I'd like to have an SLT-mirror that flips up during the shot

Started Oct 1, 2012 | Discussions thread
theswede
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,936Gear list
Like?
Re: Here are sample pictures with, and without an SLT mirror
In reply to Dirk W, Oct 3, 2012

Dirk W wrote:

The only fact between the comparison pictures is that one was without the SLT, the other with, and that the ones without have more detail and less noise.

Where is your evidence that every other factor was identical?

As a trivial example, white balance is visibly different. How can you evidence that this is not the case when it's clearly visible?

It is not helpful that you slam out a number of wild assumptions what other factors might possibly have caused that - without any proof:

The word "assumption" does not mean what you seem to think it means. And there is nothing "wild" about observing that every factor which is not explicitly stated as controlled is uncontrolled. That is the null hypothesis, requiring precisely zero assumptions.

What does require assumption, and rather wild ones at that, is that factors which are not explicitly stated as controlled, complete with tolerances, are in fact controlled with a tolerance bordering on perfection. That is, to state it frankly, delusional.

What is your proof that the new SLT would be better in that respect?

Immaterial since the problem you're claiming exists doesn't actually exist.

What is your proof that there are AA filter differences, and if so, that these lead to these results?

The observation that different camera models have different AA filters. That different AA filters lead to different amount of detail and noise is basic physics.

What is your proof that there are processing differences and if so, that these lead to these results?

The observation that the cameras contain different firmware with different results from identical settings, and the observation that results from RAW conversion using identical settings will vary.

What is your proof that there are white balance differences and if so, that these lead to these results?

Not being color blind and looking at the image is enough.

What is your proof that there are focus differences, and if so, that these lead to these results?

Careful observation of the photographs show differences in focus, not only between camera models but even between varying photographs using the same model. If you really need "proof" that focus differences lead to difference in perceived detail you really have no business talking about any of this.

What is your proof that there are exposure differences, and if so, that these lead to these results?

DPR has stated so, and you can just look at the EXIF information to verify this. And I thought you were the one trying to lecture me on how exposure differences lead to IQ differences. Have you suddenly forgotten this?

LOL your statements are all empty blah-blah without any factual proof, compared to the clear and undoubted fact of the missing SLT. TROLLS!

Ok, so where is the list of controlled parameters and the tolerance they have been kept within for the DPR camera tests? If you can provide this you have a point we can start discussion and isolation of differing parameters from. Until then you don't.

Jesper

 theswede's gear list:theswede's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony SLT-A37 Sony 50mm F1.4 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Huh?New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow