Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 30, 2007, 8:45 AM   #1
Senior Member
philgib's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 169

Oups. PLs read "Could EOS30DOWNERS comment these beta EOS40D pics ?".


Of course the EOS40D has some technical improvements, but img quality wise, would you guys pls comment on sharpness compared to the EOS30D ?

Thereare some pics taken with the 70-200 4L,this is what interests me the most.

Many thx


philgib is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 30, 2007, 9:13 AM   #2
JohnG's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529


You're not going to see an improvement in sharpness in general. You should see less noise at higher ISOs (which means better IQ), you're also going to have more cross type focus points which means if you use focus points other than the center point you'll get more accurate focusing - which equates to sharper photos more often. This benefit is going to be realized more at lower light levels and with wider apertures though. So if you're shooting a lot of 40mm f11 shots in bright sunny days you probably wouldn't notice any difference whatsoever.

But back to sharpness - sharpness is more often than not a factor of the LENS not the camera. The camera applies processing when creating JPEG compression. But that processing is customizable to increase/decrease the amount of in-camera sharpening.

IMO, sharpness is not a criteria you can really grade one current DSLR body against another. I think color, noise profile, white balance performance are all IQ attributes that are more relevant when looking from one body to another.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 30, 2007, 9:30 AM   #3
Senior Member
philgib's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 169

Thanks JohnG,

I value your posts.

About "sharpness". I can understand that lensreallymakes the difference.

Nevertheless, since I only know about p&S, i have seen some better Jpeg post-processing on older cameras than newer one for the same brand (thus a different "sharpness", that is why I am just wondering about DSLRs.

I have never had RAW before. I am sure I am going to use it, but maybe not al the time. Maybe I should :-)


philgib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 2007, 6:50 AM   #4
Super Moderator
Mark1616's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,456

Seriously RAW is not needed for the majority of peoples work. Like JohnG I shoot a lot of sports and only ever use jpg for this (the same as the pros in the big leagues), it is only when doing weddings and portraits that I go for RAW.

As for sharpness, John is right, it is nearly all going to come from the lens, even a 350D gives lovely results with good glass on so the 40D should be top notch.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:50 AM.