Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-28-2009, 07:43 AM   #121
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Outside of Philly
Posts: 1,564
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
I dont mean to bash Canon but, which Rebel series was atleast equal or better than the 40D and 50D IQ-wise? or a Rebel with an 1/8000 shutter speed or with a pentaprism? the point here is, if you are going to make a comparison or pair something with another thing, atleast make sure that that camera is atleast at par. if I would put it in a sarcastic way, it would appear something like this, " guess what, I'm gonna buy me some matchbox car because it has all the features that a Ferrari Model toy car has. the only advantage of the Ferrari car, is because of it's nice paint job, that's all".
My Xsi is at least equal or better than my 40D in the image quality department. Only thinks lacking are -
-less FPS
-1/4000s max shutter speed
-1/200s X-sync (vs 1/250s for my 40D)
-smaller buffer (~5 raw shots vs. 17)
-one control wheel

But it has a great sensor and I have no problems shooting with it alongside my 40D for all my paid jobs.

07-28-2009, 07:50 AM   #122
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Outside of Philly
Posts: 1,564
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
I will admit to not knowing much of the Canon lineup (I never bonded with the bodies). It seems like Nikon has a lot more "DX" glass out there so they are pretty invested in APS.

Does Canon have any "ltd prime" equivalents? I think I've looked from time to time (the Canon web site sucks) but didn't see (m)any equivalents.
Nikon has way too many "DX slow-ish walkaround zooms"
18-55, 18-70, 18-135m 16-85, 18-200. Canon just has the 18-55 (IS or non-IS) and the 17-85

I do admit that the Nikon 16-85 seems like a really nice lens though.

As for Limiteds, in addition to all the L primes, the 85mm f/1.8 is REALLY REALLY REALLY nice! I'd put it up against the 77 Limited any day of the week. And it's cheaper!

For a 31/1.8 replacement, I'm happy with my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (oops, that's not a Canon, and it's crop only ) The 35L is really nice though.

My "OMG, I think we can live with only one car?" lens is the 200mm f/2 IS.
07-28-2009, 09:17 AM   #123
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by egordon99 Quote
As for Limiteds, in addition to all the L primes, the 85mm f/1.8 is REALLY REALLY REALLY nice! I'd put it up against the 77 Limited any day of the week. And it's cheaper!
Yep, the 85 is hard to beat bang for the buck wise. Posted a shot using it a couple of days ago here:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/67904-beach-portrait.html

The one L prime I'd be wary of is the 50 since it seems to have a few focusing "challenges" for many users. So I went with a third party (Sigma) version instead for that focal length. Not that the Canon 50/1.4 is BAD, but it just lacks character.
07-28-2009, 09:55 AM   #124
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by egordon99 Quote
Nikon has way too many "DX slow-ish walkaround zooms"
18-55, 18-70, 18-135m 16-85, 18-200. Canon just has the 18-55 (IS or non-IS) and the 17-85 .
Yeah, I don't really understand why they have so many roughly equivalent general purpose zooms. I had the 18-70 with my D70 and that actually was a very good lens for one with "kit" status.

Then again Pentax has 18-55, 16-45, 17-70 and 16-50*...but there are some differences.

07-28-2009, 10:07 AM   #125
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 261
QuoteOriginally posted by amphysics Quote
I bought K10D, my first DSLR, in 2007. The experience is awful with many problems, among which the most important one is particle noise above ISO 400.

Among various aspects for a camera, the most useful one is High ISO performance. I'd rather have a 10 million pixel K-7 with the High ISO performance compared with Nikon D3 than have a 14.6 million one with bad performance. That is why I want to buy a 500D.

I like Pentax, but my K10D really hurts me.(Not to mention that the image for my K10D is still tilted by 1 degree)
You've got to be joking.

