10 Megapixel Cameras
10MP seems to be the minimum resolution for today's newest DSLR cameras. However, this does not mean that 10MP is entry level. Recent 10MP models include the Prosumer Canon 40D and the "Pro" Olympus E-3, as well as the entry Nikon D60, Olympus E420/E520 and Pentax K200D, and mid-level Panasonic L10 and Canon XTi. The four cameras here represent a cross-section of 10MP models, including a 1.5X, 1.6X, and two 2X (4/3) sensors. The Nikon D60 uses an older Sony CCD sensor and the other three models are CMOS technology.
Wherever possible the images were captured using a 50mm f/1.4 normal lens. This represents an equivalent 35mm focal length of 75mm for the Nikon D60, and 80mm for the Canon 40D. A 50mm on the 4/3 cameras would have an equivalent 100mm field-of-view so images were captured using the 35mm Olympus Macro lens, which is equivalent to 70mm. This lens was chosen because it is critically sharp wide-open and is in its best resolution range at the standard f/4.0 capture aperture.
All images were captured at the same f/4.0 aperture using a tripod in the same location. Focus was manual and the camera program selected the shutter speed. Lighting was a single 100-watt Tungsten bulb high right, and all cameras were set to the Tungsten preset.
Up to ISO 800 all four cameras are very similar in their resolution capabilities. One camera that stands out, however, is the Panasonic L10, which exhibits more "punch" with standard in-camera processing. However the extra sharpening and more vivid colors trade off noise as we are already seeing noise at ISO 800 along with the very sharpened image. This may have more to do with the target market of current point-and-shoot users than anything else. The E-3 is also a 4/3 sensor, but its rendering is more comparable to the Canon 40D, so the L10 performance cannot be attributed to the sensor alone.
You can also clearly see the differing approaches to image processing among the four camera makers. Some move toward a softer edge for a much smoother and less noisy appearance, and others go for sharp. The above images are default with the lowest selectable level of noise reduction. However, the appearance of the finished JPEG can be varied in all the cameras by selecting different sharpening, noise reduction color saturation, etc. in the menus for camera settings. You can set up the look to generally match what you prefer in you pictures.
By ISO 1600 the consumer cameras – the D60 and L10 – are starting to show the demands of much higher speed with increased noise. However the prosumer 40D and E3, even though they use different size sensors, are both holding up very well. By ISO 3200 you can clearly see the different approaches to sharpening and noise between the Canon and Olympus, which both use a CMOS sensor.
22 Comments
View All Comments
Wesley Fink - Tuesday, May 20, 2008 - link
The goal was to produce a fair comparison and as staed in the article we do have the TIFF files available. The purpose was never to show there is minimal difference in RAW and JPEG. As we were preparing to post there were concerns that the TIFFs, at 45mb each, might cripple our server as a direct image view "click to see". That is the ONLY reason we converted to Maximum JPEG format directly from the RAW file.Since there is some interest we will likely produce a ZIP of the TIFFS and create a download link on the RAW examples page.
Wesley Fink - Tuesday, May 20, 2008 - link
Another option would be to post a ZIP of the RAW files. The latest Adobe Camera RAW can handle the PEF format in either Photoshop CS3 or Elements 5 and 6. OR we could save in Adobe DNG format and the DNG files could be read in almost any recent Photoshop or Elements - but not other programs. If either of these is a preferred option please let us know in these comments and we will go with what readers want.pinto4402 - Tuesday, May 20, 2008 - link
A ZIP file of images in RAW or DNG format would be great. I don't think any other review site is doing this. Although I won't download them each time I read an article, I would absolutely look at them VERY carefully if I'm interested in a camera.pinto4402 - Tuesday, May 20, 2008 - link
For your sample images, have you thought about using a high quality mannequin head (sounds creepy, I know), or silk flowers? Although not perfect, this would be much preferable to the product boxes you’ve been using. This will allow you to precisely control your test protocol while at the same time obtaining useful information about the imaging capabilities of cameras being tested).Overall, your camera reviews are better than average and if you’re serious about it, why not make your testing as good as possible?
haplo602 - Tuesday, May 20, 2008 - link
"Serious photo hobbyists will also be facing difficult decisions today and even more so in the near future. The cost of larger and larger sensors has been dropping rapidly; and CMOS sensor development from all the sensor manufacturers is also a factor in lowering costs and increasing resolution. Like it or not Canon and Nikon have already begun segregating their SLR line into full-frame and APS-C sensors. Those who wondered why Sony was introducing mainly full-frame lenses will finally get their answer later this year with Sony's 24.6MP full-frame flagship model."This exactly makes me a happy film shooter :-) There's one disdvantage to full frame sensors however. They increase demand for full frame lenses and increase the prices for me :-(
Anyway good article. I'd have one comment and one request.
Comment: There was lots of heated discussion about your sample images (there is one again so far). Would be good if you could shoot manual with f/4.0 and whatever shutter reading for the selected ISO but same for all cameras to make the captured EV consistent. This should in theory lead to all images having same brightness. Of course that will vary by camera processing, but at least you get one more point you can compare from the same series of shots.
Request: Can you make an article on the processing path of different camera makes and sensors ? You covered the digital conversion so far, but the A/D part would be nice to have too. F.e how ISO is controlled (analog gain or digital interpolation) etc. Also explanation what a higher bit-depth sensor means (12 vs 16 bit sensor and A/D). I know these things are pretty basic, but this will create some common group which you can reference in the future and avoid stupid questions (well some of them at least).
7thSerapHim - Tuesday, May 20, 2008 - link
Does anyone agree that a better object with clearly defined lines and colors should be used instead, for the comparison crops?Most of the time these mass-produced product boxes have mediocre color matching and well-defined lines so it shouldn't be used as a 100% comparison crop.
The shots also seem to have a substantial amount of chromatic aberration, or maybe just due to pixel peeping, hmmm...
sprockkets - Tuesday, May 20, 2008 - link
JPEG compression control would be nice on the p&s. The Canon SD1000 has compression artifacts all over, thus making the pictures it takes look worse than a $90 Nikon.dblevitan - Tuesday, May 20, 2008 - link
There are two key advantages of RAW that you missed and that could be useful to even people who are slighly interested in improving images.First, RAW provides 12 or 14 bits/pixel while JPEG only provides 8 bits. This is extremely relevant if you edit at all in Photoshop/Lightroom because any kind of level adjustment (even auto) will cause more color degradation with an 8 bit image than with a 16 bit image (which is what the 12 bit RAW files are generally processed into).
Second, RAW provides a better chance of recovering improperly exposed images by allowing at least 1/2 stop of exposure correction without any penalty and often more without significant issues. With JPEG you simply won't get this.
Wesley Fink - Tuesday, May 20, 2008 - link
You are absolutely correct that while JPEG is 24 bits per pixel it is only 8 bits per color channel (red, green, blue). The Pentax K20D is specified as a 14-bit A/D processor.Photoshop and other processing software, as you point out, normally processes this in 16-bit. However, it really doesn't matter in the end how the program processed it or saved it, what matters is the input bit depth. Many are not aware of this, but Photoshop also processes JPEGS as 16-bit on more powerful computers, but this just speeds up processing because you start with 8-bit and save as 8-bit with JPEG. There is no real advantage processing 12-bit files as 16-bit except processing speed as you don't gain real resolution improvements.
I agree RAW SHOULD allow more dynamic range, but some of the newest models like the Nikon D300 can actually do just as well or better in dynamic range in JPEG. However, in general what you say is true although it is changing as the processing power in DSLRs is improving.
What we really need is a higher bit-width JPEG standard. Let's hope the JPEG standards committee is hard at work on just that.
Bull Dog - Monday, May 19, 2008 - link
Is it just me or is the third page missing?