Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Canon EOD D60 Image Quality W/ Canon USM Is Lenses  
User currently offlineMarco_Polo From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 324 posts, RR: 17
Posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3996 times:

I just have a general questions regarding D60 image quality when it comes Canon EOS USM Image Stabalizer lenses.

A) I was wondering if any other photographers out there are happy or impress with image quality pre-processing, no post-processing, when using USM Image Stabalizer either the 75-300mm or the 100-400mm. This is regardless whether you have the Image Stabalizer ON or OFF.

B) What are you thoughts on the Image quality comparison between D30 and D60 either RAW or uncompressed JPEG files.

Looking forward to hearing some of your input from the digital world folks.

Best Regards,

Jay Piboontum


18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3942 times:

Not sure what you're asking here Jay - I have a number of IS lenses and performance varies. The 300mm IS f4 is razor sharp, the 70-200 IS 2.8 is also very sharp for a zoom. The 100-400 IS is very good but not, as you might expect from a long zoom in the same class as the fixed 300. I'm not sure IS is at all a factor in the image quality apart from your ability to hold it still at slow shutter speeds.

IMHO all Canon files need post processing ... unless you tweak the camera settings, the standard image will be a little dark and a little soft - this is a good thing ... shadow and midtone detail is easily recovered in PS, whereas burned out highlights would be a disaster. Likewise, by leaving the image a little soft, sharpening artifacts and fringing are avoided - the images respond very well to USM in PS.

Out of camera, large/fine jpg and RAW are indistinguishable BUT, the RAW files are much more suited to post processing, so I think the final image is better.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offline2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3902 times:

I can't answer for the lenses, (using Sigma 170-500....wishing for a IS lens one of these days....)

I don't see the difference in post processing between the RAW and fine JPEG files. If the image was good out of the camera it sharpens up nicely as a JPEG. (as mentioned a little on the dark side, but easy to brighten up just a touch in PS elements...) 8X12 prints made at a local photo shop are incredible, all shot on fine/jpeg.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Zeljeznjak



Tony


User currently offline2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3898 times:

By the way....Those photos from LAX are INCREDIBLE!!!!

User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3879 times:

Jay,

No issues with the D60 and the 100-400 IS. As with Tony, they come out of the camera pretty nice and sharpen up a treat simply using something like 100, 0.8, 2 or maybe slightly more depending on the image. Fiddle with the levels a bit and you're in.

I also use the 100-400 IS with the Canon 1.4x extender, and this combo produces pretty good results too, albeit that the AF has a sense of humour failure and I need to cut over to MF (rotate the focus ring - ughh, thought I'd got away from that several years ago!)

Over 300 images shot over the weekend and I'm happy with pretty much all of them - I'll make sure the other screeners give me priority!  Big grin

Andy


User currently offlineMarco_Polo From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 324 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3858 times:

Guys:

Awesome inputs!!! O.k. Here is the kicker. I guess I am asking this questions because I just wanted to do a comparison. My friend Tim was shooting almost similar photos with me at LAX that day with Paul Paulsens and others. We both use uncompressed JPEG. I still have a D30 while he has upgrade his to a D60. When we downloaded the pictures JPEG raw and untouched. When you zoom in 1:1 ratio pictures, on his monitor you can see noises a redish / magenta kind of noise incorporated in the clear blue sky while mine on D30 there is no noticable noises. Now here is the kicker, when he switch over to RAW file which is outrageously large, and took the same pic with the same sky background, those noises no longer exists.

Now my questions to you guys. Have you guys seen this? If not, do you guys believe this might be a JPEG characterisitc or some other issues relating to internal software / hardware (CMOS). If you guys do see this noises in JPEG Large Uncompressed, are you concern?

If you guys like we can send a sample file to anyone who is interested in looking at the noises we are talking about.

Not trying to be knit picky but it does concerns me when I decide to upgrade my D30 to D60. If not I may have to choose an alternate EOS-1D which is a different review in itself. I will make that a discussion later.

Best Regards,

Jay Piboontum


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3837 times:

Jay,

I've just looked closely at a few fine/large jpegs produced by my D60 this last weekend and I see nothing in blue skies that concerns me.

If you are really concerned, I'd be happy to look at an image - maybe just a section where the red/magenta is apparent to save e-mail download time?

Andy


User currently offline2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3843 times:

I just took a look at some shots that I took yesterday at North Island. Nice clear blue sky, some with nice white clouds from storms out east and I see no noise in them at all. I even looked at them on my laptop and saw nothing. Maybe it is the monitor? (I can send you one of my files and you can see if it shows on your monitor...)

Tony


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3840 times:

Both shooting at ISO 100? Certainly noise will be discernable at ISO 200.

When the D60 was first released, there were comments on dpreview that some felt the D60 output wasn't quite as silky smooth as the D30. Can't say I see it myself, and I've shot with both - but admittedly not much in jpg.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineTpk From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 188 posts, RR: 13
Reply 9, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3835 times:

I'm the one with the noise. I've always shot ISO 100 and never had a problem when I had my D30. Then again, I was able to shoot Raw because the file sizes were significantly smaller.

