canon image quality

tray271

tray271

Messages
103
Name
tracy
Edit My Images
Yes
anyone hear sick of cmos bayer sensor tech...I am ...ive been using the sigma Merrill cameras for a while now and just am stunned everytime I see the images..with canon making an announcement at photokina I was hoping for a foveon type sensor but have this feeling it going to be the usual better high iso blah blah.....nothing comes close for pure image quality with foveon but I just wish canon would do something that makes them sand out from the other manufactures....sony are atleast trying to give us something new ...please canon bring out a multi layer sensor with the quality of foveon and I will come back to you ...
 
Gary Coyle said:
You could just try going out and shooting instead of trying to implode your own brain
Click to expand...

Dude, it's a gear forum... a place where people talk about gear.

Tracy, Canon do seem to be behind the leading edge on image quality now but that may change in the future or they may go the way of Kodak, who knows? Foveon does seem to be very interesting and I expect that the big players are at least having a look at what is possible so who knows what the future may bring. At the moment though, the differences in image quality don't seem to be enough to sway people more than the whole package of camera, lens and accessories and abilities such as focus speed and even the brand.
 
Last edited:
seen the new sensor in the 7D mk2? The camera has been spotted getting trialed at the world cup
 
to me image quality matters more for the work I do ..and as for going out I go all around the world taking photos..all im saying is lets see better quality files...no bayer sensor comes near the Merrill and I have had the sony a7r ,Nikon d800e etc etc with zeis glass and its now all gone purely for the fact I cant stand the way the files look...yes if I needed fast focus it would be my 1dx with the canon 85mm 1.2 but that just sits in the cuboard
 
Interesting, what sort of work do you shoot that needs such high quality? Have you tried medium format?
 
Byker28i said:
Interesting, what sort of work do you shoot that needs such high quality? Have you tried medium format?
Click to expand...
I was thinking what kind of stuff does he shoot when he needs the fastest focussing but the 85mm 1.2lL does the trick ;)

I always thought it was a slow lens to focus compared to canons 2.8 zooms and primes.
 
tray271 said:
to me image quality matters more for the work I do ..and as for going out I go all around the world taking photos..all im saying is lets see better quality files...no bayer sensor comes near the Merrill and I have had the sony a7r ,Nikon d800e etc etc with zeis glass and its now all gone purely for the fact I cant stand the way the files look...yes if I needed fast focus it would be my 1dx with the canon 85mm 1.2 but that just sits in the cuboard
Click to expand...

I agree foveon style sensors should be the future (unless there is something even better about to be released). But I have to say there is nothing really wrong with 1Dx or D800 that makes them unusable or unable to reproduce the scene in acceptable way at the very least.

Phil V said:
I was thinking what kind of stuff does he shoot when he needs the fastest focussing but the 85mm 1.2lL does the trick ;)

I always thought it was a slow lens to focus compared to canons 2.8 zooms and primes.
Click to expand...

This is true, but probably 1Dx would make it perform a lot better than let's say 6D or 7D would. I wouldn't mind to try it out :)
 
daugirdas said:
...
This is true, but probably 1Dx would make it perform a lot better than let's say 6D or 7D would. I wouldn't mind to try it out :)
Click to expand...
hopefully you know as well as I do, that's complete nonsense.
 
tray271 said:
to me image quality matters more for the work I do ..and as for going out I go all around the world taking photos..all im saying is lets see better quality files...no bayer sensor comes near the Merrill and I have had the sony a7r ,Nikon d800e etc etc with zeis glass and its now all gone purely for the fact I cant stand the way the files look...yes if I needed fast focus it would be my 1dx with the canon 85mm 1.2 but that just sits in the cuboard
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends how you present and view the finished image.

Personally, just about any camera I've ever used has been good enough for me and all that separates them is ergonomics, tech stuff such as focus performance and higher ISO ability but actual image quality (other than the higher ISO's) has been good enough for me since my first DSLR.
 
bayer is fine, but its like a woman saying something is "fine" in comparison
foveon files look slightly different, as they are jammed with detail
 
yes ive been down the medium format route and yes it has some advantages ie dynamic range ...but the merrills are good for fine art work ,the detail is what I love ...im not a happy snapper and find the battery life ok ,yes its not great but I find I get 40 images and that s normally all I need as I take my time setting everything up..i just find the companys are making lots of money without improving the image quality ....the only reason I would go back to canon for all my work would be if it was close to foveon with the range of lenses it makes it more versatile that the sigma but as ive said the new 7d mk2 will concentrate on faster focus maybe dual cmos blah blah blah usual ...if im wrong I will eat my words..and foveon for trees ,leaves and fur does make the bayor sensor look rather poor to be honest...the 1dx is good for sports and being weather sealed has its advantages..i find the focus is lightning fast and the tracking is better than the 5d mk3 ...come on canon give us something that is a revalation not just a tiny update ...im not goin to use iso 100000000000000.9999.000 ..its just crazy
 
What is enter about the foveon images?.

Got any links to explain the benefits?
 
JBuk said:
What is enter about the foveon images?.

Got any links to explain the benefits?
Click to expand...

Bayer sensors capture only one colour at each pixel site, and adjacent colours are calculated. Foveon captures all three colours at each pixel, so claims 3x the effective resolution. It's not quite as simple as that, but estimates of 2x effective resolution appear realistic. That's the key advantage, but the main downside is by the time light has penetrated it's way down through the various colour filter layers to the bottom of the Foveon pixel well, there's not much brightness left. Basically, high ISO performance is compromised.

I believe Sigma holds the key Foveon patents. It would be interesting if one of the bigger players held them and had sunk some of the billions spent on Bayer development into Foveon. There's more to sensors than resolution and ISO and colour though. Power consumption, heat, video, switching capability (to potentially replace the mechanical shutter) and of course cost, are all major factors.
 
