450d vs 300d image quality

thelegend

thelegend

thelegend

Associate
Joined
8 Oct 2003
Posts
256
hello

i have recently bought a 450d after previously owning a 300d.

i have only got the kit lense at the moment but imnot very happy with the quality of the images.

in comparison the quailty of the the 300d images with the 300d kit lens are a lot sharper and less grainy.

has anybody else noticed this?

lee
 
thelegend said:
hello

i have recently bought a 450d after previously owning a 300d.

i have only got the kit lense at the moment but imnot very happy with the quality of the images.

in comparison the quailty of the the 300d images with the 300d kit lens are a lot sharper and less grainy.

has anybody else noticed this?

lee
Click to expand...

I can't see any reasons why that should be true.

450D does have a newer sensor and the kit lens is much better.

perhaps you are doing something wrong??

sid
 
hmm

not sure what i would be doing wrong.

took a few photos the other day and just wasnt too pleased with them.

not had the 450d long.

ill upload a full size image and link it.

to get peoples opinions.
 
I'm not sure about everyone else, but I find after getting a new camera it takes a good few weeks and a fair few images whilst you get used to the way the camera works till your skill gets carried over from one camera to another and it starts showing it's better colours :) (no pun intended :p).

Your best bet will be to set up a tripod and take a simple image on the 300D and then swap it directly with the 450D without moving anything and take another image with identical settings to the 300D and do a comparison between the 2 :)
 
Yeah, with a more modern body that has a newer sensor it may take some getting used to.

Try compairing two like for like raw shots.
 
cheers for the ideas.

problem is, is i dont have my trusty 300d no more.

i just hope the image quality does improve as it does seem very poor in comparison.
 
hmm, from your sample i wouldn't say it was grainy at all tbh, sharpness isn't too bad either,especially if its from the kit lens.
 
ok, when looking at reviews of the 450d it was quite often said that the images could be a bit lifeless and dull until tweaked or processed....
I guess with a bit of practice and some more time your images would be more to your liking!

:)
 
The image you uploaded is suffering from hand shake. It doesn't help that the point of focus is near the rear tyre on the left central back car.
 
wez130 said:
hmm, from your sample i wouldn't say it was grainy at all tbh, sharpness isn't too bad either,especially if its from the kit lens.
Click to expand...

Despite what folk think I personally think the kit lens is a great bit of kit. Ok it's not the best and it's slow and clunky but for a kit lens its nothing to complain at!

Some of my most favourited shots on DA were taken on it.
 
well, it's not uncommon for newer cameras to get worse tan their predecessor.

You see this with the Canon 40D to 50D (check DPreview for instance), the 40D basically gives better image quality (noise, dynamic range, sharpness and detail).

In general, adding megapixels degrades image quality and technology does not increase at the same rate as the mega pixel race.

I don't know if there would be night and day differences between a 300D and 450D. Probably only if you pushed the boundries.
My mates 4MP D1H gives stunning A3 prints for starters.
 
My dad had a 300d and went on to a 450d and he also thought the pics wernt as good with the 450d.

As Ive got his old 300d we did some crude tests and found the main difference was the saturation and sharpness of the 450d wasn't as high as the 300d but both these can be altered in the menu or even better during post processing in Photoshop.

I found a similar problem when I changed from a 20D to a 1DmkII a few years ago, because the 1DmkII didn't do as much in camera processing as the 20D the images didn't look as good but with a few tweaks in Photos shop they were great, i imagine its a similar story with the 450D, it probably doesn't do as much in camera processing by default as the 300D did.
 
Attu90 said:
My dad had a 300d and went on to a 450d and he also thought the pics wernt as good with the 450d.

As Ive got his old 300d we did some crude tests and found the main difference was the saturation and sharpness of the 450d wasn't as high as the 300d but both these can be altered in the menu or even better during post processing in Photoshop.

I found a similar problem when I changed from a 20D to a 1DmkII a few years ago, because the 1DmkII didn't do as much in camera processing as the 20D the images didn't look as good but with a few tweaks in Photos shop they were great, i imagine its a similar story with the 450D, it probably doesn't do as much in camera processing by default as the 300D did.
Click to expand...

phft!! your pops new camera is broken then mate. :(

I use one of three 450D's at work ( we used to use two 10D's ) and can tell you they blow 10D's out the water.( 10D being a magnesium bodied 300D anyway)

If you like macro work your going to love the live view feature...;)


For static images the 450D is better than the 40D according to the forums..

.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom