10d & 300d: differences in filesizes?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by BUNTOVNIK, Sep 6, 2003.



    I've been browsing through the reviews of the new 300d, and noticed that in
    those comparison tables filesizes in 300d are quite larger than those in
    10d. I'm a bit puzzled about what's causing this, and wonder if anyone here
    knows something more?

    Could it be that 300d's phisically smaller sensor is producing more noise
    than the one in 10d? I have also noticed that 300d has it's sharpenin
    algorythm set to default on +1 (which is equal to +2 on 10d, as I
    understand) so could this be it?
    BUNTOVNIK, Sep 6, 2003
    1. Advertisements


    Mark B. Guest

    It's not the size of the sensor, because it's the same size as the 10D.
    Yes, the most likely explanation I've heard is because the sharpening is set
    higher than the 10D by default.

    Mark B., Sep 6, 2003
    1. Advertisements


    Jim Johnston Guest

    300D 3072 x 2048 JPEG Fine: 3.1 MB
    . 3072 x 2048 JPEG Normal: 1.8 MB
    . 2048 x 1360 JPEG Fine: 1.8 MB
    . 2048 x 1360 JPEG Normal: 1.2 MB
    . 1536 x 1024 JPEG Fine: 1.4 MB
    . 1536 x 1024 JPEG Normal: 0.9 MB

    10D 3072 x 2048 JPEG Fine: 2.4 MB
    . 3072 x 2048 JPEG Normal: 1.2 MB
    . 2048 x 1360 JPEG Fine: 1.3 MB
    . 2048 x 1360 JPEG Normal: 0.7 MB
    . 1536 x 1024 JPEG Fine: 0.8 MB
    . 1536 x 1024 JPEG Normal: 0.4 MB

    This is taken out of the manuals & 300D is larger. Jim Johnston
    Jim Johnston, Sep 6, 2003

    Matti Vuori Guest

    As was stated previously, one camera sharpens the image more, so the images
    are not the same.
    Do you really think that Canon does not have a standard test target suite
    against with the file sizes are determined?
    Matti Vuori, Sep 7, 2003

    Scott Elliot Guest

    Exactly. Sharpening introduces artifacts. JPEG compression enhances
    artifacts. One way to reduce the enhancement of artifacts would be to
    reduce the compression ratio. If you have ever converted files to JPEG you
    will know that the final image size it determined by the compression factor
    you use. I don't know that is what Canon is doing, it is just one possible
    I have no idea what test targets Canon uses. I do know that JPEG files from
    my D60 are often larger than the file size advertised by Canon. Maybe Canon
    is switching to a more realistic test.

    Scott Elliot, Sep 7, 2003

    Jim Townsend Guest

    Yes.. Sharpening makes a huge difference in file size. (So does ISO.. Higher
    ISO's introduce noise which drives up the JPEG size.

    I wonder if.. since the 300D is aimed at the point and shoot market, they
    introduced more default JPEG sharpening than the 10D.

    10D images are pretty soft by default and sometimes require touching up with
    image editing software. Most of mine need a bit of a tweak..

    That's something the P&S crowd may not be keen on..
    Jim Townsend, Sep 8, 2003

    niicko Guest

    Hi Jim,

    Can you comment more on that statment! I've just bought a 10D - I used to
    have a P&S and then went to a Pro90is then thought I would go for something
    semi-pro or at least at the bottom of the pro pile.
    My camera is currently sitting with customs until i can get round there to
    release it but are there not sharpness settings within the camera?

    niicko, Sep 8, 2003
  8. Indeed, and obviously size will range depending on the subject. This may
    be another 'wait till it's out and tested' to confirm.
    Jason O'Rourke, Sep 8, 2003

    Jim Townsend Guest

    Hi Nick..

    Yes, the 10D has a sharpness, saturation and contrast setting.. Just like the
    10D. Even at its highest setting, the images aren't that sharp.

    The debate lies with whether to sharpen in camera or with external software.

    Camera software simply sharpens everything. It's pretty crude. But with a
    program like Photoshop, you can sharpen with much more sophistication.

    For instance you can use unsharp mask which gives you the ability set
    parameters like threshhold and pixel radius. You can even do advanced
    processing where you split the image into color channels and apply different
    levels of sharpening to each one.

    This characteristic is normal for professional cameras where the users have a
    tried and true workflow for processing their images. Of course some point and
    shooters find this inconvenient..

    I've done some digging and it turns out the Rebel will have more default
    sharpening to avoid complaints..
    Jim Townsend, Sep 8, 2003

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    I used to think that the issue was merely that simple, until I bought an
    "L" lens.

    You see, the regular non-L line of Canon lenses *can't* deliver the
    resolution that the sensor is capable of resolving. If Canon sharpened
    all files in-camera so that they looked good out of the camera with
    regular lenses, the result from the sharper lenses would be severe
    over-sharpening. Maybe that's one of the reasons DSLRs don't sharpen
    out of the camera; they don't know how much to sharpen, because they
    don't know how sharp the lens is.

    The images out of the camera with my 300mm f4L lens are nearly as sharp
    as the images out of fixed-lens/tiny CCD cameras.
    JPS, Sep 10, 2003
  11. Even on a camera with a non-interchangeable lens, the best amount of
    sharpening depends on the f-number, how well the autofocus worked, and
    whether the camera or subject moved during the exposure. Most of these
    factors are beyond the possible knowledge of the camera. It's just
    better to do the sharpening under the guidance of a trained eye.

    Dave Martindale, Sep 10, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.