Nod
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 08/04/2006
Posts: 4063
Loc: Devon, UK.
|
|
Just read the 450D test in this week's AP and noticed that a couple of the shots had been played with in PhotoShop. Now, call me old fashioned but surely a camera test should just be on the camera (or at least what comes in the box with the camera!) so shots should be "as is" or at worst processed using the converter supplied (in the 450D's case, Digital Photo Professional).
To a certain extent, I would say the same about using more exotic lenses in camera tests - after all, it's the glass that really counts, so a 450D with a top quality lens will give better IQ than a 1Ds MK III with the kit lens from the 450D (in all probability).
--------------------
MATWSIJ.....
To avoid being offended, please insert apropriate smiley.
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9160
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Since all digital camera shots require some degree of processing, whether in camera as JPEGs or not, I see no issue with using the 'industry standard' imaging software to demonstrate just what the camera is actually capable of. Judging by the posts on these fora Adobe's Camera Raw seems to be the preferred converter of choice and few people, other than myself, admit to using DigitalPhotoPro. If I were a potential user I would want to see an indication of the best the camera is able to achieve. The same goes for using good quality lenses, with the caveat that some examples of what the basic kit lens is capable of are presented so that punters are made aware of it's limitations.
Quote:
...so a 450D with a top quality lens will give better IQ than a 1Ds MK III with the kit lens from the 450D (in all probability).
After you've belted the 18-55 into place on the 1Ds with a large hammer I doubt the quality would be oustanding............  
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN 
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4239
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
I see no issue with using the 'industry standard' imaging software to demonstrate just what the camera is actually capable of. Judging by the posts on these fora Adobe's Camera Raw seems to be the preferred converter of choice and few people, other than myself, admit to using DigitalPhotoPro. If I were a potential user I would want to see an indication of the best the camera is able to achieve.
Ummm.... wasn't Barney's point that DPP did a better job than Camera Raw with the files from the 450D?
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9160
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Quote:
Ummm.... wasn't Barney's point that DPP did a better job than Camera Raw with the files from the 450D?
That's as maybe but it wasn't the point of Nod's post and wasn't the issue being adressed...
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Nod
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 08/04/2006
Posts: 4063
Loc: Devon, UK.
|
|
I would rather see what the CAMERA and supplied software could achieve rather than what is eventually possible with PS use. On page 22, there are 2 B&W conversions - one done using the channel mixer in PS after JPEGing a RAW file using DPP and the other using the camera's mono picture style with a tweak of levels in DPP.
As for the lens not fitting - sorry, I'm a Nikon user so all my lenses fit all my bodies (although the 1 Dx lens I have probably vignettes a lot on a film body!). Substitute an EOS 500 kit lens!
--------------------
MATWSIJ.....
To avoid being offended, please insert apropriate smiley.
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4239
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
I would rather see what the CAMERA and supplied software could achieve rather than what is eventually possible with PS use.
Me too. In fact what's important to me is what comes out of the camera, raw, unsharpened, uncompensated because that it what the specialist astronomical image processing software I use works best on.
I dumped Camera Raw after finding the Canon tools did a better job; the only thing in CR's favour is its integration into PS, but then PS is not my workspace of choice (too cramped, too resource heavy), I only use PSE on rare occasions when other tools won't do the job properly and am definitely not in line as a CS3 customer.
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9160
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Quote:
I would rather see what the CAMERA and supplied software could achieve rather than what is eventually possible with PS use.
Any complete review of a digital camera should certainly include examples of images taken with any included lens (where applicable) and equally with the included software. Equally is it not in the interests of the same completeness reasonable to include examples of what can be done with better/best quality lenses and alternative image converting/editing software?
Not every budget body is necessarily going to be used by a complete beginner with cheapo lenses therefore those who are experienced and likely to use the camera with good quality lenses do need to know that the camera is capable of delivering the good the lens produces. Digital bodies and their inbuilt data capture and processing do have more impact on final image quality than was formerly the case with film.
DPP is also a pretty competent RAW converter but the same is not necessarily true of all OEM included software - indeed Nikon's Picture Project rarely gets a positive mention and others are often described in considerably less rosy terms... Quite reasonable IMO to show what the camera or combo is capable of with the market leading image software.
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 36427
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
And pre-DPP, Canon's efforts were risible, too.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9160
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Ah well, I don't go that far back into pre-history............
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
