Tom, Canon has had to make tradoffs as well. They went with larger sensors (FF and 1.3x crop)on the higher-end bodies to get lower noise and higher resolution, at the cost of poor edge performance with wide angles on the FF bodies (Primarily a lens issue, although Digital is more sensitive to edge performance than film is due to sensor wells) and a lack of ultra-wides on the 1.3x bodies. On the lower-end bodies they've chosen to use their resolution advantage (in the 8MP vs 6MP days) to permit more agressive noise reduction, at the occasional cost of unnatural colour in certain cases. It seems that the noise reduction on the 10MP bodies is similar between the D80 and Rebel XTi (At least with the D80 at defaults, as its high-ISO noise reduction is configurable, the XTi's is not).
There's always tradoffs. Always. -Adam Tom C wrote: > I agree with that in principle, but the issue here as I read it, is one of > the sensor making this an issue because of high noise levels that were not a > concern in the 6MP models. > > In other words, I expected that image qualiy would get better in the new > body across the board, not that their would be tradeoffs. > > It seems Canon at least (don't know about Nikon) has been able to > continually increase sensor resolution while continuing to keep noise to a > low level. > > > Tom C. > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: K10D aimed as D200 killer > Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:31:02 -0500 > > The issue here is whether or not the camera should do any non-reversable > processing such as sharpening or noise reduction. Nikon has decided to > make it configurable on the D80, and set the defaults to what's > appropriate for P&S use, while Pentax has chosen to make its defaults > more appropriate for post-processing. > > I prefer Pentax's approach. It gives me more control over rendering, and > does not reduce the level of information in the image (which noise > reduction does). > > -Adam > > > Tom C wrote: > > In my mind it's difficult to understand the difference between > > sharpness/unsharpness/detail and noise. It seems to me that an image > > considered to be sharp, yet with a lot of noise, is in reality not sharp > > and/or contains less detail because the noise is itself replacing detail > > that would otherwise be there. > > > > Noisy picture = Yucky picture. > > > > > > Tom C. > > > > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > > From: Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: K10D aimed as D200 killer > > Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:09:23 -0800 > > > > My comment at end. (Caution: Some of you wll hate it. You may not want > > to read it.) > > > > ----- > > > > Remember the reviews of the *istD? It got beaten up because Pentax > > decided to make soft pictures strait out of the box. I was not part of > > the list then, but I imagine many talking about this being better > > because it left the decision to the photographer. > > > > As I understand it, it's the same with noise vs. details. > > > > > > Tim > > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > In addition, requiring the the user to do even more in post-processing > > to try to correct for what could be viewed as a camera short-coming, > > strikes me as a cop out. I already don't use the *ist D for anything > > serious over ISO 800. I don't want additional post-processing work, > > that may or may not correct the situation on an image-by-image basis. > > > > Tom C. > > > > ----- > > At dpreview I just found a translation of a interview with Hisashi > > Tatamiya, who has been leading the K10D project. > > > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=20671456 > > > > ----- > > > > I believe Pentax made the right decision in regard to high ISO noise. > > Image sharpness is retained, if you can figure out a way to reduce noise > > in PP without softening the image. But Nikon may have been smarter > > marketing-wise. > > > > Pentax would have been criticized whichever way they went. Popular > > Photography's review of the D80 praised it for low noise at high ISO, > > completely forgetting to mention that the D80 achieves this at the cost > > of soft images. When Pop reviews the K10D, they will complain that it > > compares poorly to the D80 in high ISO noise. And readers who don't know > > any better will believe that that is the final word. > > > > Reading between the lines of the summary of the interview, Mr. Tatamiya > > is (it seems to me) saying two things: (1) there will be noise at high > > ISO and you may not like it, and (2) its your problem. None of this is a > > surprise. The sensor is known to be noisy at high ISO, and I suspected > > that Pentax would choose a middle course between Nikon and Sony. I just > > hope that images will be useable at ISO 800. If they are, I'll be > > satisfied. But I am not expecting this. > > > > Herb Chong contacted me off-list, and suggested something I had not > > heard before. According to Herb, the rule of thumb for good image > > quality is two steps above the base ISO. This matches my experience with > > the D, which is fine at 800, but (to my eye) not at 1600. If this rule > > of thumb holds for the 10 mp sensor, then ISO 400 will be the point > > above which we can expect image quality to decline noticeably due to > noise. > > > > (Actually, the paragraph above assumes that all else is equal--like > > pixel density. Since the K10D has a higher pixel density, one may expect > > the loss of an additional step due to inherently higher noise. Combining > > (1) lower base ISO, and (2) smaller pixel size, the K10D could > > conceiveably yield noticeable degradation in image quality above ISO > > 200. But Nikon seems to get good image quality without softening at ISO > > 400, so I believe we will too.) > > > > Joe > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
