Barry Goyette
Second Officer
Flight distance : 14928 ft
United States
Offline
|
Hogster Posted at 2018-10-11 00:58
So do you think that original shot which you posted on RCGroups was a one-off, possibly caused by a mis-focus? The difference seemed startling in that example!
Thanks for your help
So as for your samples...I see what you're seeing , but it's not definitive -- as things like the distance and types of subject matter, lighting etc are all different. What I do see is that the x5s has a fair bit more noise, and that, in combination with higher aliasing, could be introducing the "appearance" of detail in the shot...sure I see that things like the bricks on the driveway are rendered, and that's typical of a sensor with a weak or no AA filter. When I sharpen the X7 image with a .3-.5 pixel radius, I get a result that looks very similar to what the x5s looks like...it's a little more aliased and noisy. and at 100%.. you'd be hard pressed to pick out which image was which. At 200-400% I'm seeing problem with both photos...but that's what pixel peeping is about...finding problems. 100% generally is the only one that matters. I'll bet if you shot the same image, with both cameras, sharpened the x7 a "little" and printed both at 16x20, and showed to a client, they couldn't tell the difference...although, they might notice the better color range, and dynamic range of the x7 and if they were really savvy, the lower noise.
As for my experience. I think I already mentioned that the still shot you picked and then cropped to an out of focus area, was focused to an area of the foreground, and that the still shot was at f2.8 versus 4.5 for the video frame. (2.8 is definitely a tad soft on all the DL lenses). With the vineyard shots I mentioned, the f-stop was the same, and the distances of the shots I looked at were the same, and I didn't see any significant difference in the level of detail..if anything the video shots seemed to have a little more noise reduction.
For perspective, my other cameras are a hasselblad H5d-40 and a Canon 5dsr. Both cameras without AA filters. I'm at least as sensitive as you about the softness introduced by the AA filter and noise reduction on DJI's cameras. I just think the X7 is operating about as designed (as a Cinema camera with a well tuned OLPF), and while your expectations may be more, it's not a defective system. It's just not one designed for higher res stills than the x5s (the vertical resolution of the two cameras is nearly identical, so expecting "more detail" because of the increased cost isn't a healthy expectation).
The question comes then, if it is only "as good" (or not quite as good :-) at rendering aliased detail as the x5s, and that's what you want in a picture...(I'm surprised in all the pixel peeping you haven't noticed the noise of the x5s, and aren't commenting on how noise free the x7 is)...the question is whether the x7 is a better camera for you. Well it does have more horizontal coverage, and the lenses generally are better in the corners...It has about a stop of additional DR, and a significantly better color depth...but if those things aren't as important as pixel level sharpness, and most importantly, you're not using the camera for what it's designed for...video/cinema/le film...then it's probably not the camera for you. |
|