My Review about canon 500d
Sunday, September 6, 2009
I guess it is safe to assume that the expected 15 MP sensor of the 500D would be quite similar if not the same as that of the 50D. So I just compared the “noise sample shots” of the 40D, 50D, and 450D at dpreview.
Visible noise on the “gray patches” of the 450D is worse than 50D at ISO 1600, but I would also say that the 50D’s ISO 3200 is worse than the 450D’s ISO 1600… same for 800 on the 450D vs. 1600 on the 50D. So we cannot expect a full stop gain in shutter speeds without additional noise.
And this is even before taking the impact of noise reduction on fine detail into account: While the 100% crops of the “queen’s head” used by dpreview of course has a larger magnification on the 50D due its increased resolution, it appears to me that visible detail is actually worse in the 50D, even when comparing shots at the same ISO speed!
Of course this could be due to a slightly different test setup (the two cameras were not tested directly against each other).
Comparing 40D with 450D, I’d say 450D clearly wins. While “grey patch” noise is worse at 1600, a lot of fine detail is actually preserved on the “queen’s head”, making it look better than that of the 40D.
Well, its of course a lot of speculation trying to judge from the 50D to the 500D, but I doubt that at the same resolution the 500D is any better than the 50D.
@Gusto: AF micro adjustment would indeed be interesting… but in its current implementation in the 50D, 5D Mk. II, and 1Ds Mk. III you can — AFAIK — only set a single AF offset value for all focal ranges. But often lenses tend to missfocus differently at different range. So I’d rather prefer to have well-calibrated lenses out of the box. :-)
@Calvin: I guess the added value of the xxD is more in improved or “more professional” user interface, more rugged body, some basic weather sealing (IIRC), and of course AF precision and speed. That’s why we probably won’t have more cross sensors than the center one in any xxxD anytime soon.
[get this widget]
Visible noise on the “gray patches” of the 450D is worse than 50D at ISO 1600, but I would also say that the 50D’s ISO 3200 is worse than the 450D’s ISO 1600… same for 800 on the 450D vs. 1600 on the 50D. So we cannot expect a full stop gain in shutter speeds without additional noise.
And this is even before taking the impact of noise reduction on fine detail into account: While the 100% crops of the “queen’s head” used by dpreview of course has a larger magnification on the 50D due its increased resolution, it appears to me that visible detail is actually worse in the 50D, even when comparing shots at the same ISO speed!
Of course this could be due to a slightly different test setup (the two cameras were not tested directly against each other).
Comparing 40D with 450D, I’d say 450D clearly wins. While “grey patch” noise is worse at 1600, a lot of fine detail is actually preserved on the “queen’s head”, making it look better than that of the 40D.
Well, its of course a lot of speculation trying to judge from the 50D to the 500D, but I doubt that at the same resolution the 500D is any better than the 50D.
@Gusto: AF micro adjustment would indeed be interesting… but in its current implementation in the 50D, 5D Mk. II, and 1Ds Mk. III you can — AFAIK — only set a single AF offset value for all focal ranges. But often lenses tend to missfocus differently at different range. So I’d rather prefer to have well-calibrated lenses out of the box. :-)
@Calvin: I guess the added value of the xxD is more in improved or “more professional” user interface, more rugged body, some basic weather sealing (IIRC), and of course AF precision and speed. That’s why we probably won’t have more cross sensors than the center one in any xxxD anytime soon.
[get this widget]
0 Comments:
Powered by Blogger Tutorials
