Image Quality: Is newer better?

In many respects.

hannenberg wrote:

IMO the short answer is no. I believe there was a jump in IQ from the SX30 to SX40 probably mostly due to the decrease in megapixels. There was a discernible improvement in CA . I haven't seen a lot of evidence that the most recent models from Canon and Panasonic have better IQ. In the case of the SX50, I think there's some evidence that CA is worse.

The newer models certainly have other features that might be desirable, e.g., faster autofocus, longer zoom. etc. Speaking for myself, I'm content to wait until the next generation of superzooms before trading in my trusty SX40

Agree 100%. The difference is definitely not worth upgrading for and i also see a negative with the CA on the new SX 50.

averagjoe wrote:

I never had an issue with the IQ I got out of the 630, so I don't see the need to spend the extra several hundred on the latest model, when on a good day a used A630-640-650 model (all highly acclaimed and much beloved by their users) can be had for around $100.

Thing is that ISO 1600 really isn't "low light".  It can be indoor with decent window light without flash.  Your a630 might have had ISO 800.  I have an a620 and it only has ISO 400.   Even the G11 blows away the a650 at ISO 1600.  But if you really don't shoot in non bright conditions, maybe just use your mobile phone to snap pics.

Hank3152 wrote:

Hi Joe,

Image quality?.......simply put, no...not noticeably better. I bought a G11 just before my A610 died and was able to do some comparisons......only after careful scrutinizing of the corners of 100% crops at ISO100 did I observe a slight difference of contrast and sharpness.

You are wasting your time trying to see differences at base ISO, 100.  Your G11 should trounce your a610.  You are also comparing probably 5 MP vs. 10 MP.  Plus the a610 probably has ISO 400 as a highest ISO while the G11 is probably better at ISO 1600 than your a610 was at ISO 200.

RedFox88 wrote:

while the G11 is probably better at ISO 1600 than your a610 was at ISO 200.

It may be true for A610,

but from 2006 untill 2011, there were almost no significant improvements in IQ area.

Here is ISO800 Canon A640 from 2006 vs ISO800 Canon G11



Canon G11 vs Canon A640 in ISO800

Here is ISO800 Canon G7 from 2006 vs ISO800 Canon G11



Canon G11 vs Canon G7 in ISO800

There is no IQ gain at all for G11, just some extra NR.

Only in 2012 with G15 and its bright lense and G1X with its huge sensor

Canon made a leap forward.

G1X and G15 started new era of IQ progress for Canon advanced compacts.

Dimitri Khoz wrote:



There is no IQ gain at all for G11, just some extra NR.

Only in 2012 with G15 and its bright lense and G1X with its huge sensor

Canon made a leap forward.

G1X and G15 started new era of IQ progress for Canon advanced compacts.

Not true.  I have compared the a650 to the g11 at ISO 1600 and well the a650 falls apart.

Not in your opinion, you mean. Glad to correct you.

RedFox88 wrote:

Dimitri Khoz wrote:



There is no IQ gain at all for G11, just some extra NR.

Only in 2012 with G15 and its bright lense and G1X with its huge sensor

Canon made a leap forward.

G1X and G15 started new era of IQ progress for Canon advanced compacts.

Not true. I have compared the a650 to the g11 at ISO 1600 and well the a650 falls apart.

OH, and I just checked ISO 800 in DPR's a640 and G11 review and the G11 clearly beats the a640.  I mean clearly because the G11 details are much clearer since the a640 had old blurring noise reduction going on.  Sometimes people think the old stuff is better than the new without really wanting to see if the new is better.

RedFox88 wrote:

OH, and I just checked ISO 800 in DPR's a640 and G11 review and the G11 clearly beats the a640. I mean clearly because the G11 details are much clearer since the a640 had old blurring noise reduction going on.

DPReview test shot with a640 is underexposed by 1 stop comparing to G11, f5.6 vs f4.0 at the same 1/640 sec ISO800

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonA640/Samples/Comparedto/A640_ISO800.JPG

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonG11/Samples/comparedto/higheriso/G11_ISO800_0310.JPG

therefore noise is much more pronounced in a640 image (a640 had almost no NR for JPEGs).

Here is IR controlled test using same exposure and same test set

ISO800 image made with G11

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G11/FULLRES/G11hSLI0800.HTM

here is ISO800 G7

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G7/FULLRES/G7hSLI0800.HTM

here is ISO800 a640

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A640/FULLRES/A640hSLI800.HTM

and you will find that a640 retains same amount of details as G11, just chroma noise is a bit more visible in prints.

I run NeatImage over G7 and a640 shots, and the difference in IQ between ISO800 G11 and ISO800 G7 is about 1/2 stop.

It is very small difference, especially considering age difference between the cameras.

And it is ISO800, not even ISO200 or ISO80.



Canon A640 ISO800 + NR (underexposed by 1 stop and with the bottle further from camera)

Canon G11 ISO800

If A640 shot was given same amount of light like in the G11 shot,

it would completely match newer G11 in details after NR.

Dimitri Khoz wrote:

I run NeatImage over G7 and a640 shots, and the difference in IQ between ISO800 G11 and ISO800 G7 is about 1/2 stop.

It is very small difference, especially considering age difference between the cameras.

What's most important for the sensor performance is the QE and the read noise. The QE only increases slowly, but the read noise has been reduced quite a bit. If we compare the G9 and G15 on DxO we can see that "SNR 18%" (mostly determined by the QE) has improved by something like 1/3 stop at low ISOs to app. 2/3 stop at higher ISOs, and the DR (where the read noise is more important) has increased by app. 1.5 to 2 stops across the whole ISO range.