to derail the thread but how is LR3 handling the SX40 raw files? How does it cope with the lack of lens correction etc.

Once it's reasonably stable then the Adobe lens profiling program can be used to create a custom lens profile. LR can then use this to do lens correction.

There is also a DNG profile creator from Adobe to create custom color profiles as well.

Phil.

Dale Buhanan Veteran Member • Posts: 4,280
Re: New (CHDKversion is available for SX40 I see

Thank you for that information, Phil. I actually went to the CHDK forum and learned that you were one of the 'Hero members' there, and also one of the main contributers. So thank you for all that you do.

I guess I will wait for a little longer then for my own CHDK experiements with the SX40 and let you heavy weights blaze the path through the forest first. I'll keep watching here for more of your work and progress.

I was quite surprised that the results you got at ISO 1600 were that good in RAW to be honest. I would have expected more noise than you got. I myself tried a similar experiment using jpg's from both the G12 and the SX40 at ISO 1600 in fairly dim room light. What I saw is that the SX40 was practically noise free due to noise reduction, while the G12 showed less noise reduction and a noisier image. But the G12 also had more detail. In spite of the noise reduction in the SX40, I would have to say the OOC image from it was superior to the G12. It was smooth and quite nice, unless you pixel peeped for fine detail It would have taken quite a bit of PP on the G12 image to equal what was OOC on the SX40. So that was impressive to me.

PhilM oz wrote:

There are currently two people working on CHDK for the SX40 (ERR99 and myself). We have different camera firmware versions - his is 1.00f and mine is 1.00g.
The version posted on the CHDK forum is an early alpha for 1.00f from ERR99.

I hope to merge our efforts over the next few days so our combined version can progress to the beta stage.

Phil.

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

 Dale Buhanan's gear list:Dale Buhanan's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon G1 X II Canon EOS 70D Canon PowerShot SD500 Canon PowerShot G5 +35 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads