is X3 image quality really better?

[Brett DiMichele]

Laurence,

I am with you..

I have been debating up one side and down the other with a certain
Canon 10D owner who comes to the DPReview forums. I post and image
and ask him to critique the picture and it always turns into a "Well I think
the 10D would have captured more detail" Yeah riiiight...

I spent months looking at full scale images out of all the D-SLR's and there
is only one (well, two) that made me go "wow" the SD9 and the SD10!

I could give a rats behind about Brand Loyalty and I didn't let my camera
choice be dictated by the mega millions of dollars spent on advertising hype
and I didn't need white lenses to justify myself as a competent human
being. I looked at images and I picked the camera that had the best...

I went into it knowing that the SD9/10 didn't have 45 million AF points or
Lasers to light up the AF brackets and I knew I would never be able to buy
those pretty white lenses (that's what they make spray paint for, right?).
But I knew the SD9/10 was a very good camera and much better than
what I have been used to since it's been a long time since I have owned
an SLR..

I am not dissapointed in the camera in the least! But I am dissapointed in
myself and my skills. I can't do this camera justice, but when I do get it
right I even amaze myself!

 

[seeking668]

thanks for your comments, as you know, I do agree under good lighting conditions, SD9/10 generate excellent results, and I am very convinced the quality is better compared to other 6M DSLR's, otherwise this conversation won't even exist.

but as we all know, life all about compromise and balance. as a backpacker (traveled all around the world), I shoot mostly on the road, can't manage to use tripod all the time, and need to shoot at low light/night time as well as brightly lit conditions. and I am still not convinced the noise level as high ISO/long exposure can compete with 10D etc. and I can't get practical lens like 28-135IS or 24-120VR. that's why I am still trying to figure out which one I'd rather go for as a balanced concious choice.

 

[Mike Chaney]

Having owned and used a Fuji S2, Nikon D100, Canon 10D, and Sigma SD10 in the last year, I'm convinced that the SD10 is capable of producing higher quality images than any from that bunch. I currently own and use the 10D and SD10 and while I find it more difficult to achieve the SD10's potential compared to the 10D, I believe that in the hands of photographers who are equally capable with both cameras, the SD10 will outshine the 10D in the majority of cases. There are, however, a few "holes" in the SD10's performance like long exposure shooting that make it less than a 100% victory.

Like others, I do wish that Foveon had put their chip in a little more "capable" body with at least better low light AF, better white balance, and software that can handle the changing color characteristics of the Foveon sensor in low light. I'm hoping that Sigma can address the latter with Sigma Photo Pro 3.0 that (again I'm hoping) may be on the horizon.

--
Mike
http://www.ddisoftware.com

 

[photogeek]

I have a suggestion for you both. Allocate a weekend and go somewhere together with your cameras. Shoot stuff in RAW with your cameras (tripod mounted), side-by-side. Include portraits, landscapes, architecture, macro... Go home, do your best at post processing (no Photoshop, though, except for sharpening). Compare the results. Print out the best pairs of pictures that you've captured using color-profiled output device and workflow, use the same device. Something like 12x18" should be enough. Sit down and compare the results side-by-side. Now that would be interesting. Better yet, get that Nikon fella to dump his gear and buy Sigma instead.

To date I've seen only ONE less than comprehensive side-by-side real-world shoot-out between Canon and Sigma (Bayer & Foveon). This is strange because there are several people on this forum alone who have both cameras, and are very passionate about Foveon technology.

 

[seeking668]

yes, only shoot the same scene, under same condition, and compare side by side will be meaningful

I have a suggestion for you both. Allocate a weekend and go
somewhere together with your cameras. Shoot stuff in RAW with your
cameras (tripod mounted), side-by-side. Include portraits,
landscapes, architecture, macro... Go home, do your best at post
processing (no Photoshop, though, except for sharpening). Compare
the results. Print out the best pairs of pictures that you've
captured using color-profiled output device and workflow, use the
same device. Something like 12x18" should be enough. Sit down and
compare the results side-by-side. Now that would be interesting.
Better yet, get that Nikon fella to dump his gear and buy Sigma
instead.

To date I've seen only ONE less than comprehensive side-by-side
real-world shoot-out between Canon and Sigma (Bayer & Foveon). This
is strange because there are several people on this forum alone who
have both cameras, and are very passionate about Foveon technology.

 

[tammons]

thanks a lot for the reponse.

I read elsewhere too that for really big prints, sd9/10 is really
better, but I am just wondering if 10D can be as sharp as SD9, and
10D could be a bit "smoother", then why...

It could be almost as sharp with a L lens, but with identical lenses the SD_ would win out.

BTW, what is "DR"?