If you're looking for decent high ISO performance, you won't find it from the 500D. It has consistently shown itself to perform poorly in low light and in noise tests compared with it's predecessor, the 450D, which, it should be noted, couldn't match the performance of the 400D in the same areas. All for the sake of a few extra megapixels, which really hasn't given the Rebel series much more resolving power than it originally had. It's the same problem Canon has on it's hands with the 50D, which has performed worse in these same tests than the 40D, and the extra megapixels provide little benefit there too. BTW, all this information comes from thorough reviews on DPReview, and there are samples up if you want to double check my findings.

As for the 500D being compared to the K7, I'll laugh you out of the room. Are you buying this camera to take pictures or shoot video? Sure, the K7's video mode isn't as impressive, but frankly, that pales in comparison to all the categories in which the K7 trounces the 500D. You seem to like numbers, so here's a taste:

- 11 point SAFOX AF (Canon has 9 point)
- 1/8000th of a second top shutter speed (Canon has 1/4000th)
- Exposure compensation to +/- 5EV (Canon is +/-2)
- 77 point matrix metering system (Canon has 35)
- 5.2 frames per second in JPEG, PEF, or DNG (Canon is 3.4 and only JPEG)
- Pentaprism viewfinder with 100% frame coverage (vs 95% and a pentamirror)
- Total dust, weather, and temperature sealing (Canon's camera is ass to the wind)

So for that extra cash, looks like I'm getting a lot more than you bargained for. I would suggest taking this kind of unintelligent troll-talk elsewhere, as it only works on the stupid, and as you can see, Pentaxians are unusually well educated.
07-28-2009, 11:21 AM   #126
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
Drew:
I started typing up yet another angry response about the misconception of 40D vs 50D (seeing as I own one and have used both). But since you probably prefer reviews to real world, here you go:
Canon EOS 50D review Cameralabs resolution results

Notice the resolution #s vs th 40D?

QuoteOriginally posted by cameralabs:
In terms of resolving power, the Canon EOS 50D delivers 2350 and 2400 lpph of horizontal and vertical resolution respectively when equipped with the EF-S 18-200mm IS kit lens. Fit a higher quality prime lens like the EF 85mm f1.8 and the 50D delivers higher resolution figures of 2450 lpph for both horizontal and vertical resolution.

This places it comfortably ahead of the Canon EOS 40D which when equipped with the same EF 85mm f1.8 lens scored 1950 and 2100 lpph of horizontal and vertical resolution respectively.As you'd expect given their respective pixel counts, the Nikon D90 and D300 fall roughly in-between, with the D300 (and Nikkor DX 17-55mm f2.8) scoring 2250 and 2300 lpph of horizontal and vertical resolution respectively.

So the EOS 50D has the potential to easily out-resolve the 40D, but to really exploit its high pixel density, you'll need to equip it with decent optics. We found the EF-S 18-200mm IS may have been a very convenient general-purpose lens, but it did limit the ultimate resolution of the 50D.
QuoteOriginally posted by cameralabs:
But between 100 and 3200 ISO, the EOS 50D really does deliver very similar noise levels to the earlier 40D at a pixel level. This is impressive given the significant boost in total pixels and remember if you're reproducing 40D and 50D images at the same size, the 50D's noise artefacts will appear smaller. It also proves the 50D's greater sensor efficiency in practice, although now the micro-lenses are gapless, the engineers are running out of options to further boost resolutions without compromising noise given the APS-C real-estate.
PS: I'd take a Rebel with it's "limited" 9 point AF system over Pentax's 11 point any day for anything that moves. Speaking of things that move, good luck getting 5.2fps out of the K-7 in AF-C mode.

Usual disclaimer: I think Pentax makes killer cameras and for many many people it's the best bang for the buck. I'm not a "Canikonian" but I do have to pipe up when gross misinformation is posted by the fanboys.

Last edited by pingflood; 07-28-2009 at 11:29 AM.
07-28-2009, 11:43 AM   #127
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by snogglethorpe Quote
So, if it's due to a simple lack of NR (as opposed to deficiencies in the sensor), then can one generally achieve similar results (to the C/N "look") by using NR in post-processing?

[I'm not very familiar with image processing software. I've always thought that cleaning up noise would have a noticeable impact on edges etc, but the C/N results seem impressively clean and sharp.]
When you compare images NR on vs NR off, you'll see a loss of detail. As was pointed out, high-contrast edges retain their sharpness, but there's a loss - significant loss - of low-contrast gradations (like fabric texture, skin texture, etc). Now, that said, I would point out that it's *always* possible to produce a better noise reduction of an image in dedicated software than in-camera. For instance, something one notices is that large, out of focus areas often show noise horribly, where high-detail areas do not. In Photoshop or other image editing software, it's possible to mask the sharp areas and apply NR to the OOF halo so that the entire image looks smooth and sharp, without the loss of *any* detail. You just can't do this in camera.

Frankly, the whole NR-in-camera debate puzzles me. With the storage capacity of hard drives, the low prices of SD cards, and the proliferation of photo editing/managing software at reasonable prices (compared to any DSLR!), I don't understand why someone wouldn't shoot RAW 100% of the time. Higher dynamic range, better color capture, more flexibility in post... *shrug*. If you're shooting "RAW", you *shouldn't* be getting any noise reduction (we all know this probably isn't true) applied, and you should be able to use the much more powerful and customizable computer-based NR systems for BETTER RESULTS than in-camera NR.

</rant>
07-28-2009, 12:37 PM   #128
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Drew:
I started typing up yet another angry response about the misconception of 40D vs 50D (seeing as I own one and have used both). But since you probably prefer reviews to real world, here you go:
Canon EOS 50D review Cameralabs resolution results

Notice the resolution #s vs th 40D?





PS: I'd take a Rebel with it's "limited" 9 point AF system over Pentax's 11 point any day for anything that moves. Speaking of things that move, good luck getting 5.2fps out of the K-7 in AF-C mode.

Usual disclaimer: I think Pentax makes killer cameras and for many many people it's the best bang for the buck. I'm not a "Canikonian" but I do have to pipe up when gross misinformation is posted by the fanboys.

when you mean Rebel, did you also meant the previous Rebel XTI and up til the XSI? because if that were the case, I would disagree with your assessment on that part. the AF on those two are unpredictable/inconsistent as well even at 3fps burst, and that's why I still prefer the EOS 40D over them. I'm not a fanboy but I don't want to push the Rebel's capability beyond what it can really do in reality. this is also the reason why I opted not to go for the Xsi eventhough it seems to be a match for the EOs 40D which really isn't. both systems have 9 AF points but there is a significant difference. from my experience with the K-7, the 11 AF points helped a lot and not so much with the Rebels that I tested. mind you that this is not misinformation as well.

07-28-2009, 12:41 PM   #129
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by egordon99 Quote
My Xsi is at least equal or better than my 40D in the image quality department. Only thinks lacking are -
-less FPS
-1/4000s max shutter speed
-1/200s X-sync (vs 1/250s for my 40D)
-smaller buffer (~5 raw shots vs. 17)
-one control wheel

But it has a great sensor and I have no problems shooting with it alongside my 40D for all my paid jobs.
that's good to hear and glad that you are enjoying your Xsi. I'm on the otherhand don't share the same sentiment with it however. there are things that I was unsatisfied with the Xsi in comparison with it's medium range bros.

Last edited by Pentaxor; 07-28-2009 at 01:04 PM.
07-28-2009, 01:21 PM   #130
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
when you mean Rebel, did you also meant the previous Rebel XTI and up til the XSI? because if that were the case, I would disagree with your assessment on that part. the AF on those two are unpredictable/inconsistent as well even at 3fps burst, and that's why I still prefer the EOS 40D over them. I'm not a fanboy but I don't want to push the Rebel's capability beyond what it can really do in reality. this is also the reason why I opted not to go for the Xsi eventhough it seems to be a match for the EOs 40D which really isn't. both systems have 9 AF points but there is a significant difference. from my experience with the K-7, the 11 AF points helped a lot and not so much with the Rebels that I tested. mind you that this is not misinformation as well.
Oh, the 40D and 50D are definitely far improved over the Rebel, but the Rebel XSi/T1i do fairly well when tracking. But it is somehwat subjective, and depends on the user and the type of shooting, so I am not going to say you are wrong in what you are reporting.
07-28-2009, 01:44 PM   #131
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 261
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Drew:
I started typing up yet another angry response about the misconception of 40D vs 50D (seeing as I own one and have used both). But since you probably prefer reviews to real world, here you go:
Canon EOS 50D review Cameralabs resolution results

Notice the resolution #s vs th 40D?





