Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

UK-GERMANY 10D Review


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 Andi Voeltz

Andi Voeltz

    Eagle Ray

  • Industry
  • PipPipPip
  • 366 posts
  • Location:Berlin, Germany
  • Interests:Underwater Photography, Rollerblading, Swimming, Travel

Posted 19 October 2003 - 11:36 AM

A nice review of UK-GERMANY's 10D housing by Andre Smith is online at http://www.digideep....ticles.php?id=4
find a housing for your digicam! oOo. http://www.digideep.com .oOo.
market overview of the essential equipment for digital uw photography

#2 james

james

    The Engineer

  • Super Mod
  • 9969 posts
  • Location:Houston TX

Posted 21 October 2003 - 11:00 AM

Thanks for a very good review Andre, and for posting it Andi. Perhaps next time you would like to also submit it to Wetpixel? :-)

I have one comment for folks reading the review who have never used a DSLR - It is not recommended to raise the ISO values to achieve a good exposure. This is a LAST resort. Instead, I would recommend changing f-stop by one or two stops, or adjusting strobe power, or moving your strobe closer.

Sometimes there is simply no choice, for example, when you are at f4 or f5.6 and 1/30th and you need to keep your depth of field. You are pretty much stuck if that's what you need to get a blue water background. However, you can bump your ISO up to 200 to get a background exposure at f8 1/30th or f5.6 1/60th and you probably won't see much of a difference in image quality.

It is not advisable to shoot above ISO400 underwater as the noise in shadow areas and blue water will be unacceptable.

Cheers
James
Canon 1DsMkIII - Seacam Housing
Dual Ikelite Strobes
Photo site - www.reefpix.org

#3 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 21 October 2003 - 12:35 PM

Hi James

Firstly, I have submitted the review to Wetpixel! It has been in the hands of Eric for quite a while but as you know he has been a busy man.

Secondly, I must challenge you on the issue of raising your ISO ( ASA ) to get adequate exposure. While I agree with your comments in general, I beleive that your opinion is based on your experience with film, digicams and Nikon DSLRs. It is a different story with Canon DSLRs since the introduction of the 10D. In fact that is one of the main reason why I chose this camera. Apart from UW photography I do a lot of of hockey photography where there isnt much light and you need fast shutter speeds. I use ISO 800 and even 1600 frequently and I can assure you that noise has not been a problem (and I am refering not only to viewed images but also prints up to 17 X 11 inches)

I would like to refer you to the following review of the 10D In the Luminous Landscape: http://www.luminous-...meras/10d.shtml. I have pasted the text - please see the actual results at the link above:

Noise — Not!
Since the D30 was introduced 3 years ago Canon has excelled in producing low noise images, especially at medium to high ISOs. I regularly shoot with my Canon 1Ds at anything between ISO 100 and 400, because there is hardly any difference in visible noise, especially when processed though Capture One.

Now with the 10D, and in conjunction with Capture One LE, the bar has been raised another notch. The frame below says it all. It was taken at ISO 1600. Click on it and view a larger version and then look at the 100% detail crop below. There's noise, but more like the grain that one is used to seeing from ISO 400 film. And, there is none of the blocking up of shadows and reduced resolution that one is used to from using fast colour films.



Canon 10D with 400mm f/5.6L lens at ISO 1600
If like me you find yourself shooting in low light levels, whether sports, wildlife or documentary, you owe it to yourself to have a look at the Canon 10D. It really does set a new benchmark in high ISO image quality. With the Canon 10D ISO 800 is a fully usable speed, and 1600 looks pretty much the way 400 speed film did.



100% detail crop
This of course raises the inevitable question — what about ISO 3200? On the 10D this is activated through a Menu setting called ISO Expansion. When turned on this allows an H setting above ISO 1600 to appear, which is ISO 3200. Noisy? Ya, sure, as you can see below. But it allows for usable images in light levels that were previously out of reach. In the shot below I was able to use a 400mm f/5.6 lens hand-held in pre-dawn light levels that normally would have kept me in bed.


ISO 3200 100% Crop

____________________________________________________

I think the resuts speak for themselves! In my opinion, with the 10D ( and it will be the same for the Digital Rebel) using ISO settings anywhere between 100 and 800 is a very convenient why to obtain the exposures you reuire without any loss of image quality.

