Reading mode: Light Dark

Sony HX1 new samples!

Go to last post
marti you keep on insisting on SOMETHING WRONG, FROM THE BEGINNING
chech out the exif and STOP INSISTING ON SOMETHING WRONG
SONY HX1 DOES NOT HAVE 64 NOR 80 NOR 100 ISO
ITS LOWEST ISO IS 125

STOP INSISTING, YOU ARE WRONG! REALISE THIS AT LAST AND STOP INSISTING!
 
akaloith said:
marti you keep on insisting on SOMETHING WRONG, FROM THE BEGINNING
chech out the exif and STOP INSISTING ON SOMETHING WRONG
SONY HX1 DOES NOT HAVE 64 NOR 80 NOR 100 ISO
ITS LOWEST ISO IS 125

STOP INSISTING, YOU ARE WRONG! REALISE THIS AT LAST AND STOP INSISTING!
Click to expand...
SEND THE GUY WHO WROTE THE ARTICLE A LETTER BECAUSE IT WAS NOT WRITTEN BY ME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I CLEARLY READ ISO> > > > > 64 in that ARTICLE......with a specific picture.

now u even blame me for that

this has nothing to do with insisting this has to do with reading what someone else wrote.

Buy the camera .........soon u can and enjoy.

--
  • living in harmony with nature and other beings...will create an better world for all * marti58 -2006
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marti58/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/worldwidefriendship/
 
Would the HX1 have a better quality than the Panasonic LX3?

in terms of pictures and 720p videos?
 
Wow, P90 has some really serious problems. I think that is why the Sony does so well with the superzooms, despite the competition having RAW, the Sony always ends up with the better value. I looked at the P90 and from the samples that I saw, clearly saw some issues. The H-50 redeemed itself by overcoming the H9 issues and problems and really kicked butt.

The HX1 hopefully does as well as the H-50.
akaloith said:


marti in another post you were wondering if sony hx1 can achieve
nikon p90 detail and you showed us a heavily resized p90 sample
well here is the real thing
ahh sorry the left is the sony and right is nikon
poor nikon :(
Click to expand...
 
The ISO levels on the sample photos on the Trendy Net review, range from ISO 64 to ISO 800. Like most photos from the HX1 we've seen on reviews so far, these look so weak, it's as if someone was deliberately trying to make the camera look bad. In fact, there hasn't been a real review of it yet. The brief remarks on websites like this, do nothing more than parrot the blurbs that Sony has produced, describing it in nothing but superlative terms.

The HX1 video on the YouTube link on another message on this thread, looks almost completely free of rolling-shutter problems, although it was shot in foggy conditions and looks bleak otherwise.
--
Steve McDonald
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22121562@N00/
http://www.vimeo.com/user458315/videos



http://video.yahoo.com/people/4019627
 
makasu said:
Would the HX1 have a better quality than the Panasonic LX3?

in terms of pictures and 720p videos?
--
Click to expand...
From what little I've seen from the HX1, I'd say that the LX3 has better photo quality, although it is limited with its short zoom range. It's not the same sort of camera as the HX1. It's 720p video uses 23 Mbps for its M-JPEG format, while the 720p mode of the HX1 uses only 6 Mbps for its AVC format. The HX1 has only a Standard quality mode for 720p. Its 1080p mode has a Fine quality setting, using 12 Mbps. The AVC format is much more efficient and advanced than M-JPEG, so the HD video of the two models may be similar in quality although the LX3 requires more card-space to store it.

--
Steve McDonald
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22121562@N00/
http://www.vimeo.com/user458315/videos



http://video.yahoo.com/people/4019627
 
Stephen McDonald said:
The ISO levels on the sample photos on the Trendy Net review, range
from ISO 64 to ISO 800. Like most photos from the HX1 we've seen on
reviews so far, these look so weak, it's as if someone was
deliberately trying to make the camera look bad. In fact, there
hasn't been a real review of it yet. The brief remarks on websites
like this, do nothing more than parrot the blurbs that Sony has
produced, describing it in nothing but superlative terms.
Click to expand...
only time will answer the many questions, something else has come up... it seems higher ISO performance is better then the lower ISO ones ...at least in samples shown so far.

guess we need to wait till someone buy's it and start using it and show us 100% ones unedited....shot in manual ect...

so far the... so called reviews ...did not have shown anything earthquaking to my eye's.

lets hope its due user inabiity's.

--
  • living in harmony with nature and other beings...will create an better world for all * marti58 -2006
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marti58/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/worldwidefriendship/
 
Because both LX3 and HX1 costs around the same price. I don't know which to get. I asked a few stores and they said that the HX1 is incredible... But some samples I have seen on the forum are not great.

So which one should I buy? Since they are both around $600CDN?

Or should I invest a little more into the Canon T1i? Since I know someone that works at Canon and can get around 30% off?
 
I've almost bought LX3, but awful "pulsing bright line across screen" artifacts from CCD in movie mode from bright lights made me wait for HX1. (look in youtube for LX3 night movies).
 
shooting needs ........the LX is around some time now and enough examples on internet.

quality of the HX1 remain to be seen on this moment as we did not have seen real world samples or any serious testing site giving an review on it.

i would not compare them as they're different.
--
  • living in harmony with nature and other beings...will create an better world for all * marti58 -2006
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marti58/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/worldwidefriendship/
 
The LX3 will perform better than the HX1 because it has a larger sensor: 1/1.6" vs 1/2.3". If image quality is a priority, go for LX3. If versatility is what you want, go for Sony superzooms. LX3 is for the more serious photographers, Sony's lineup is for the average consumers.
nygus said:
I've almost bought LX3, but awful "pulsing bright line across screen"
artifacts from CCD in movie mode from bright lights made me wait for
HX1. (look in youtube for LX3 night movies).
Click to expand...
It's not an artifact, it's a common problem with CCD sensors. CMOS is better for video. CCD is superior for image quality, but CMOS is cheaper to produce, much more energy-efficient and has faster processing, at the expense of image noise and poor light sensitivity.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/843/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ProfHankD
I would go 500mm and I would go 500 more
Replies
1
Views
52K
Tom Caldwell
T
M
From the past, to the future.
Replies
12
Views
7K
Tom Caldwell
T
Alex Ethridge
Acronyms used in photography
2
Replies
27
Views
24K
Guy Parsons
Guy Parsons
E
Testing the Sony 70-350mm with comparisons to Sony 70-300mm
Replies
10
Views
15K
Ed Church
E
ProfHankD
Are cheap old lenses still IQ-competitive with midrange new?
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
4K
M_digicapt
M

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top