What actually makes good image quality?

[Singhy]

Hey guys im new here, I have recently purchased a Canon 1000D and a nice camera it is :D

I was wondering what exactly makes the image quality what it is, ive read a few articles here and havent found an answer so far? Is it the camera itself or the lens attached? As im using a 18-55mm lens now will using another more expensive lens increase the image quality or just have better lighting, colour?

Sorry pretty new to SLR cameras myself ^^ Many thanks

[EveryMilesAMemory]

It's the 12 inches behind the camera that makes good images:D

[BestVisuals]

It's the photographer, but unless you're going for moody out-of-focus images, a sharp lens and good camera are required. We're now at the point with digital cameras where flaws in the glass is far more noticeable than it was with film, so I'd say good glass is the priority.

[S.Horton]

Skip all the commercial 'stuff' and this site has a good starter explanation.
http://www.imatest.com/docs/iqf.html

[DC Fan]

Factors:

Does the image tell a story?

Does the image stir the emotions of the viewers?

What passes as technical quality - sharpness, exposure - pales in comparison to those factors. Images that are technically flawed by some 21st-century standards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lange-MigrantMother02.jpg) are renowned because they are more than just files or patterns of grains and colors - they touch the heart, they delight, frustrate, confound and stimulate.

[ron chappel]

haha,very tricky question Singhy,as you can see by the varied answers!
Assuming you arent referring to the artistic qualities of the (and it doesnt appear you are),here are some of the most important factors(not ness in order of relevance!):

Camera - any DSLR camera can get awesome image quality at lower ISO's,but some like your 1000D also give great results even when the ISO is raised to 800 or even more
Notice i dont mention megapixels?It's simply not relevant these days-all DSLR's have enough
Lenses - Yes lenses can and do make a difference!! Your 18-55 is an ok basic lens but try some of canon's best glass (there are too many to mention).Awesome!
Of course many of these lenses cost heaps but there are occasional bargains like the EF50/1.8II

Editing - what you do in the computer once the images are downloaded can also make a big difference!
Sharpening usually helps (dont overdo it or the pics look weird),playing with the contrast nearly always makes a small improvement while playing with light levels and colour balance can make big difference (depending on the image)

[bildeb0rg]

Light

[nphsbuckeye]

Factors:

Does the image tell a story?

Does the image stir the emotions of the viewers?

What passes as technical quality - sharpness, exposure - pales in comparison to those factors. Images that are technically flawed by some 21st-century standards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lange-MigrantMother02.jpg) are renowned because they are more than just files or patterns of grains and colors - they touch the heart, they delight, frustrate, confound and stimulate.
Agreed. I got the Best of PJ 2008 a week ago or so, and although some might rip pictures apart for technical anal reasons, they are all outstandingly composed and fill with emotion.

[friz]

Factors:

Does the image tell a story?

Does the image stir the emotions of the viewers?

What passes as technical quality - sharpness, exposure - pales in comparison to those factors. Images that are technically flawed by some 21st-century standards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lange-MigrantMother02.jpg) are renowned because they are more than just files or patterns of grains and colors - they touch the heart, they delight, frustrate, confound and stimulate.
Bingo! We have a winner! This is what matters to me. A good chance that the pictures that have significance to me may not be significant to you. That's what makes this fun.

[cdifoto]

Hey guys im new here, I have recently purchased a Canon 1000D and a nice camera it is :D

I was wondering what exactly makes the image quality what it is, ive read a few articles here and havent found an answer so far? Is it the camera itself or the lens attached? As im using a 18-55mm lens now will using another more expensive lens increase the image quality or just have better lighting, colour?

Sorry pretty new to SLR cameras myself ^^ Many thanks
Light, subject, composition, and emotion.

[gjl711]

... Images that are technically flawed by some 21st-century standards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lange-MigrantMother02.jpg) are renowned because they are more than just files or patterns of grains and colors - they touch the heart, they delight, frustrate, confound and stimulate.

Bingo! We have a winner! This is what matters to me. ....But that wasn't the question. There is a huge difference between image quality and a quality image. The former is 100% technical and the later a combination of technical and artistic.

To me image quality is governed by:
proper settings,
quality glass
quality sensor
post processing skills.

THese will maximize the image quality. Of course the image itself can be crap, but at least it will be quality crap. :)

[Tee Why]

I think you are asking the technical aspects of image quality while many are giving you an answer to what makes a great image.

To me, a great image has emotional impact, good composition, good use of lighting, and proper timing.

I think in terms of image quality, I can recall several factors.
Resolution: does it clearly show details? Especially in the corners of the image and with the aperture wide open?
Contrast: Is there a clear transition from bright and dark parts of the image?
Color rendition: Is there an accurate reproduction of colors/tones?
Distortion control: Is barrel or pincushion distortion control so that the image looks to be on the same plane?
Chromatic aberration control: Are there any color abberations (e.g. purple fringing around high contrast subjects)?
Noise level: Is the noise level low enough that it does not interfere with the impact of the image?

With dslr's, some things like noise and Chromatic aberration are the result of the sensor, even resolution to some degree is a combination of the sensor and the lens. But of the two, I'd say it's more the lens.

[sjones]

I am also assuming that you are inquiring about the technical aspect, which is fine, but if the photograph is uninspiring or appears poorly executed, particularly to you, since it is your photo, then any issues involving technical quality are irrelevant.

[Picture North Carolina]

Assuming the photographer know what they are doing technically, IMHO the most important advice is:

Excellent glass on a lesser body can produce better images than bad glass on a better body.

You can have the best body and the best sensor in the world, but if the light that is thrown into it is produced by something like a $149.95 piece of crap Quantaray lens, that's exactly what you will get - a crappy image.

[gjl711]

...
Excellent glass on a lesser body can produce better images than bad glass on a better body.... I totally agree with this statement. All today's bodies are so close in capability and quality that one would have a most difficult time telling a photo taken from one or another. But glass has such a great range in quality that an upgrade in glass give an immediate result. A great example is the 18-55 kit lens and the 17-55IS. Same range with very difficult results.

[clipper_from_oz]

regrettably the old saying....the more you pay the more you get is very right in this instance....look at sigmas "ex dg" range for entry lens good quality.......kills canons std ef range