PS: I'd take a Rebel with it's "limited" 9 point AF system over Pentax's 11 point any day for anything that moves. Speaking of things that move, good luck getting 5.2fps out of the K-7 in AF-C mode.

Usual disclaimer: I think Pentax makes killer cameras and for many many people it's the best bang for the buck. I'm not a "Canikonian" but I do have to pipe up when gross misinformation is posted by the fanboys.
Good points, specifically about the moving targets, and you're not alone in that conviction, either. There's a reason you see hundreds of Canons at sporting events. I'm not sure how the 500D's system stacks up to the likes of the 40/50D or higher models though, which is what most photographers would take into the field.

I didn't make a point of quoting the review source I referred to, but basically, I'll just refer you to the conclusion of the review of the 50D. Canon EOS 50D Review: 31. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review The resolution is certainly there, but it's not the 1.5X increase that the resolution of the sensor would suggest, and it's hampered by the noise results.

Seems the powers that be differ on this point. Sorry for my run-and-gun tone earlier, I just get frustrated when people drop the K7 and the K20D into company that they really don't relate to. The 500D and the K7 are still worlds apart.
07-28-2009, 01:55 PM   #132
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Oh, the 40D and 50D are definitely far improved over the Rebel, but the Rebel XSi/T1i do fairly well when tracking. But it is somehwat subjective, and depends on the user and the type of shooting, so I am not going to say you are wrong in what you are reporting.
thanks pingflood. that is the reason why I can't find any excuse nor any reason to dislike the 40D/50D series. the 40D camera was the only APS-C sensor dslr that really impressed me now and then coming from Canon. I even prefer it over the D200, but not over the S5pro. the S5pro just happens to be a different dSLR and have a different approach on image processing and definitely has a very good AF. it's just that it's freakin expensive. between the S5Pro and 40D, it is more like comparing apples to oranges.
07-28-2009, 02:04 PM   #133
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
QuoteOriginally posted by Torphoto Quote
I can say that after using the K7, it is definitely a superior camera overall vs anything in the price range,
a high price range.

the 50D being 300 dollars cheaper by average canadian standards... and well, the 500 cheaper by 600 dollars.

that can buy you a decent prime.
07-28-2009, 02:14 PM   #134
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by drewdlephone Quote
Good points, specifically about the moving targets, and you're not alone in that conviction, either. There's a reason you see hundreds of Canons at sporting events. I'm not sure how the 500D's system stacks up to the likes of the 40/50D or higher models though, which is what most photographers would take into the field.

I didn't make a point of quoting the review source I referred to, but basically, I'll just refer you to the conclusion of the review of the 50D. Canon EOS 50D Review: 31. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review The resolution is certainly there, but it's not the 1.5X increase that the resolution of the sensor would suggest, and it's hampered by the noise results.

Seems the powers that be differ on this point. Sorry for my run-and-gun tone earlier, I just get frustrated when people drop the K7 and the K20D into company that they really don't relate to. The 500D and the K7 are still worlds apart.
DPreview got a lot of flack over the 50D review and with very good reason. Initially they posted their findings with a beta version of ACR, which they later corrected. I also believe they used used a lens that was not a good match for the very demanding 50D sensor.

Keep in mind that 50% more pixels doesn't equal 50% higher resolution vertical/horizontal. Sqrt(1.5) = ~1.22 so 22% theoretical higher res on either measurement. The Cameralabs findings with the 85/1.8 land on average right around that number, showing that at least at ISO 100 a good lens can truly take advantage of the increase in MP. The only lens I really use on the 50D is my 400/5.6 which thankfully has some pretty fantastic IQ; if I was still using the Bigma I probably would be just as well off with a 40D.