Just my 2c worth!

#4 james

james

    The Engineer

  • Super Mod
  • 9969 posts
  • Location:Houston TX

Posted 21 October 2003 - 03:58 PM

Thanks for your comments and the link to Luminous Landscape.

I guess "acceptable image quality" is just a subjective thing - kind of like "how long is a piece of string." To me, shots with the S2 at ISO1600 are not acceptable, and the noise is comparable to the 10D. I have shot the S2 and the D60 underwater, so I have a bit of experience w/ both, but most w/ the S2.

If you'd like to see noise comparisons between some different DSLR's, Phil Askey has some excellent comparison plots.

As an extreme example, here are some ISO1600 shots from the S2:

Posted Image

A macro shot with plenty of light looks OK on screen, but is barely acceptable in print.

Posted Image

A well lit and properly exposed wideangle shot looks good onscreen, but it is DISMAL in print. Totally unacceptable to me. I've got some 100% crops around here if anyone is interested in seeing them.

Cheers
James
Canon 1DsMkIII - Seacam Housing
Dual Ikelite Strobes
Photo site - www.reefpix.org

#5 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 21 October 2003 - 06:36 PM

Posted Image

James, remember the review and the topic - Canon 10D. While your coments are valid in general - it is not for the 10D

Yes, do read Phil Askey's review - I tt clearly demonstrates the superiority of the 10D over the D60 wrt noise at higher ISO: http://www.dpreview....s10d/page18.asp

Quote from above:

"As we had expected these test results were virtually identical to those produced for our pre-production preview. Things seem fairly close at ISO 100 and 200, at ISO 400 the EOS-10D is beginning to look cleaner, at ISO 800 the difference is more noticeable and the EOS-10D's ISO 1600 performance is very good indeed, actually exhibiting less noise than the EOS-D60 at ISO 800. It would appear that Canon's changes to image processing (probably enhanced high sensitivity noise reduction) and improved CMOS manufacturing processes have made a more significant difference to noise at higher ISO's."

And in the conclusion he states: See items 3 and 4 http://www.dpreview....s10d/page23.asp

Excellent resolution, pulls ahead of EOS-D60 (just), no moiré at resolution limit
Good color, if different response than the EOS-D60, Adobe RGB delivers better accuracy
Noise free 'silky smooth' images
Very low noise levels even at ISO 1600, virtually unnoticeable below this
Images not 'over sharpened' or damaged by visible sharpening artifacts
Excellent long exposure capability, some 'stuck pixels' in very long exposures (3 mins plus)
Both reduced shutter release lag and reduced viewfinder blackout are noticeable
Vastly improved auto focus system, focuses twice as quickly, works in much lower light
Seven point AF and Registered AF button
Very clever 'smart buffering' means you can almost always take the next shot
Good metering, still no specific 'spot metering'
Good manual preset white balance, average automatic white balance, Kelvin option added
Much less of a 'dust problem' than other competitive cameras (special filter?)
In-camera programmable 'parameter sets' to control image processing algorithms
Adobe RGB parameter, although it's a shame you can't combine with other parameters
RAW mode provides the 'digital negative', about 1 stop of latitude in over exposed images
New and improved File Viewer Utility is a vast improvement, still slow however
Remote capture software for studio setups
All metal body feels solid, robust, reassuring quality
Built as a Digital SLR from the ground up
Easy to use, integrated digital / photographic controls and displays
Improved control layout, power switch is far better
Playback magnification up to 10x (perfect for checking focus)
Orientation sensor for automatic image rotation
Improved, higher resolution and brighter LCD monitor
Full Canon EF lens compatible
Improved IBM Microdrive performance, better than EOS-D30 & D60
Good combination of both full auto, scene and manual exposure controls
Highlighted AF points
Top panel LCD illuminated
Custom functions to control camera operation
Excellent battery life, light weight and small batteries
Excellent supplied software suite
Superb value for money, even better than the EOS-D60!