Dynamic range. Slide film has about 4 stops. The 10D seems very short sometimes.

since you mention S2, from this link:
http://www.digitalcamera.jp/report/S2Pro-020602/index.htm

it seems S2 catches much more detail than D100/D60, I just can't
believe it, is that real?

The S2 is sharper than every other camera except for the 1DS, 14N and SD_.

happy holiday

I will probably take some heat for this, but I have seen side by
side photos from a SD9 with a 28-70EX and a 10D with a 24-70L both
at F8 and the 10D was a sharp as the SD9 but was sharper at the
edges. I do think that the SD9 would have been sharper with a prime
lens though.

I have also shot a 14N at ISO80 which blows everything else away
(except for maybe a 1DS), but underexposed at ISO 200 a SD9
processed double size beats it.

Also the 10D is a great low noise camera, but it has terrible DR
and you will never get the best out of it unless you shoot all L
lenses (super expensive).

I have also shot the S2 which is a great camera and somewhere in
the middle. It is pretty sharp, fast and has good color and jpegs.
The S3 should be better. I think the best thing about the S2 is the
ability to shoot Nikon lenses, which I like a lot.

The SD9 had iffy color, but the SD10 seems to have much better color.

I guess if it were me making the decision it would be a toss up
between the S2, SD10 (these are pretty close. the SD10 is sharper,
but the S2 is more well rounded. The S2 cant meter through a manual
lens and does not have a mirror lock up) or the 2DH. The DR of the
10D and 300D is terrible in bright high contrast situations. The S2
is a bit non forgiving too but not as bad as the 10D. The SD9/10 is
much more forgiving in DR IMO.

Its a very difficult question.

I am quite impressed by full size images of SD10/9 posted on
pbase.com, and strangely couldn't find that many full fize images
of other type of DSLR's. I don't want to argue whether it's due to
those users don't like to post them full size, or just their full
size images are not so good. but the fact is, I don't have lots of
"data" about image quality of other CCD/CMOS DSLR's, contrary to
SD10/9.

Check out the samples from phil. I did a lot of 40x60 crop
enlargements and the SD9 beat all the cameras sharpness wise except
for the 1DS and the 14N. OF course if you are only printing 5x7 it
really does not matter.

So far, I am kind of geared towards getting a SD10, until I saw the
"chinese doll" shot of 300D vs. SD9 posted on this forum sometime
ago, both full size, the image quality is pretty much equivlent
using good lens. and after I saw images of SD10 vs other DSLR's on
http://www.imaging-resource.com , I lost most confidence in SD10/9:

SD10:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SSD10/FULLRES/SD10FARLs.HTM

10D:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E10D/FULLRES/E10DFARLF.HTM

D100:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/ND100/FULLRES/D10FARLF.HTM

The details of SD10's image is less than other DLSR's (just look at
the window). but on the other hand, similar sample images on
steves-digicams.com show SD10's result at least as good (if not
better) than other DSLR's. (I understand lighting conditions/lens
etc can't be identical, that certainly places a role on the final
result, but the SD10's image is really disappointing)

I would not base camera buying decision on 1 photo. There are a
lot of blunders that can happen when shooting comparisons.

Granted I would only go for sigma if its image quality is at least
somewhat better than the other DSLR's (with good light condition,
forget about high ISO/long exposure), otherwise, I'd rather get
Canon/Nikon which has more lens and other benefits.

I have shot a E20, S2, 10D, 14N, and a SD9 and for now I am
sticking with the SD9. For the $ the SD9 or SD10 is a good deal.

I do believe in final results, they are what really counts, theory
doesn't do any good if the result is poor. now I don't really know
which way to go, maybe you guys can shed some light on this? thanks.

You also may want to rent a camera and check it out.

Check out this pic with a SD9 and a 40yr old manual lens. This is a
1/2 crop processed double size, which would be the equiv of a 1.7
mp file. Pretty amazing for 1.7mp. A few of the crop duster photos
are full size also. I also have some s2 photos on my site.

http://www.pbase.com/image/23118713/original

(any links of good full size images of C/N DSLR appreciated)

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

--
http://www.troyammons.com
http://www.pbase.com/tammons
http://www.troyammons.deviantart.com

 

[Yi Ding]

but as we all know, life all about compromise and balance. as a
backpacker (traveled all around the world), I shoot mostly on the
road, can't manage to use tripod all the time, and need to shoot at
low light/night time as well as brightly lit conditions. and I am
still not convinced the noise level as high ISO/long exposure can
compete with 10D etc.

