John Setzler’s picture comparison

05/29/2004 07:44:26 PM · #1

I am still analyzing John Setzler's picture comparison.
I am looking at ISO 200 right now.
10D ISO 200 //www.pbase.com/image/28546492
D70 ISO 200 //www.pbase.com/image/28893895

My observations are as follow:
10D: sharper, brighter, more contrast, more yellow,less 'spots' on the sky

D70: softer, duller,more bluish,wider lens, different appearance of the head of the lamps (stars around the lamps)

Do you agree with me, or is it just my screen?

Which is the more natural presentation of the reality, only John knows.
My question : is it possible to achieve exactly the same appearance of the D70 picture as the 10D one using editing software or by changing the settings in the camera? (John, what is the exif info for the D70 shot?)

Art

Message edited by author 2004-05-29 19:49:03.

fsteddy

05/29/2004 08:10:33 PM · #2

I agree with you. The 10D has a much more pleasing look to the image.This is just my opinion and it is not just because I have a Canon.

05/29/2004 08:40:14 PM · #3

My conclusions of the comparison are as follows:

1. The D70 has a better auto white balance than the 10d does. The color representation of the actual scene was better reproduced right out of camera with the nikon.

2. The softness/sharpness of the image can't really be applied to the camera itself. However, I used my Canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM and my dad used the Nikkor 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 lens. Based on this, we could possibly assume that Canon lens is sharper than the Nikkor counterpart.

3. This test was done to compare ISO noise levels. The Canon appears to win at higher ISO settings.

These shots were setup on tripods, side by side and the composition was almost identical for both cameras. Both sets of shots were done at the 28mm end of the lenses. Each shot was also done at the same exposure settings, so the EXIF data for the nikon shots would match those on the 10D.

05/29/2004 09:15:17 PM · #4

Thanks John for the clarification. Most of the time I try to use low ISO. Now I am testing my friend's D70, and I am thinking about borrowing a Canon 10D or Rebel, since they have the same sensor. In the store they told me that the Canon sensor doesn't attract as much dust as the Nikons. Is it true?
Art

Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM for Canon EOS

05/29/2004 09:21:40 PM · #5

Originally posted by artvet:

I have no clue. I would go back and ask them how they know this...

Pioneer

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

05/29/2004 09:24:08 PM · #6

Originally posted by artvet:

I would like to see the difference if any between these two, as they are what I am looking to buy next, and I am leaning towards the Canon, and after seeing these two pictures compared the Canon looks clearer to me, but what do I know LOL

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

05/29/2004 09:47:14 PM · #7

Originally posted by Pioneer:

Having played with the Nikon D70 and the Canon Rebel extensively, I would suggest the Nikon. High ISO noise only becomes an issue in low light situations where faster shutter speeds may be required. If your low light situation doesn't need to stop motion, either camera would work equally well. I believe that the feature set offered on the Nikon D70 is far superior to the Rebel.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

05/29/2004 11:23:48 PM · #8

I'm wondering if comparisons should be made between images made with the same iso setting, as they may really be different sensitivities since the Canon and the Nikon start their iso scales at different settings. To me, the Nikon iso 200 looks slightly less exposed than the Canon iso 200, especially in the more distant areas of the scene, which are recording as darker areas, and where you are going to get more noise. Maybe the Canon iso 100 should be compared with the Nikon iso 200?

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

05/30/2004 12:04:19 AM · #9

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

If your low light situation doesn't need to stop motion, either camera would work equally well.

Do you mean the option of 1/500 synchronization on Canon?

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

I believe that the feature set offered on the Nikon D70 is far superior to the Rebel.

I didn't need a manual to figure out how to use the D70. It is really nice and fast, but the picture output, didn't meet my expectations. On Monday I am going to McBain Camera to check out the Rebel. It is $1349 for the kit, compared to $1899 for the D70. If the Rebel is good enough for me, the rest I can spend on accesories. And if my expensive hobby progresses, in a few years I may go for more expensive cameras, like D1 Mark II. My F601 with lense and B24 flash has an estimated value of $220 in trade. So, I don' think it is worth to be stuck with Nikon.

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

Maybe the Canon iso 100 should be compared with the Nikon iso 200?

I don't think you can or should compare Canon ISO 100 with Nikon ISO 200. Obviously, the Canon ISO 100 is much better.

Art

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

05/30/2004 12:53:05 AM · #10

I'm just saying that it appears to me that the exposures, though set at the same settings for both the Canon and Nikon, do not appear to me to be equal (almost), especially in the distant areas of the scene on the left side of the photo. I would imagine that this would have some bearing on the noise levels and that your comparisons may not truly be justified. Not 100% sure, just bringing up the issue.

I'm not even sure how prudent it is to compare images not only from camera backs of different manufacterers, but from different lenses, which may have different numbers of elements and groupings. Just thinking out loud.

Originally posted by artvet:

Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Maybe the Canon iso 100 should be compared with the Nikon iso 200?

I don't think you can or should compare Canon ISO 100 with Nikon ISO 200. Obviously, the Canon ISO 100 is much better.

Art

Message edited by author 2004-05-30 00:56:44.

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

05/30/2004 01:06:30 AM · #11

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

I'm not even sure how prudent it is to compare images not only from camera backs of different manufacterers, but from different lenses, which may have different numbers of elements and groupings. Just thinking out loud.

How else would you compare ISO noise between two different cameras? This test I did was for no other reason than to see the differences. Everything I read about CMOS vs CCD says that CCD is less noisy than CMOS, but I believed it was wrong based on the results I have seen from Canon. You can't put a nikon lens on a canon camera and vice versa.