So although acceptability is a matter of taste as you say - I would urge you to actually see the printed result of a 10D at ISO 800 .
The above picture was taken with the 10D is just that: ISO 800, f16, s1/90. I have printed itat 17 X 11 inches. There is no visible noise or grain - perhaps I should mail it to you :(
For those noisy Nikons and Fujis ( sorry couldnt resist :blink: ) stick to ISO 100 or 200!

#6 james

james

    The Engineer

  • Super Mod
  • 9969 posts
  • Location:Houston TX

Posted 21 October 2003 - 07:00 PM

I'm glad that you're happy with the 10D's noise performance Andre. The photo that you posted looks great onscreen.

I'm sure you will enjoy your camera system very much.

Here is a graph put together by Phil Askey showing noise performance for Oly E-1, Nikon D100, Canon 10D and Fuji S2pro:

http://www.dpreview....use1/page14.asp

I don't know why Phil buried this in the Oly E-1 review - I wish he would put it somewhere else. There is no D60 to compare to, put I think you will find Phil's results interesting. Phil shows EOS 10D noise to be higher than the S2pro at both ISO800 and ISO1600.

Again, this all comes down to a matter of "how long is a piece of string?" I don't feel satisfied with high ISO results and you do - and that's fine. This is surely a matter of personal preference.

The original point that I was trying to make I believe is still valid - which is: I would recommend changing other parameters, such as strobe to subject distance, fstop, and shutterspeed, in lieu of bumping up the ISO sensitivity.

Cheers
James
Canon 1DsMkIII - Seacam Housing
Dual Ikelite Strobes
Photo site - www.reefpix.org

#7 JackConnick

JackConnick

    Orca

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1253 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA
  • Interests:Sailing, diving, women, cats

Posted 21 October 2003 - 07:04 PM

Andre;

I'm considering the 300G rebel, which is very similar tothe 10D. Would most of your comments apply re less noise at higher ISO speeds?

Jack

Jack Connick
Optical Ocean Sales.com Sea & Sea, Olympus, Ikelite, Athena, Zen, Fix, Nauticam, Aquatica, Seacam, Gates, 10Bar, Light & Motion, iTorch/I-DAS & Fantasea Line - Cameras, Housings, Strobes, Arms, Trays & Accessories
Blog & Gallery: Optical Ocean Sales Blog
Flickr Gallerys: Optical Ocean on Flickr


#8 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 21 October 2003 - 07:33 PM

Yes, it is absolutely identical in that respect! B)

#9 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 21 October 2003 - 08:10 PM

[/QUOTE]

Hmmm.... The way I read the RGB graph( which is what counts after all ) it shows the S2 Pro has a higher noise level in the blue channel than the 10D.

Be that as it may, my point is that noise up to ISO 800 is so minimal with these cameras that is the last thing you should be worrying about in pursuit of a good image. Compare that to things like backscatter, camera shake at slow shutter speeds, poor focus etc, it is small fry. ( which is part of the reason for your stingray shot) Why then, if it is easy to work at a given f stop where you are comfortable with the lens performance and the strobe exposure, surely it makes sense to change your ISO number to give you an appropriate shutter speed. This technique is endorsed by many photo pros and in particular in the digital sports photography field.

#10 wetpixel

wetpixel

    Wetpixel

  • Admin
  • 2943 posts
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 24 October 2003 - 07:27 AM

I've finally posted the review here at Wetpixel. I apologize for the delay! We received it during DEMA, and then I left town for awhile...

Anyway, thank you, Andre, for such a comprehensive report.

I'd like to interject also that more measured noise doesn't always add up to a less pleasing image. The final word comes from the person who is looking at the end result...

I've also had good luck getting virtually every shot to look good on screen. However, getting a decent print out of a high ISO image has been something that I have had mixed results with. Generally, I leave the noise in the image, but I use color noise reducing filters. Sharpening also becomes very difficult with noisy images, so getting a sharp print also becomes hard.
Eric Cheng - Administrator, Wetpixel -

#11 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 25 October 2003 - 08:22 PM

Thanks Eric and yes I think you have hit the nail on the head with your assessment :" The final word comes form the person who is looking at the end result.." . And of course it really depends at what you are looking at - your computer monitor, your 4 X 6 inch print or your large printed poster. So blanket statements saying don't do this or do this are probably not very useful unless you can exactly specify for what purposes you are making the recommendations.

