everyone seems to discount the f828 as soon as they see the noise.. the problem is that the f828 has been compared to the 300D/10D on almost every site.. why not compare it to something in the same category? the f828 isn't a DSLR and it's not trying to be.. lets compare it to the f717, or other prosumer non-dslr's, and we'll see just how "noisy" it is... I'm still waititng for that kind of review.. I KNOW it cant beat the 10D's smooth CMOS sensor (no CCD camera CAN..), but lets see it against other CCD cameras, like the A1 and whatnot..
I think the article also makes a good point in stating that to get comparable lens quality and ability for a DSLR you'll have to spend beacoup dollars for a couple extra lenses.
In the images from the review it looks like the photographer left the aperture and shutter speeds the same and simply changed the ISO. The photo at 400 ISO looks way over-exposed so, of course, the noise is going to be more pronounced. I'm sure it would look much better if it were properly exposed. Now I'm not saying it is exactly on par with the better DLRS but the noise looks to be more manageable then some people are saying.
I'm curious as to what it is about a CMOS sensor that can achieve less noise levels than a CCD. Is this really true?
In the images from the review it looks like the photographer left the aperture and shutter speeds the same and simply changed the ISO. The photo at 400 ISO looks way over-exposed so, of course, the noise is going to be more pronounced. I'm sure it would look much better if it were properly exposed. Now I'm not saying it is exactly on par with the better DLRS but the noise looks to be more manageable then some people are saying.
I'm curious as to what it is about a CMOS sensor that can achieve less noise levels than a CCD. Is this really true?
T
I don't know the answer, but I know that i have to shoot at iso 1600 or iso 3200 when I want pronounced grain in my photos. I can't get it at 800 or less.
in the case of the f828.. after seeing MANY full size pics from it on the dpreview forum (and other places), i'm not all that concerned about the noise.. but the Chromatic Abherration is definatly coming from the lense, and not "light spilling" to adjacent sensors as some have suggested.. The CA is very directional, meaning it's always pointing away from the center.. this can only mean that it's a somewhat faulty lense design, which saddens me a bit, since it's not something easily fixable.
Talking about megapixel, the 828 got 4:3 image ratio while the 300d have a 3:2 image ratio. It's a fact that most of the print are 3:2 image ratio and it's the image ratio that have the most different size you can print. If you convert the 8Mp picture of the 828 to 3:2 to print a 4x6 a 8x12 a 10x15, 16x24 or 20x30 that leaves you with 7.1MP while the 300d stay with 6.3Mp. it's only a .8MP difference, not 2MP
Yep, ya cram 8 million pixels into a tiny sensor, you've got serious noise to deal with!
I'm beginning to wonder. The larger the MP size on a CCD camera, the greater the noise? If thats the case, I wonder at what point does the MP size of a CCD camera make the picture worse[noise-wise], when increased. ...if that made any sense?
Well, according to this article anyway, it is the CCD that is supposed to yield lower noise and higher quality than the CMOS. This being said, it is clear that a lot of other factors are involved.
This Camera is such an exponentially huge improvement over anything I owned before that I don’t have much to complain about yet. Being colorblind, chromatic aberration is a lifestyle, not a defect…
This Camera is such an exponentially huge improvement over anything I owned before that I don’t have much to complain about yet. Being colorblind, chromatic aberration is a lifestyle, not a defect…
Post some samples,I'm waiting to see :-) , and congrats to a new camera !
