Sharper RAW files ?

[John D]

I have both the 400D and 40D and can't see any difference in terms of sharpness from either. I shoot in RAW and always apply some degree of sharpening. The amount of sharpening required is fairly similar for both cameras.
IMHO both cameras produce excellent images.
Hope this helps.
John D

[MeadsMan]

Thanks John D,does the 40D have the same or a different sensor do you know ? Apart from the sharpness question,I am sure I have read that some cameras offer less noise at higher iso settings,have you found this to be the case with your 400D and 40D ?

[Jim Ford]

Originally Posted by MeadsMan

Would I get a sharper image straight from camera if I upgraded my 400D to a higher end Canon like the 40D for instance ?

Both cameras have the same 10.1 Mega pixels and the same physical size CMOS sensor, therefore I assume the sensor resolution is the same. So, assuming the same lens, we can expect the same degree of unsharpness of raw files straight out of the camera, so I think the answer is 'No'. I deliberately said 'unsharpness', because as I've mentioned previously _all_ images that are not sharpened in the camera are inevitably unsharp, and unless you want to achieve some sort of artistic effect, they _will_ need sharpening (unless you just want thumbnails or very small enlargements).

My main 'walk around' lens is described in dpreview as 'quite simply a superb lens, which can lay claim to being one of the very best standard zooms currently available'. My macro lens is similarly described 'the nearest we've yet found to a technically perfect lens'. In both cases they produce soft images out of the camera, which need sharpening. I say this to illustrate that just because you have a high performance body and lens, it doesn't mean that you get sharp raw images.

I'm sorry if I bang on about it, but the first lesson a new DSLR owner really needs to learn concerns sharpening!

Jim

[MeadsMan]

Thanks Jim,I agree with you,it`s a whole new ball game with a Digital SLR.I was never into my own developing,and have found it very hard,that an expensive camera {for me} needed a fair wack of computer enhancement to get the most from it.I still personally like to keep any of my enhancements to a minimum,but sharpness is of course in almost all photos paramount.Thanks again for the links,some of it has made sense to me allready,I`ll keep mulling over them no doubt.

Cheers.

[Jim Ford]

Perhaps I should have mentioned that sharpening produces the _illusion_ of a sharper image. Still that's what photography's all about - producing the illusion of a 3d scene on a 2d medium!

Jim

[BillyPilgrim]

Originally Posted by MeadsMan

Would I get a sharper image straight from camera if I upgraded my 400D to a higher end Canon like the 40D for instance ?

I always thought that the level of sharpness was dependent on the quality of the lens and nowt to do with the body?

[momji1971]

All Dslr camera have a filter in front of the sensor. Hence why ALL files are unsharp with no sharpening applied in camera or post processing. Same goes for £200 camera or a £4500 camera.

ALL files need minor sharpening to bring back what you saw through the lens.

regards.
Stu.

p.s. Full frame cameras will have better control of noise due to not being crammed with photosites.
(i.e. D3 has the same pixle count as D300 but larger sensor)

[MeadsMan]

Originally Posted by BillyPilgrim

I always thought that the level of sharpness was dependent on the quality of the lens and nowt to do with the body?

I used to believe that too ...It can make a difference,I used to use a 75/300 mm zoom ,I was never all that happy with the images from it,I then purchased a 400mm prime,and am a lot happier with the results,I am fairly certain,this isn`t just down to the extra range it gives.But even with this lens,that has had nothing but good reviews,I still find I need to add some sharpening,to get them looking there best.And I nearly always use some kind of support,ie a monopod or tripod.

[momji1971]

The 'AA' filter in front of the Bayer sensor that resides in 99% of cameras is designed to blur and smooth the captured image to stop the aliasing effect naturally caused by the sensor pattern. Some cameras have a stronger AA filter others weaker. All except sigma (foveon sensor) have this.

Yes good glass helps. Yes solid support helps. BUT, you will always have to sharpen at some point.

Kind regards.
Stu.

[dunlin]

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

If you shoot raw, the images will always need sharpening, either transparently with the default setting of the raw processor, or manually. See the following link, which is a good explanation why (and should be made 'sticky'!):

Sharpening -- Part I

For more information regarding sharpening, download the 'Photokit Sharpener' manual from here:

PhotoKit Sharpener Manual

BTW, 'raw' is not an acronym like 'JPEG', and therefore should not be capitalised. It means exactly what it says!

Jim

Hi jim
I down loaded the link you posted on sharpening http://ronbigelow.com/articles/sharpen1/sharpen1.htm
For any one who hasnt read it there are six parts or chapters in the link on sharpening.
Its well worth downloading so you can read it at your leasure. The article starts with simple sharpening techniques and progresses on to more advanced techniques.
I found the article fascinating as well as educational. I never knew there was that many different ways of enhancing a photo.
Thanks for posting the link jim and if you have any more links id appreciate it if you could pm them to me.
Ive been messing about with photoshop for a few years now and still only know 10% of it.
It wouldnt be a bad idea to have a permanent link on wab where members could share there photoshop tips and techniques

regards mark..