![]() At least, to my eyes, it still seems like the GH2 and GX1 are resolving more fine detail than the 1Ds II, with identical noise performance. Wow – that’s interesting! At base ISO, the light noise reduction has eliminated the fine grain noise present in the Micro 4/3 shots, while leaving detail essentially untouched. The following are the crops with noise reduction tweaked to yield a similar final level of fine detail (only showing base ISO and 1600 and higher):Ĭamera Base ISO, with noise reduction – Click to Enlarge ISO 1600 with noise reduction – Click to Enlarge ISO 3200 with noise reduction – Click to EnlargeĪnd for fun, I also shot one of the 1Ds II shots at ISO 3200, underexposed by a stop and then pushed in post by a stop to yield effective ISO 6400: ISO 6400 with noise reduction – Click to Enlarge My thoughts: This ended up being at around a level of 20-40 depending on the ISO. So, I kept the 1Ds II files the same, and increased luminance noise reduction in Lightroom until I achieved what to my eye was identical levels of detail between the three cameras. ![]() That is, if I can use noise reduction techniques and still get a file with the exact same amount of detail, then that should be the real comparison. ![]() This was my thinking, and the detail advantage of the Micro 4/3 bodies is the lower weight of the car. Yes, one has a more powerful engine, but what if the 480hp car weighs 20% less? It’ s like when you have a car that has a 600 hp engine vs one that has a 480 hp engine. However, I’m not concerned with the technical performance of something…I’m concerned about the final print, or final image on screen. So, the 1Ds II is about a stop better at high ISO….or is it? I started thinking…in pure noise performance, yes, it is. 1Sensor Shootout: Panasonic GH2 vs Panasonic GX1 vs Canon 1Ds Mark II.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |