K20D VS Canon 40D High ISO (Not 56K Friendly)

codiac2600 · 02-26-2008, 11:40 AM

Here you go... nothing official and it's all up to you to make decisions now.

Canon 40D ISO 800:

K20D ISO 800:

Canon 40D ISO 1600:

K20D ISO 1600:

Canon 40D 3200:

K20D ISO 3200:

*Fl_Gulfer* · 02-26-2008, 12:03 PM

Which camera has produced the actual colors? Also I noticed that the K20 has a little better fonts.

*jbcampbell* · 02-26-2008, 12:28 PM

Looks like the 40D wins above ISO 800, which should not be a big shock. The K20D is 14MP vs 10MP on the 40D with the same size sensor. But great performance by both.

mwcfire · 02-26-2008, 12:29 PM

Wow, thanks for the pics. I think the noise is lower on the K20D or is it just softer? The color on the 40D is better (WB?). I was targeting the contrast area at the base of the air can on the left side above the spool of thread.

Andrew Faires · 02-26-2008, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by mwcfire

Wow, thanks for the pics. I think the noise is lower on the K20D or is it just softer? The color on the 40D is better (WB?). I was targeting the contrast area at the base of the air can on the left side above the spool of thread.

Not sure if it's the WB, or if it's the fact the K20D shots are over-exposed, but I agree, the colour on both the A700 and 40D look better.

As Chris said though, these are informal shots so I'm not reading too much into either colour or noise in comparing the images from either the 40d, a700 or k20d. From my stand-point, the fact that the noise is better on all 3 cameras at ISO 800 in comparison to my k10d at ISO 400 gives me something to look forward too when the time does come to upgrade.

Thanks again, Chris.

jms698 · 02-26-2008, 12:41 PM

I like the Canon 40D's colors better. They seem more neutral. The K20d has an less pleasing over-saturated "bright" tone to it (which, I presume, is the default setting to satisfy the American reviewers (Phil, etc.). Strange that the Canon does not do this, though.

The Canon 40D seems to have focused on the text in the background, throwing the camera in the foreground slightly out of focus. The Pentax K20d seems to have chosen the old Pentax camera to focus on (maybe it is biased towards its older brother

), throwing the text slightly out of focus.

In terms of noise the Canon is slightly better in my eyes. The Pentax has more chroma noise. E.g., in areas that are mostly black (like the body of the old Pentax camera), the K20d introduces a few multi-colored speckles at high-ISO. The 40D is nice and black.

In terms of overall noise I'd, again, pick the Canon as the winner by an ever so slight margin. However, if I resample the Pentax image to the smaller resolution of the Canon, the Pentax's noise is far superior. ISO 3200 is practically noise free, if scaled down to 10 megapixels.

svenphoto · 02-26-2008, 12:57 PM

well, I am actually impressed.....by the camera i was not hoping for to be impressed by. The last pics i saw on a japanese or korean review site where absolutly in favour of the k20d, the 40d being less detailed or sharp, (less mpix..i guess). noisewise the k20 was only second after the d3, so better than the d300, and 40d.

Now what i see and interprid as (pls. correct me if i am wrong) the k20d being more noisy and less colour accurate. reds seem fine, but what about the yellows on the left of the pic, and the wood colour tone. somehow it doesnt look like wb, but i could be wrong...

After handling the d300 last weekend at a studioshoot in not too bright lights, i was so impressed by it ,and had so much trouble handling my k10d da* 50-135 ,couse it hunted for focus all the time, i just coudn't keep up with the model, with the d300 (wich is not mine) i could! I was the only pentax user at the workshop shoot, and proud, but i was not so sure why anymore.

I was hoping for a upgrade, but i guess i might have to sit it out and wait for the next pentax. This is really the first time since i follow the intro of the k20d that i begin to feel a bit disappointed with the pentax system.

Can somebody please bring back my pentax proudness,and hope?!

thanks in advance

orbital · 02-26-2008, 12:57 PM

Thanks Chris! Impressive for 14mp.

Hey, do you have a D300 there that you can add to the test?

Tom Lusk · 02-26-2008, 01:41 PM

I wasn't expecting the 40D to do so well. Thanks for posting this, Chris.

I agree also with those who say the Canon's colours seem more natural.

Disagree about putting the K20 up against the D300, though.

They're in entirely different classes.

VAV · 02-26-2008, 01:50 PM

Chris - thanks for putting up the comparisons .. Following up on what Svenphoto and Orbital have posted, I second the request to do a comparison against the D300, if possible. The faster autofocus of the D300 is attractive to me and I would appreciate seeing how well the high-ISO performance compares against the K20.

Thank you

Rickster · 02-26-2008, 09:04 PM

Here you go ... let's compare apples to apples ...

800
Image removed

1600
Image removed

3200
Image removed

Which images above have the least noise and highest detail?

Although the color balance on the 40D images are a bit more pleasant they are not accurate. The whites are beige. RGB values for white on the 40D = [239,228,212] vs [250,250,250] for the K20D

According to the EXIF data, the 40D images were shot in AUTO WB and the K20D images were manual. I don't think we can say much about WB in these images except the K20D manual WB balance appears to be spot on.

**roentarre** · 02-26-2008, 09:14 PM

Thanks Chris for posting this great comparison.

You have just saved me from considerating to buy a 40D as I had been thinking to resort to doing some sports events or birding shots again. Its noise performance and colour are not as impressive while k20d would give me more bucks for the performance. The 14 MP without comprimise in image quality is definitely a great bonus for me (so I could enlarge the shot even more!)

Noise seems better on k20d to my naked eyes. k20d certainly has a lot going for me comparing to k10d. After all, canon's natural washed out colour are good for protrait work. Not a great thing for landscape IMHO. Unless I am a CSI, I might go for canon colour.

lol101 · 02-26-2008, 11:12 PM

To me K20 looks better noisewise at 800 and 1600 and slightly worse at 3200: impressive performances.

I have never been a big fan of the bright mode colors though...

I assume NR was off and these are jpegs right?

Another area where the K20 did better (and probably the reason why noise is also better) is in exposure, the K20 consistently overexposed by 2/3rd of a stop compared to 40D, giving an optimal exposure for this scene with an histogram right up to the right: excellent!

thibs · 02-26-2008, 11:24 PM

Codiac, for the sake of being complete in your reporting, could you tell us what settings were used?

Were those shots done in RAW or JPEG?
IF RAW, what settings, RAW developper?
If Jpeg, what NR setting ?
(and same for the A700 comparison)

Thank you !

proudtoshootpentax · 02-27-2008, 12:28 AM

Maybe I'm crazy, but I thought the K20D showed less noise. I just pulled these into CS3 and zoomed in nice and close.
Not only does it handle noise better, but the 14 MP allows for more detail than the 40D.
As far as the colors and such, all that can be controled either in camera with the new six image modes, or as raw files in editing software.
I'm pleased as a peach with what I've seen so far from the K20D.
Admittedly, I'll probably build up my lens collection with a few DA* lenses first (I want the 50-135mm and the 200mm), but I'm certainly sold on the
image quality gains of the new 14mp cmos.