I think I've hastily deleted all of the photos that had it really bad, but if I'm able to find one and you wouldn't mind looking at it Andy, I would really appreciate it. I'll let you know.

Hopefully I'll be able to solve the problem and allow Jay to feel comfortable gettting a D60 while improving my own photography.

Tim


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3836 times:

Tim,

Had another look at some jpegs... Still I can't see anything that remotely resembles your problem. I've tried looking in Photoshop, and directly through a browser. I've also zoomed up the image in Photoshop to 2x and 4x with no noticable discoloration.

If you do find an image, drop it to me on e-mail and I'll take a look.

Andy


User currently offlineMarco_Polo From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 324 posts, RR: 17
Reply 11, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3823 times:

Tim:

Send Andy, Tony, and Colin your suspected files. As Andy suggested, crop out the area of interested and send it. CC me also.

Best Regards,

Jay


User currently offlinePlanedoctor From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 286 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3816 times:

If you go to sites like fredmiranda.com, you will see reviews that suggest that the D60 does have a slight bit more noise in areas such as sky, even at low iso like iso 100 at 100% size. If you reduce a D60 size shot down to D30 size, you are obviously going to lose a lot of that noise and end up with an even cleaner image (although I don't know if iso 100 on the D30 can get any cleaner!). So what I am saying is: I think you get better image quality with the D60 than the D30 overall although at 100% crops there is a little more noise. Would this discourage me from getting the D60? I don't think so. However, if money were to allow I think I would ultimately prefer to go with the 1D or its successor (news of which is leaking out at the moment).


Just my view here!

-Ken


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Reply 13, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3803 times:

or its successor

My eyes are closed and hands over ears ... I don't want to know ... as Oscar Wilde said, I can resist anything except temptation  Smile

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offline2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3780 times:

Heres a stupid question....

Does the noice come out on prints made from digital shots? Or is it something that only shows on a monitor?

I have had several 8x12 prints made from my D60 (all shot at 100) and the colors are as true, clear and bright as any I have ever had from film.

Tony


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3785 times:

OK, I have been sent two cropped images by Tim. Here is my response to him:

----

Tim,

I must admit I am puzzled. Yes I can clearly see the artifacts.

I've tried the same process as you and I have to admit I see similar (though not so noticable) artifacts in a picture of mine.

However...

(1) they are not obviousy present in my original jpeg, only those saved by photoshop - even a crop represents a resave of the original image (yes?) so the only true original is the image out of the camera without a crop

(2) they are not noticable if the image is reduced to smaller sizes (i.e. 1024 pixels)

(3) they are not in any way noticable in a photo quality print from the full size original image at about 12x8 inches

I've not bothered to send my own findings (unless you really want to see them). However, I use broadly similar settings to you - 100 ISO, usually aperture priority F8.0, large fine, etc. on the Canon 100-400IS or 28-135.

The only conclusion I can draw at this moment is that the artifacts are put there by photoshop - I cannot see them in my image in the original jpegs captured by the camera without any processing/cropping/saving etc. I can only assume these artifacts are caused by the process of saving a jpeg as a second generation - as I say, even a crop followed by a save is a second generation, and therefore subject to some degredation. Maybe raw will work better?

You should ask Colin Work - ckw - he's an expert in such matters. Perhaps forward my comments, and maybe let me see what he has to say too.

Sorry I cannot be of more help,

Andy

----

Colin, I hope you don't mind me recommending your opinion!


User currently offlineMarco_Polo From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 324 posts, RR: 17
Reply 16, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3727 times:

So... Has anyone shot aircraft photography with Canon EOS 1D? How is your experience with the camera, handling, and quality?

Best Regards,

Jay


User currently offline737heavy From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2002, 601 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3706 times:

Canon 1Ds will be out soon, wonder what kind of quality that will be knocking out.

User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 63
Reply 18, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3692 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi all

Heard a rumor of a Canon EOS 3D in the pipeline....might be duff info though.

Regards

Gary Watt
Aberdeen, Scotland


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Experience With The Canon EF300 F4 L Is USM? posted Sat Feb 4 2006 16:31:30 by JK
Canon 28-300 Is USM Vs. 100-400 Is USM posted Wed Sep 28 2005 19:16:27 by Stefan
Canon 75-300 4-5.6 USM Is Lens Question posted Mon Jul 11 2005 19:44:20 by Madjones
Poor Results Canon 300 Mm L Is USM F4.0 Help! posted Mon Feb 21 2005 10:48:42 by LHRSIMON
An Used Canon 100-400L IS-USM posted Wed Aug 11 2004 23:54:06 by Volare
Opinions On Canon 75-300 Is USM posted Tue May 11 2004 15:23:18 by Danny
Opinions On Canon Is Lenses posted Sat Apr 24 2004 02:09:38 by Southpaw8669
Canon 75-300 USM Is Problem, Any Ideas? posted Sun Mar 21 2004 14:04:28 by Jkw777
Canon 100-400mm L Is USM For Airshow Photography posted Thu Mar 4 2004 03:43:53 by Maiznblu_757
Anyone Using The Canon 75-300 Is USM Lens? posted Sun Feb 22 2004 12:02:30 by Soren-a