Compared to...

Studio scene comparison (RAW)

For a (more) level playing field for comparison we also shot our studio scene in RAW mode with each camera and converted it using Adobe Camera RAW. Because Adobe Camera RAW applies different levels of sharpening to different cameras (this confirmed) we had to use the following workflow for these conversions:

  • Load RAW file into Adobe Camera RAW (Auto mode disabled)
  • Set Sharpness to 0 (all other settings default)
  • Open file to Photoshop
  • Apply a Unsharp mask: 80%, Radius 1.0, Threshold 0
  • Save as a TIFF (for cropping) and as a JPEG quality 11 for download

This is our standard studio scene comparison shot taken from exactly the same tripod position. Lighting: daylight simulation, >98% CRI. Crops are 100%. Ambient temperature was approximately 22°C (~72°F). Camera settings as per previous pages.

And, so that you can try subjecting the images to your own noise reduction and image processing workflow, you can download the following RAW files:

Pentax K2000 (K-m) vs. Canon EOS 1000D (Rebel XS)

Pentax K2000 (RAW)
Canon EOS 1000D (RAW)
3.2 MB JPEG (3872 x 2592 )
3.2 MB JPEG (3888 x 2592 )

Trying to assess the underlying image quality, once you've removed the influence of the in-camera processing, the K2000 does a better job against the 1000D. The image isn't quite so sharp but they are similarly detailed, with a slight edge going to the Pentax. Which makes the dissappointing JPEGs even harder to understand: if the sensor is capturing at least as much detail as the Canon, why does it need such crude sharpening to convey that detail in JPEG?