I have an SD9 that is very limited in ISO range, and I usually use no higher than ISO200 on it. This poses some difficulity in low light and indoor shots without a tripod. However, over time I have been able to hand-hold my camera at slower and slower shutter speed. For example, with the 50mm EX lens I am now usually able to get sharp hand-held images at 1/15s or 1/10s if there is no wind; with the 15-30 EX I can get down to 1/8s or 1/6s. Physically I am not strong at all (just no tremble with my arms). Since your can afford the physical challenge of backpacking, I think you'll get very good hand-held stability as well. With the SD10's higher ISO range, a low shutter speed is still useful if a big DOF is needed.

Of course, not all my shots are tack sharp, but most of the unsharp ones are due to improper focus instead of hand shake. Given the fact that the SD10 has better autofocus than the SD9, I assume you'll be happy with an SD10.

The SD10's high ISO performance is pretty good but not as good as that of the Canon 10D. However, if you don't need ISO1600 a lot, the SD10 should serve you well. Actually the SD10's ISO1600 seems to be very useable if the images are to be downsized.

I suggest you order an SD10 (either with the kit lenses or and have body only plus a couple of EX lenses) from a reputable dealer (like B&H) that accepts returns, and test it extensively under challenging conditions. If you are not satisfied with it, then try a 10D or wait a couple of month for any news from next year's PMA...

and I can't get practical lens like 28-135IS
or 24-120VR. that's why I am still trying to figure out which one
I'd rather go for as a balanced concious choice.

Is IS really need for 28-135? Not for me. The upcoming 80-400 OS from Sigma might be a very practical lens if it has good optical quality. Initial test shots are already availble. You may want to try it out as well...

Yi

 

[Z (is real)]

I'm hoping that
Sigma can address the latter with Sigma Photo Pro 3.0 that (again
I'm hoping) may be on the horizon.

SPP is actually written by Foveon, not Sigma.

-Z-

 

[Mike Chaney]

I experimented with an adaptive unsharp mask filter this morning that is designed to equalize sharpness of colors that have been "smudged" by Bayer sensor interpolation. This filter is nothing more than an unsharp mask filter that doesn't sharpen B/W detail at all but applies sharpening to colored areas proportional to the number of sensors that contribute to color. For example, a black line on white paper will receive no sharpening while a black line on pure red will receive 100% of the indicated USM. Black on green gets 50% of the indicated USM. Desaturated green where the red and blue channels are not zero but are half the intensity of green receive 25% of the indicated USM. Etc.

Here are the results. I think this filter gives the Bayer images more of a 3D effect and it certainly balances sharpness between B/W detail and "primary" detail like black/red. Keep in mind that this filter took me about 10 minutes to write so it is in its early stages. I may add some code to "tone down" the intensity of the filter in shadows to reduce noise, etc.



--
Mike
http://www.ddisoftware.com

 

[seeking668]

interesting, but I feel the sharpen is a bit too much?

I have always thought about for bayer sensor, in LAB space, instead of sharpening on the L channel, we should really sharpen the A/B channel since it's the color resolution that's poor for bayer sensors.

keep up the good work

 

[Chris Rijk]

but as we all know, life all about compromise and balance. as a
backpacker (traveled all around the world), I shoot mostly on the
road, can't manage to use tripod all the time, and need to shoot at
low light/night time as well as brightly lit conditions. and I am
still not convinced the noise level as high ISO/long exposure can
compete with 10D etc. and I can't get practical lens like 28-135IS
or 24-120VR. that's why I am still trying to figure out which one
I'd rather go for as a balanced concious choice.

Here's a picture I took last week (on Christmas Day actually). It's of some fungi in a dark wood, so I shot with ISO400 (though I kinda prefer the ISO200 shot I took due to better positioning):
http://www.aceshardware.com/chris/photos/Cambridge/fungi_iso400.jpg

No post processing has been done. Shot with AWB at 32mm (with my 24-70 EX), no flash, F4.5, 1/80s shutter. Hand held.

Maybe I should have tried at F8 and slower shutter, but the footing was rather uncertain (uneven forest floor) and I didn't have too much time...

Note the fine cobweb threads... the detail is still there. The colour isn't quite so good as the ISO200 shot, but it's not that noticible.

Anyway, I certainly think my SD10 is usable under poor lighting conditions. Certainly harder to get a good shot, though that'd be the case with all cameras.

I've taken some "action" pictures under low light as well - the sensor didn't let me down.

Taking shots indoors under normal house lighting is kinda painful though. (really need a flash)

Maybe a better way to think about this is: do you care more about outside shots between dusk and dawn, or night shots or action shots? I think it would be easier to compensate for having to use lower ISO for static subjects by becoming better at keeping the camera still. It's much harder to compensate for a less capable sensor...

