Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 9, 2005, 7:11 PM   #11
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

the great thing about canon is that they use the same image processors (now the digic II) for a given generation of cameras no matter what line, beit prosumer or pro, it is in.. everyone wins!!
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2005, 9:58 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I was about to disagree with Hards80, but then I realized I didn't know.
I really wonder if the noise reduction is only done in the Digic II. I was under the impression that that is really just the processor, and didn't have the "firmware" burn into it. So it would be possible for two cameras to use the same "processor" & sensors and have different noise patterns/quality/amount/whatever.

It is my understanding that the noise is less in the 1D MkII, but not good enough that someone who really cared about quality would use 400ISO. So, to me (I considered getting a MkII) I wouldn't gain any ISO because the 20D's 200ISO is usable, but the 400ISO isn't good enough without noise reduction. The MkII is the same way.

But that is a statement about me as much as the camera. Maybe your standards are such that 400ISO would be acceptable.

So I agree with Hards80, you should really get the Mkii for other things (some of which are listed above, and in many more are listed in some reviews on the web.)

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 10, 2005, 1:15 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 175
Default

eric s wrote:
Quote:
I was about to disagree with Hards80, but then I realized I didn't know.
I really wonder if the noise reduction is only done in the Digic II. I was under the impression that that is really just the processor, and didn't have the "firmware" burn into it. So it would be possible for two cameras to use the same "processor" & sensors and have different noise patterns/quality/amount/whatever.

It is my understanding that the noise is less in the 1D MkII, but not good enough that someone who really cared about quality would use 400ISO. So, to me (I considered getting a MkII) I wouldn't gain any ISO because the 20D's 200ISO is usable, but the 400ISO isn't good enough without noise reduction. The MkII is the same way.

But that is a statement about me as much as the camera. Maybe your standards are such that 400ISO would be acceptable.

So I agree with Hards80, you should really get the Mkii for other things (some of which are listed above, and in many more are listed in some reviews on the web.)

Eric
The control of noise is not only effected by the processor, but the size of the pixels. The bigger the pixels, the better the image will usually be. That is why point and shoot digital cameras, with their tiny sensors and tiny pixels, don't go above ISO400 (and even that speed is usually pretty noisy). The first part of this article explains it well:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...5d_or_20d.html

I agree that there are more compelling reasons to go to a 1 series body other than image quality or noise control, but even after seeing this graph, I would be more inclined to choose the MkII on any level, as the more usable ISO range (200-800) is quite a bit less noisy on the MkII compared to the 20D.
ChrisDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 10, 2005, 7:52 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Oh, I fully agree that the larger photosites on the sensor reduces the noise. I know that very well. Someone wondered if the noise in the MkII N would be better than the MkII. The answer is... no one except Canon employees know, but it probably doesn't. It could, as there is a software component to noise reduction, along with a hardware component (more than then just the sensor.) Canon does an amazing job of adding more and more MP (which means smaller and smaller photosites) yet the noise in the images is either very similar or lower. Therefor, you must (obviously!) conclude that side of the photosite is not the dominate factor in noise reduction. My guess is there is other components in the sensor that help reduce noise, which just don't fit in a smaller sensor. (That is, obviously, just speculation.)

My point is that it doesn't really matter why the noise is lower. I understand why, but in reality it doesn't make a different. What matters is the results. For me (and I have high standards) ISO 400 on the MkII (and probably the MkII N) isn't "better enough" than the 20D so that I would use it on a regular basis. ISO400 is better, but I still have to apply noise reduction, which can loose detail and increases processing time.

The instant Canon releases a One series camera that offers ISO400 with similar noise as ISO200 on the 20D, and I'll buy it on the spot ( I expect it to cost around $4,000USD.) It would improve my photography that much.

That is the same question that BarkerWR should ask of himself, if he cares.
Is the improved image quality enough to justify the cost? Is the better AF, improved metering modes, weather sealing, longer battery life, dual memory cards,... worth the money.

Except for the noise issues, for me, it is almost worth it. But I'm holding out for even better, because I expect the next one to have it. What I worry about is if they combine it with the 1Ds MkII. I don't want full frame. Heck, I don't want 1.3x frame, I really like the 1.6x of the 20D. But I know that I won't get 1.6x... so that is life.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2005, 9:06 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

i'll let you all know after friday. i'll have one in hand for a little bit of fun at a canon invite presentation show in NYC at the Javits center.

as was said the camera is 2x the weight of a 20D. i hauled my 1D2around NZ and AU (1Ds2 DOA at Canon for an imager) most of August with the othere essentials to make me work and i am feeling my age somewhat after that little escapade.


sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2005, 9:39 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I look forward to hearing what you think of it.
Make sure to take some pictures that include dark and light areas. I want to know if they've improved the dark noise issues that all the Canon DSLRs have to some extent.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 13, 2005, 9:41 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

got a bright and shiney brand new sandisk 2gb E3 card just for that if they allowme to plug it inthat is.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 15, 2005, 12:48 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 7
Default

Thanks for the advice. The AF is a BIG seller for me. I have been doingÂ* a lot more sports lately and the 20D's AF is pretty poor at that from what I've seen. The other features are definitely nice too especially it being more rugged becuase I do photojournalism and I tend to be a little rough at times with my equipment. The noise isn't a huge problem. I just wanted to make sure that I'm not going to end up with something even noisier. As long as it matches or beats the 20D, it would please me. On a separate note, I'm looking to get an ultra-wide zoom, better than my 17-40. I know it's going to be a smidge wider on the MKIIN but does anyone else have anything to recommend like the Sigma 12-24, etc? F/2.8 would be nice. Thanks!
BarkerWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 15, 2005, 1:52 PM   #19
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

AF poor on a 20d? hmm... news to me..

sure the 1dmkii/n will be a little better thanks to its 45 point AF, but don't expect any miracles over the 20d..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 15, 2005, 11:02 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

When you say you want something "Better" than the 17-40... in what way? Optically? Wider? Faster? Better build?

Optically it is very good, so you might have trouble beating it. The build quality is very good (I feel.) Obviously there are faster and wider.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:53 PM.