dtaylor said:xps said:I´m not sure, whether all testing magazines get "normal" Cameras you can buy on the market. It is sometimes said, that Companies send specially adjusted Cameras to them. Maybe it is true.
If a "special adjustment" improves performance, why wouldn't they just make that adjustment to the entire production line???
But what I can say: In my fotoclub, more than a dozen of people own a 7D or an 60D. And we were frustrated how big the quality gap of the IQ is. Mine 60D has low noise, lower then the 60D of my friends. But my 7D is more noisy and has low contrasting quality. There other Camerasare much better than mine.
Proof? And by proof I mean properly controlled and executed tests. You pixel peepers don't realize that a 1/3 stop variation in exposure, or a seemingly innocent change in post processing, can produce quite large differences in noise at 100%.
So, I think that Friedmud could be quite right, because his own camera is making not as good pictures as written on the online magazines.
He posted an example of a "bad" ISO 100 image in another thread and got pounced on. There is nothing wrong with the image at all, no noise to see what so ever. He was upset because the blue sky is not an artificially smooth sheet of plastic. (And to think, some people ADD noise/grain because they think their digital images are too smooth and plasticky!)
You just can't please some people...
Dear Mr. dtaylor!
Thanks for your clear words. You are rigth, these are no scientific tests.
But as an normal user I want to get
"normal" pictures out of my camera. No professional images, but images, where I am satisfied.
And if - in sum - my personal Camera puts grainy pictures out (6 persons changed the cameras around and worked with the 7D of another person for 4 weeks, taking more then 1500 pics each) even when we change the user, and another Camera does produce much better images, then you CAN say, that this special camera suffers from more grain.
Upvote
0