My personal findings are that up until 800-1600 I get more detail out of a 50D shot. At 1600-3200 there really isn't any noticeable difference between it and the 40D.... depending on the scene of course. Some 1600 shots come out really nice, if the light is good, and will probably outdo the 40D equivalent by a hair.

I do agree the 500D vs the K-7 is not a good matchup. Image quality wise the 500D shines, but as an overall camera the K-7 is clearly ahead with its far better build, viewfinder etc. What I initially complained about was when somebody posted about the 500D not being equivalent IQ wise which I thought and still think is wrong.

QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
thanks pingflood. that is the reason why I can't find any excuse nor any reason to dislike the 40D/50D series. the 40D camera was the only APS-C sensor dslr that really impressed me now and then coming from Canon. I even prefer it over the D200, but not over the S5pro. the S5pro just happens to be a different dSLR and have a different approach on image processing and definitely has a very good AF. it's just that it's freakin expensive. between the S5Pro and 40D, it is more like comparing apples to oranges.
Yeah, the S5Pro is a wonderful camera with huge dynamic range. If I shot weddings or portraits I'd use one. For my purposes though the 50D is a better fit.
07-28-2009, 02:46 PM   #135
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by drewdlephone Quote
You've got to be joking.

If you're looking for decent high ISO performance, you won't find it from the 500D. It has consistently shown itself to perform poorly in low light and in noise tests compared with it's predecessor, the 450D, which, it should be noted, couldn't match the performance of the 400D in the same areas. All for the sake of a few extra megapixels, which really hasn't given the Rebel series much more resolving power than it originally had. It's the same problem Canon has on it's hands with the 50D, which has performed worse in these same tests than the 40D, and the extra megapixels provide little benefit there too. BTW, all this information comes from thorough reviews on DPReview, and there are samples up if you want to double check my findings.

As for the 500D being compared to the K7, I'll laugh you out of the room. Are you buying this camera to take pictures or shoot video? Sure, the K7's video mode isn't as impressive, but frankly, that pales in comparison to all the categories in which the K7 trounces the 500D. You seem to like numbers, so here's a taste:

- 11 point SAFOX AF (Canon has 9 point)
- 1/8000th of a second top shutter speed (Canon has 1/4000th)
- Exposure compensation to +/- 5EV (Canon is +/-2)
- 77 point matrix metering system (Canon has 35)
- 5.2 frames per second in JPEG, PEF, or DNG (Canon is 3.4 and only JPEG)
- Pentaprism viewfinder with 100% frame coverage (vs 95% and a pentamirror)
- Total dust, weather, and temperature sealing (Canon's camera is ass to the wind)

So for that extra cash, looks like I'm getting a lot more than you bargained for. I would suggest taking this kind of unintelligent troll-talk elsewhere, as it only works on the stupid, and as you can see, Pentaxians are unusually well educated.
I'll take 1536x1024 @30fps mode over 1920x1080 @20fps .
YouTube - Pentax K-7 with Celestron 9.25 and F6.3 focal reducer (1480mm F6.3) in 1536x1024 *** HD video mode
YouTube - Pentax K-7 test with Celestron C6-R 1200mm F8
YouTube - First bike riding test with Pentax K-7 and 15mm F2.8 Sigma in 1536x1024 *** mode handheld with SR on

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, canon, dslr, k7, million, pentax, photography, photographyblog, pixel, sum
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Switching to Canon 5D, advice needed on adapting Pentax lenses on canon camera hangu Photographic Technique 4 08-19-2010 09:09 PM
Pentax Kx - Canon EOS 500D dilemma DavoMrMac Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 12 02-02-2010 01:46 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 55-300mm, Sigma 105mm Macro, Canon 500D Filter zinj Sold Items 2 07-28-2009 09:08 AM
Canon EOS 500D reveiw Pentax KM \ 2000 is better :) Adrian Owerko Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 5 05-25-2009 02:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:38 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top