Gary Coyle said:
And on the 8th day God created.......................................................
Click to expand...

Medication? Take It. :D Chill. Accept that some people want to talk about gear in a gear forum.
 
Last edited:
tray271 said:
anyone hear sick of cmos bayer sensor tech...I am ...ive been using the sigma Merrill cameras for a while now and just am stunned everytime I see the images..with canon making an announcement at photokina I was hoping for a foveon type sensor but have this feeling it going to be the usual better high iso blah blah.....nothing comes close for pure image quality with foveon but I just wish canon would do something that makes them sand out from the other manufactures....sony are atleast trying to give us something new ...please canon bring out a multi layer sensor with the quality of foveon and I will come back to you ...
Click to expand...
The Sigma Merrell IQ above ISO 400 is pretty poor isn't it??
 
HoppyUK said:
Bayer sensors capture only one colour at each pixel site, and adjacent colours are calculated. Foveon captures all three colours at each pixel, so claims 3x the effective resolution.
Click to expand...


It's just as honest as the claimed resolution of a Bayer arranged sensor. A 'normal' 12MP sensor has 6 million green sensors, 3 million blue sensors and 3 million red sensors. That's not 12 million full colour sensors any more than the Foveon sensor is.


Steve.
 
As for the original point, I've not found anything wrong with the IQ my 6d produces.
 
Steve Smith said:
It's just as honest as the claimed resolution of a Bayer arranged sensor. A 'normal' 12MP sensor has 6 million green sensors, 3 million blue sensors and 3 million red sensors. That's not 12 million full colour sensors any more than the Foveon sensor is.
Click to expand...

The key thing to remember is pixels do not equal sensor sites. A 12MP sensor produces images with 12 million pixels and that's all that's claimed by the manufacturer. How the sensor does this, how many light receiving "sites" it has and whether each one senses a single colour or multiple isn't relevant to the MP rating of the sensor.
 
Exactly... but salesmen like big numbers so they count up everything they can and claim it in the advertising.

It's even worse with audio amplifiers. The true way to measure the power is RMS (root mean square) however, if you use a peak value, you can double the figure. And if you invent something which has nothing to do with how it will work in the real world and call it Instantaneous Peak Power, you can double the figure again.

Guess which figure the salesman will use!


Steve.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
As for the original point, I've not found anything wrong with the IQ my 6d produces.
Click to expand...

Well, quite. And in the quest for improved image quality, that's much more easily achieved by the inherent advantages of a physically larger sensor - better sharpness, improved dynamic range, higher ISO.

There's a lot more to it than just squillions of pixels. Take the Nikon D800 with 36mp, it's not easy to actually maximise that sensor's potential in terms of sheer resolution. Making the most of it requires a very high quality lens, at optimum aperture, on a tripod with mirror lock-up. Most users won't achieve that very often, but the other upsides of full-frame are always there, easy to access, and easy to see.
 
Last edited:
tray271 said:
the battery life ok ,yes its not great but I find I get 40 images
Click to expand...

40?! Is that with the lemon battery or the potato battery? Seriously 40? 4-0? I can spot you a film camera and a couple of rolls of film if life's that depressing.
 
tray271 said:
.all im saying is lets see better quality files...no bayer sensor comes near the Merrill and I have had the sony a7r ,Nikon d800e etc etc with zeis glass and its now all gone purely for the fact I cant stand the way the files look...yes if I needed fast focus it would be my 1dx with the canon 85mm 1.2 but that just sits in the cuboard
Click to expand...


Challenge accepted.

Post up a full res image from your Merrill please.... choose the one you feel best represents this quality you discuss. Preferably an un-retouched RAW file.
 
Last edited:
40 images might mean he has the camera on a lot but doesn't shoot much, you can get over 100 shots if you timelapse with quick interval.

you can find lots of comparisons and sample shots online, and its not hard at all to get super pinsharp results like in the samples....

vs a 6d then its about 50% extra detail to the dp, maybe more if the canon has average len or wrong micro adjust, or shake, leaf shutter of the dp is very qiute and doesn't shake camera like a focal plane, and mirror
 
I'm not sure what the fuss is about with the Merrill sensor. After reading this thread and actually, before this came up I considered one as a little light walkabout (I love primes, and had considered a Fuji x100) after the price drop. But having seen a set of images, I'm not that impressed. Granted they were only sample images and we could all probably take better photographs than the samples, but really, at the moment, I'll stick with my 6d and a 35mm for a small(ish), light walkabout setup.
 
Last edited:
The real world is full high quality beautiful photographs..
only a tiny proporton of them were taken on a foveon sensor

All sensor technology is a compromise as are the algorithms used to get the best out of them.
The measure of sucess is in the images produced, not some perceived particular technical advantage.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
The real world is full high quality beautiful photographs..
only a tiny proporton of them were taken on a foveon sensor

All sensor technology is a compromise as are the algorithms used to get the best out of them.
The measure of sucess is in the images produced, not some perceived particular technical advantage.
Click to expand...
Absolutely...

But this would make all equipment fora redundant.
 
tray271 said:
to me image quality matters more for the work I do ..and as for going out I go all around the world taking photos..all im saying is lets see better quality files...no bayer sensor comes near the Merrill and I have had the sony a7r ,Nikon d800e etc etc with zeis glass and its now all gone purely for the fact I cant stand the way the files look...yes if I needed fast focus it would be my 1dx with the canon 85mm 1.2 but that just sits in the cuboard
Click to expand...

What glass were you using on a D800E that couldn't outperform the Sigma DPM? I have both a Sigma DPM and a D800 and the D800 is better in IQ.
 
Especially over 400 ISO. That renders the Merrill out if the equation for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top