LO res. sd1m files very sharp

how do you handle this?

please show examples or I can find answers on google myself

thanks in advance

It isn't clear what your problem is.

Not enough depth of field ?

Don

ole kekkonen wrote:

how do you handle this?

please show examples or I can find answers on google myself

thanks in advance

I used to shoot my SD1 Merrills in low res all the time.

Low res gives you 10um pixels, slightly bigger than even than the SD9's 9.12um at high res.

On a per-pixel basis larger pixels give a higher MTF at Nyquist (0.5 cycles per pixel) but visible false detail above Nyquist. At 10um, Nyquist is 50 lp/mm quite within the capabilities of a good lens.

Most of your image is not sharp which is why Don asked his question, so what did you mean by "this"?

I see absolutely no advantage in using low res with the SD1 unless you are in no man's land, your card is running full and you need to get those shots.
Low res doesn't even perform better at high ISO settings, rather the opposite.
If 4-5 MP were enough for me, I would probably still use a DP1s, DP2s or SD15.

ole kekkonen wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

ole kekkonen wrote:

how do you handle this?

please show examples or I can find answers on google myself

thanks in advance

I used to shoot my SD1 Merrills in low res all the time.

Low res gives you 10um pixels, slightly bigger than even than the SD9's 9.12um at high res.

On a per-pixel basis larger pixels give a higher MTF at Nyquist (0.5 cycles per pixel) but visible false detail above Nyquist. At 10um, Nyquist is 50 lp/mm quite within the capabilities of a good lens.

Most of your image is not sharp which is why Don asked his question, so what did you mean by "this"?

Ted? English please?

and I dont have a LENS PROBLEM.

Never said you did.

what did you mean by "this"?

HI Ole:  here are a couple of cow elk images that I inadvertently shot my SD1 Merrill on low Rez.  I rather like the detail in the fur and the over all look of the images, sort of like SD9 on steroids!  

Enjoy!  

quma wrote:

I see absolutely no advantage in using low res with the SD1 unless you are in no man's land, your card is running full and you need to get those shots.
Low res doesn't even perform better at high ISO settings, rather the opposite.

Low res gives less noise. Therefore, it's ISO "performance" is better.

xpatUSA wrote:

quma wrote:

I see absolutely no advantage in using low res with the SD1 unless you are in no man's land, your card is running full and you need to get those shots.
Low res doesn't even perform better at high ISO settings, rather the opposite.

Low res gives less noise. Therefore, it's ISO "performance" is better.

In theory, but not with the SD1 and Sigma Photo Pro.

Two shots, same settings, the high res photo has been downscaled to match the low res.
Both are unusable as color photos, but the low res is worse, even as a black and white image.

HIGH RES, downscaled to LOW RES, all settings zero, noise reduction off

LOW RES, all settings zero, noise reduction off

quma wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

quma wrote:

I see absolutely no advantage in using low res with the SD1 unless you are in no man's land, your card is running full and you need to get those shots.
Low res doesn't even perform better at high ISO settings, rather the opposite.

Low res gives less noise. Therefore, it's ISO "performance" is better.

In theory, but not with the SD1 and Sigma Photo Pro.

Two shots, same settings, the high res photo has been downscaled to match the low res.
Both are unusable as color photos, but the low res is worse, even as a black and white image.

HIGH RES, downscaled to LOW RES, all settings zero, noise reduction off

LOW RES, all settings zero, noise reduction off

I was talking about temporal noise, not Foveon green/magenta blotching.

In any case, for temporal noise comparison it is not valid to re-sample one image to match another.

xpatUSA wrote:

I was talking about temporal noise, not Foveon green/magenta blotching.

In any case, for temporal noise comparison it is not valid to re-sample one image to match another.

Read again what I wrote:

quma wrote:

I see absolutely no advantage in using low res with the SD1 [...]
Low res doesn't even perform better at high ISO settings, rather the opposite.

What I demonstrated.

quma wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

I was talking about temporal noise, not Foveon green/magenta blotching.

In any case, for temporal noise comparison it is not valid to re-sample one image to match another.

Read again what I wrote:

quma wrote:

I see absolutely no advantage in using low res with the SD1 [...]
Low res doesn't even perform better at high ISO settings, rather the opposite.

What I demonstrated.

OK, understood. One image unchanged, one image re-sampled to 50% - the unchanged image not looking "better" than the re-sampled image.

xpatUSA wrote:

quma wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

I was talking about temporal noise, not Foveon green/magenta blotching.

In any case, for temporal noise comparison it is not valid to re-sample one image to match another.

Read again what I wrote:

quma wrote:

I see absolutely no advantage in using low res with the SD1 [...]
Low res doesn't even perform better at high ISO settings, rather the opposite.

What I demonstrated.

OK, understood. One image unchanged, one image re-sampled to 50% - the unchanged image not looking "better" than the re-sampled image.

The low res image does also have a strong green color cast and some weird artifacts (beyond the color blotching) 
Either the pixel binning is faulty or SPP isn't handling those low res files properly.

Another Merrill Lo-res image, developed from lo-res raw.

Merrill lo-res is great, and quite like I've seen from the SD9.

ole kekkonen wrote:

how do you handle this?

please show examples or I can find answers on google myself

thanks in advance

Hi Ole,

What exactly is your question?

Jan