I don't envy you choice. I was going to go with a 10D, but then the SD10 came out and after about 20 hours of research, and correlating with the type of shots I tend to take, I went with the SD10.

--
New SLR user and Sigma owner in London

 

[seeking668]

obviously, since A/B channels do not have much structure information, have to use L channel to find the "edges" first, then apply "separation" on the A/B.

interesting, but I feel the sharpen is a bit too much?

I have always thought about for bayer sensor, in LAB space, instead
of sharpening on the L channel, we should really sharpen the A/B
channel since it's the color resolution that's poor for bayer
sensors.

keep up the good work

 

[Stan]

This is fascinating. Maybe we need a comment from someone with a human factors background. I don't know the word, but for hearing the field would be "psychoacoustics".

There does seem to be something to this 3D thing...yet the Bayerites feel that their approach mimics how we see/process images so it's moot. Yet your filter improved the image in my opinion. Something is not jiving!

Keep up the good work Michael.

Stan

 

[seeking668]

http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw/raw_05/essay.html

if you can make the resolution charts of 10D look like SD9, that will mean you are on the right track

 

[WHNewell]

Laurence,
I could not agree more. It seems that people spend a lot of time
with a magnifying glass looking at these photographs. I think they
need to sit back, look at the picture, and pick the system that
produces an image that appeals to them.
msoutherland

--

Ditto, I might suggest trying low and medium rez settings also. You'll be quite gratified with the results. Eventually I'll open a pbase account and display some of my less than worthy images.

Wally

 

[Markkk]

I have been searching for a good DSLR for quite a while, I don't
have lens collection to worry about, so I can pick any
10D/D100/SD10/istD... I have spent LOTS of time looking at images
at different places, and understand full well about X3 technology
etc. etc.

I am quite impressed by full size images of SD10/9 posted on
pbase.com, and strangely couldn't find that many full fize images
of other type of DSLR's. I don't want to argue whether it's due to
those users don't like to post them full size, or just their full
size images are not so good. but the fact is, I don't have lots of
"data" about image quality of other CCD/CMOS DSLR's, contrary to
SD10/9.

So far, I am kind of geared towards getting a SD10, until I saw the
"chinese doll" shot of 300D vs. SD9 posted on this forum sometime

ago, both full size, the image quality is pretty much equivlent
using good lens. and after I saw images of SD10 vs other DSLR's on
http://www.imaging-resource.com , I lost most confidence in SD10/9:

SD10:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SSD10/FULLRES/SD10FARLs.HTM

10D:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E10D/FULLRES/E10DFARLF.HTM

D100:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/ND100/FULLRES/D10FARLF.HTM

The details of SD10's image is less than other DLSR's (just look at
the window). but on the other hand, similar sample images on
steves-digicams.com show SD10's result at least as good (if not
better) than other DSLR's. (I understand lighting conditions/lens
etc can't be identical, that certainly places a role on the final
result, but the SD10's image is really disappointing)

Granted I would only go for sigma if its image quality is at least
somewhat better than the other DSLR's (with good light condition,
forget about high ISO/long exposure), otherwise, I'd rather get
Canon/Nikon which has more lens and other benefits.

I do believe in final results, they are what really counts, theory
doesn't do any good if the result is poor. now I don't really know
which way to go, maybe you guys can shed some light on this? thanks.

(any links of good full size images of C/N DSLR appreciated)

Ive had the SD9 for a year and was very happy with the results for landscape photography. I hated the camera when shooting people photos due to the problems with poor white balance and metering particularly when indoors - yellow skin tones.

As a result I purchased the 10D with all the L lenses and I havnt looked back. Skin tones and metering indoors is amazing, I have not had to set a custom white balance and can just point and shoot. It is so easy to use that you can concentrate on just taking a picture and not worrying about anything else. The camera is also so portable and the battery lasts forever. You can let it convert to Jpegs knowing that the result will be spot on.

For landscapes it is not as dynamic as the SD9 and the Jpegs it spits out can be a bit flat and boring. i think the cameras geared towards people photos.

This problem can be overcome by shooting with RAW and converting using capture 1 or photoshops camera raw which is bundled with CS now. I have found that i can push the data a little more than with raw X3 file. The plugin is similar to photopro.

I have been experimenting with the DRI plugin which lets you combine 2 exposures of the same photo (very quick and in 16bit) and the results are pretty amazing. I have compared these results with the new highlight and shadow feature in CS and the results while not as good as 2 exposures still better than I expected. The 10D does capture a lot of detail.

All and All I would say the 10D image quality is pretty simillar to the SD10 in terms of detail etc. The only real camera that stands out above the rest is the 1Ds. For ease of use and confidence with the white balance and metering the 10D win hands down.