So with that in mind my spesific recommendations for the Canon 10D would be:

Maximum acceptable ISO(ASA) no for:
Computer images - 800-1600
7 X 5 inch prints - 800-1600
11 X 8.5 inch prints - 800
17 X 11 inch prints 400-800.
Larger prints - sorry no experience

Maybe you and James could give your equivalent suggestions for the 1DS and S2 Pro.

Thanks again
Andre

#12 craig

craig

    Full Moon Rising

  • Super Mod
  • 2826 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin, TX

Posted 25 October 2003 - 08:52 PM

Andre, great photo considering the camera you had to work with ( sorry couldn't resist :( )

And please, no more quoting Luminous Landscape! I feel much better when you quote Phil Askey ("beyond the Nyquist limit" quote aside). If we were to all believe LL, the camera would somehow magically know what raw converter you were using when deciding how much noise to "put in"!

It was my understanding that the S2 and the 10D had quite comparable noise performance. Of course, they're all "comparable". Even my lowly D100 has equal or better luminance noise performance at ISO 400 and 800 than the 10D according to Askey.

Like James, I see changing ISO as a last resort. What's the matter with f/4 or f/5.6?
I love it when a plan comes together.
- Col. John "Hannibal" Smith

------
Nikon, Seatool, Nexus, Inon
My Galleries

#13 Cybergoldfish

Cybergoldfish

    Sperm Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts
  • Location:UK */Seychelles/Singapore
  • Interests:Don't include plankton

Posted 26 October 2003 - 02:26 AM

In the anemone shot:
Is that a great deal of blue noise or was it raining?

#14 Andi Voeltz

Andi Voeltz

    Eagle Ray

  • Industry
  • PipPipPip
  • 366 posts
  • Location:Berlin, Germany
  • Interests:Underwater Photography, Rollerblading, Swimming, Travel

Posted 26 October 2003 - 02:45 AM

In the anemone shot:
Is that a great deal of blue noise or was it raining?

You are too sarcastic boy :blink: - Hey stop giving Andre a hard time, just
because we published his review on digideep.com first :( ... I cannot
wait to meet Eric in Antibes. We will also discuss merging some features
of our partnering sites.

Anyone else coming?
find a housing for your digicam! oOo. http://www.digideep.com .oOo.
market overview of the essential equipment for digital uw photography

#15 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 26 October 2003 - 09:38 AM

In the anemone shot:
Is that a great deal of blue noise or was it raining?

You are very observant! Yes it was a dark rainy day- very little light for a CFWA shot. Also remember that it doesnt rain underwater - so that's why there is no noise in that part of the picture either!

#16 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 26 October 2003 - 10:19 AM

  What's the matter with f/4 or f/5.6?

Why nothing of course - unless you need a smaller aperture for adequate depth of field for a particular composition.

Let me sum this up for the last time - I do not wish to get dragged into a mudslinging debate. In this regard let me apologise about my previous remark about other "noisy cameras" in case I offended anyone - it was honestly a remark made in jest (with a smilie attached)

In my UW film shooting years there have been many occasions where it would have been nice to have faster film but you where stuck with what you had in the camera at the time. I used Fuji Provia F 400 quite extensively for days when there wasnt going to be much light but that was only a partial solution.

So with digital UW photography I saw that as one of the areas where there would be considerable advantage. My initial experience is that in my hands I have found that I can use this tool sucessfully to get some images that have been difficult in the past. For me this means being able to get an image that is acceptable for publication and can print up to 17 X 11 inches and still look good. I have found that I can do this by using ISO numbers up to ISO 800 with my 10D . So therefore I made this suggestion in my review. No, it is not meant to be the Gospel - I was just trying to be helpful. I certainly did not intend to offend anybody. If you still feel this is an outrageous error on my part - I do apologise again and I will not be offended in any way if you wish to delete my review and comments from the Wetpixel site.