High ISO noise is just ONE aspect of camera comparisons. I also don't want to seem like I'm pushing Canon in this comparison either. Canon wins in the ISO noise arena. The Nikon D70 wins over the Rebel in about every other aspect as far as I'm concerned. Go do a side by side comparison of the two camera feature sets on dpreview and see what you think.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

05/30/2004 01:38:20 AM · #12

Maybe a fair comparison of the two systems can't really be made. Like comparing apples and oranges. Different glass, different metering systems, etc, although I'm not 100% sure of how those variables would have an impact on noise levels. Is ISO the only factor in noise level? I have also read that ccds should show less noise than cmos so maybe Canon is applying some sort of in-camera processing?

Just curious, how did you meter this scene and if you used in-camera metering, did the two cams give similar results?

Nikon AF-S DX 18-105 f/3.5-5.6 ED VR

05/30/2004 02:21:47 AM · #13

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

How the scene was metered is basically irrelevant, but here is how we did it....

I took an average matrix reading with my 10d at ISO 100 and we used that as our base reading. Once we had that info, the rest was simple. We were shooting in manual mode. So each time we increased the ISO setting, we compensated the exposure by adjusting the shutter speed. To go from ISO 100 to ISO 200 and maintain the same level of exposure, you simply double the shutter speed. You double it again to go to ISO 400... double that again to go to ISO 800... etc... etc...

I could be wrong, but I can't think of a better way to compare ISO noise levels on two different cameras. The only possible improvement in this procedure would have been to have two identical 3rd party lenses (sigma,tamron,tokina,etc).... one with a canon mount and one with a nikon mount. Doing this would have probably eliminated any difference created by the lens, but I seriously doubt that the lens itself contributes much to ISO noise. If there is any contribution from the lens, it would be the sharpness factor. A sharper image would make the ISO noise appear to be worse.

Whether the comparison is 'fair' or not is basically a moot point. If the CCD is indeed more noise free than CMOS, I would love for someone to show me real life examples of how it is so. My conclusion on the reading I have done that indicates that CCD is cleaner than CMOS is that the writings were done before Canon introduced its current system of CMOS and the DIGIC processor. You may be right in one aspect... The Canon DIGIC processor may be attenuating noise. If this is so, then the CCD may indeed be 'cleaner' than the CMOS. Regardless, these images speak more loudly than any technical writing that may disagree with the end result :)

dhare

Nikon D7000

05/30/2004 02:48:16 AM · #14

I'd be interested to know if you used RAW data modes on both cameras, or JPG ?

I have noticed quite a difference between JPG and RAW quality on the D70.

kreybar

Nikon D70

05/30/2004 04:05:19 AM · #15

Another question : What was the white balnce setting for the Nikon ? IMO , on a limb here : Is there a color temp difference between the two ? The canon image appears warmer . Look at the bushes at the base of the lamps & the flowers : were they orange or yellow ? Also , notice the difference in detail at the base of the bulbs.CMOS vs. CCD ? By doubling the aperture are you compesating for the difference in size & speed between the two ? Or temperature?
I have to agree with John about the feature's advantage of the D70 and add that it appears that Nikon has given us an awful lot of post-processing latitude in the images from the D70 . Where's Gordon for the technical explanations ? LOL !

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

05/30/2004 05:40:28 AM · #16

I have 2 reasons why to buy Canon:
More lenses (better quality too ) to choose from !
Less sensor noise!
Colors and white balance can be fixed later with Photoshop....

Message edited by author 2004-05-30 05:45:05.

kreybar

Nikon D70

05/30/2004 06:00:37 AM · #17

And 2 words by Phil Askey ; "Silky Smooth" that caused me so much frustration in my decision of Canon/Nikon,LOL.It's a personal decision for each to make but I'll go back to what John said about the features .The lack of startup time ,buffer speed & the ability to spot meter & focus with that little AE/AF lock button was what got me .Now I gotta go watch the sun come up .

Davenit

Canon EOS-1D

05/30/2004 08:34:46 AM · #18

Originally posted by pitsaman:

I have 2 reasons why to buy Canon:
More lenses (better quality too ) to choose from !
Less sensor noise!
Colors and white balance can be fixed later with Photoshop....

Nikons Glass is legendary. Their 200-400 f4 (if you can find one) goes for ENORMOUS bucks. Nikons top glass matches up evenly with Canons.

In the right hands either camera can have brilliant results in any situation...

Dave

05/30/2004 11:37:39 AM · #19

I used JPG mode on the Nikon and Raw on the Canon. Both were set to auto white balance.

05/30/2004 12:04:01 PM · #20

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

I used JPG mode on the Nikon and Raw on the Canon. Both were set to auto white balance.

Why not both JPGs or both RAWs?

05/30/2004 12:29:41 PM · #21

Originally posted by artvet:

Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I used JPG mode on the Nikon and Raw on the Canon. Both were set to auto white balance.

Why not both JPGs or both RAWs?

In reality, they were both JPG files. I extracted the embedded JPG from the Canon raw file rather than processing the raw file itself. I took all of this into consideration when I set this up and I shot in such a way that the images would be as close as possible.

timj351

Sony DSC-F707

05/30/2004 03:48:25 PM · #22

John, I agree with everything you have said except for the part where you said "A sharper image would make the ISO noise appear to be worse". Whether you produce a sharp image or not it will not effect the noise in the original image. Only the amount of sharpening applied to the image 'after' the image is taken will either decrease or increase the noise. Proof of this is that there is just as much noise in a blurred background as there is in the sharpest parts of the image.

T