brent collins: "Mediocre JPEG processing with mushy detail and visible artifacts" does not equal a score of 78. MANY people shoot only jpeg.
Wow, just wow. What a hypocritical person. And also one who obviously LOVES to exaggerate. I read a review and gave MY opinion. I didn't realize that only certain people can respond to Sony reviews. Fanboy calling fanboys....too funny.
Direct link |
Posted on Sep 15, 2012 at 21:24:42 UTC
brent collins: "Mediocre JPEG processing with mushy detail and visible artifacts" does not equal a score of 78. MANY people shoot only jpeg.
Sensibill,
I own several brands and have zero bias. Each one has it's strengths. My posting history? Really? It's simple math. Why would I buy a camera of lesser IQ for more money. My EPL2 beats the Sony at jpeg. That matters to me and many others who use these cameras for quick easy outings when the DSLR is more than needed. Whine? I made a comment and gave some opinions. The only one acting like a child is you.
Direct link |
Posted on Sep 15, 2012 at 11:11:51 UTC
brent collins: "Mediocre JPEG processing with mushy detail and visible artifacts" does not equal a score of 78. MANY people shoot only jpeg.
Not a matter of learning. I shoot RAW almost all the time, but when my Epl2 can crush the Sony at jpeg with a higher selling price I then have reservations. To attack a persons choice to shoot jpeg and expect quality is idiotic
Direct link |
Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 16:55:12 UTC
Simon97: I agree with DPR's assessment. Shoot this thing RAW to get the 24mp resolution expected.
Noise at higher ISOs is a disappointment. Low noise at high ISO is part of the attraction of larger sensors. Compared the other cameras RAW noise is two stops worse and nearly 3 stops vs. the K5. The Sony 16mp sensor seems to be the current APS-C champ. This camera is a victim of the megapixel race. RIP
no, I'm saying that it's all subjective. Like I said several times before....get a Sony and we will have a challenge. Prove me wrong....
Direct link |
Posted on Nov 16, 2011 at 22:52:34 UTC
Simon97: I agree with DPR's assessment. Shoot this thing RAW to get the 24mp resolution expected.
Noise at higher ISOs is a disappointment. Low noise at high ISO is part of the attraction of larger sensors. Compared the other cameras RAW noise is two stops worse and nearly 3 stops vs. the K5. The Sony 16mp sensor seems to be the current APS-C champ. This camera is a victim of the megapixel race. RIP
Hahahahahaha. At 800 ISO it can't even beat my E-PL1 let alone my 7D. And I'm viewing this on my iPad with should surly mask any minor differences. Too bad the difference isn't minor.....it's painfully obvious.
Direct link |
Posted on Nov 16, 2011 at 19:01:26 UTC
Most people who have drinking problems place their beverage of choice in a different container to conceal the problem or skirt legal issues of open container laws.
Direct link |
Posted on Oct 5, 2010 at 14:52:07 UTC
as 6th comment
Unsheath? Quick release? Anybody else picking up on the tone here? ;-)
brent collins: "Mediocre JPEG processing with mushy detail and visible artifacts" does not equal a score of 78. MANY people shoot only jpeg.
Wow, just wow. What a hypocritical person. And also one who obviously LOVES to exaggerate. I read a review and gave MY opinion. I didn't realize that only certain people can respond to Sony reviews. Fanboy calling fanboys....too funny.
brent collins: "Mediocre JPEG processing with mushy detail and visible artifacts" does not equal a score of 78. MANY people shoot only jpeg.
Sensibill,
I own several brands and have zero bias. Each one has it's strengths. My posting history? Really? It's simple math. Why would I buy a camera of lesser IQ for more money. My EPL2 beats the Sony at jpeg. That matters to me and many others who use these cameras for quick easy outings when the DSLR is more than needed. Whine? I made a comment and gave some opinions. The only one acting like a child is you.
brent collins: "Mediocre JPEG processing with mushy detail and visible artifacts" does not equal a score of 78. MANY people shoot only jpeg.
Not a matter of learning. I shoot RAW almost all the time, but when my Epl2 can crush the Sony at jpeg with a higher selling price I then have reservations. To attack a persons choice to shoot jpeg and expect quality is idiotic
"Mediocre JPEG processing with mushy detail and visible artifacts" does not equal a score of 78. MANY people shoot only jpeg.
$2000.00 does not equal enthusiast
Simon97: I agree with DPR's assessment. Shoot this thing RAW to get the 24mp resolution expected.
Noise at higher ISOs is a disappointment. Low noise at high ISO is part of the attraction of larger sensors. Compared the other cameras RAW noise is two stops worse and nearly 3 stops vs. the K5. The Sony 16mp sensor seems to be the current APS-C champ. This camera is a victim of the megapixel race. RIP
no, I'm saying that it's all subjective. Like I said several times before....get a Sony and we will have a challenge. Prove me wrong....
Simon97: I agree with DPR's assessment. Shoot this thing RAW to get the 24mp resolution expected.
Noise at higher ISOs is a disappointment. Low noise at high ISO is part of the attraction of larger sensors. Compared the other cameras RAW noise is two stops worse and nearly 3 stops vs. the K5. The Sony 16mp sensor seems to be the current APS-C champ. This camera is a victim of the megapixel race. RIP
Hahahahahaha. At 800 ISO it can't even beat my E-PL1 let alone my 7D. And I'm viewing this on my iPad with should surly mask any minor differences. Too bad the difference isn't minor.....it's painfully obvious.
Most people who have drinking problems place their beverage of choice in a different container to conceal the problem or skirt legal issues of open container laws.
Sad to see people like this, but contrary to some, it's not a matter of luck. Also, it's clearly a female.