Peace :(

#17 wetpixel

wetpixel

    Wetpixel

  • Admin
  • 2943 posts
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 26 October 2003 - 12:09 PM

Let me sum this up for the last time - I do not wish to get dragged into a mudslinging debate. In this regard let me apologise about my previous remark about other "noisy cameras" in case I offended anyone - it was honestly a remark made in jest (with a smilie attached)

...

If you still feel this is an outrageous error on my part - I do apologise again and I will not be offended in any way if you wish to delete my review and comments from the Wetpixel site.

Andre - We certainly welcome your thoughts and opinions. "Noise" can be measured both by machines and by humans (subjectively), and all reviews have some amount of subjectivity in them. For 100% objectivity, people can peruse the specs themselves.
Eric Cheng - Administrator, Wetpixel -

#18 craig

craig

    Full Moon Rising

  • Super Mod
  • 2826 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin, TX

Posted 26 October 2003 - 12:53 PM

No offense taken, of course. I took a little Canon dig in your "style" not to be mean. I had hoped some would find it amusing. I fully recognize that the 10D is a fine camera and am by no means a D60/10D hater. I believe it is every bit the equal of, but not substantially better than, the D100 or S2. I've always believed it was the housing, ports, and lenses that mattered most in your choice of underwater setup.

I recognize that the 10D is reputed to have excellent noise performance but it not a huge differentiator and I don't think it enables an approach different from any of the other digital SLR's. I understand you didn't suggest that. I can say with certainty that the D100 is not usable underwater at ISO 1600 but is probably fine at 400 and maybe 800.

So here's the question: ignoring ambient light only, do you feel the combination of strobe power and subject distance compels you at times to use higher ISO's or are you simply trying to achieve blue water backgrounds in weak light without resorting to slow shutters? Granted I only have ISO 200, but I haven't yet encountered the need to speed it up. In the recent class, I was challenged to produce blue water with very slow shutters and was frequently begging for ISO 100 or even 50! Some would say the D100's lack of ISO 100 is a weakness regardless of the noise. There are times when film shooters prefer a faster film UW, but 50 and 100 speed film seems to be what's most commonly chosen.
I love it when a plan comes together.
- Col. John "Hannibal" Smith

------
Nikon, Seatool, Nexus, Inon
My Galleries

#19 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 26 October 2003 - 09:10 PM

So here's the question:  ignoring ambient light only, do you feel the combination of strobe power and subject distance compels you at times to use higher ISO's or are you simply trying to achieve blue water backgrounds in weak light without resorting to slow shutters?  ...

.  There are times when film shooters prefer a faster film UW, but 50 and 100 speed film seems to be what's most commonly chosen.


Yes indeed that is the case. What would be your slowest acceptable shutter speed? Mine is 1/30 although I would really prefer 1/45 sec or faster. So if I do want to do a close focus wide angle shot, for example. where I would like an aperture of about f16, it may simply not be possible at ISO 100 on certain days. Now if you dive on the British Columbia coast you are not going to get that shot even at ISO 400. So the only option available is to increase your ISO setting

Regarding film choice - I totally agree with you. Over the years I have used predominantly Fuji Velvia ( ISO 50 ) , Fuji Provia F ( ISO 100) and more recently the new ISO 100 Velvia. I have used Fuji Provia F 400 when the conditions were not so bright. Even during a recent dive trip to Cozumel I found myself being very grateful for having this around as it rained the whole week I was there. However. I have not been completely satisfied with ISO 400 slide film as the grain does become visible unfortunately so it was a stop gap measure.

My wide angle pictures have generally been reserved for the middle of the day when there was some bright sunlight around. Now with digital I feel quite liberated. I have the option of doing this on many more occasions and I am much less restricted by the weather and time of day. If the DM says this is a good wide angle dive - I am there with a wide angle set up!

#20 craig

craig

    Full Moon Rising

  • Super Mod
  • 2826 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin, TX

Posted 26 October 2003 - 09:20 PM

Funny, I had that same question in my post but deleted it. I think that's what it gets down to. If you want blue backgrounds and a fast enough shutter, you may ultimately need to use high ISO's to get what you want. Makes perfect sense to me though I haven't been doing the type of dives where that's been the case.
I love it when a plan comes together.
- Col. John "Hannibal" Smith

------
Nikon, Seatool, Nexus, Inon
My Galleries