Reading mode: Light Dark

F707-CP5700 comparison (part II)

  • Thread starter Thread starter HelenPB
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
H

HelenPB

Guest
As requested, I did some more comparisons between the 707 and 5700, this time without inadvertently leaving Nikon's saturation control on. Pretty much the same subjects, although there are some interesting zooms and saturated flower shots. I should note that they were both set on auto focus, but with the Nikon it's not the default setting, which I didn't like at all; the exact name for it is listed on the page.

http://www.pbase.com/helenpb/sony_f707nikon_cp_5700_comparis

--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
 
That may be. But I wanted to use as close to the same settings as possible, since I did this yesterday and one setting was different between cameras (and I was requested to do it over). Since I have use of the Nikon for a little while, I just thought it would be interesting to see how the two compared when used in a pretty automatic mode. (I've only ever had Sony digital cameras, so the CP5700 is a new experience for me.)

Yes, I would agree, some of the F707 shots look overexposed, but that always seems to happen with my camera with reddish/pinkish flowers in brilliant sunlight as well as with most scenes shot in Landscape Mode.

Helen
Christian said:
First of all: same ISO settings - the 707 exposes automatically ca.
twice as much as cp5700 (see exposure times and f-stop). The
pictuires of 707 look IMHO overexposed.
Click to expand...
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
 
Helen, look also to the 707- Review by Phil Askey at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscf707/page16.asp . He compared it to canon g2 with the following result:

"The first thing to note is that although both cameras shot the same exposure (1/6 sec, F4.0) the G2 was set to ISO 50, the F707 set to ISO 100... It goes to show the wide variation in what one manufacturer alls 'ISO 100 equiv.' or 'ISO 50 equiv.' The G2's ISO 50 is probably in reality higher than the quoted figure and that the F707's ISO 100 is lower."

I estimated the real ISO value is about 64 instead of 100, but now i will try to expose my photographs with exposure compensation of -0.7 as standard. I' not sure- but i'm already satisfied with my 707.

--
Christian

http://www.christian-bruenig.de
nigt shots with 707: http://www.christian-bruenig.de/nacht
http://www2.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc.php4?mypics=2488
 
Christian,

Very interesting. I think I had heard or read that before but hadn't really focused on it until you brought it up (no pun intended). Anyway, your idea sounds like a good one; hope you'll post some of your shots!

I love my F707, too, but as I said it is enjoyable to have the experience of using another maker's camera to my heart's content. I had actually thought of buying it myself but decided against it; I think I'll wait and see what the F707 successor is all about.

Helen
Christian said:
Helen, look also to the 707- Review by Phil Askey at
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscf707/page16.asp . He
compared it to canon g2 with the following result:
"The first thing to note is that although both cameras shot the
same exposure (1/6 sec, F4.0) the G2 was set to ISO 50, the F707
set to ISO 100... It goes to show the wide variation in what one
manufacturer alls 'ISO 100 equiv.' or 'ISO 50 equiv.' The G2's ISO
50 is probably in reality higher than the quoted figure and that
the F707's ISO 100 is lower."
I estimated the real ISO value is about 64 instead of 100, but now
i will try to expose my photographs with exposure compensation of
-0.7 as standard. I' not sure- but i'm already satisfied with my
707.

--
Christian

http://www.christian-bruenig.de
nigt shots with 707: http://www.christian-bruenig.de/nacht
http://www2.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc.php4?mypics=2488
Click to expand...
--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
 
Not a very accurate comparison Helen, ..............................you really need to make sure both cameras are on manual with exactly the same settings and exactly the same focal length,.............................take some measurements then do it again.

That said, the images from the 5700 look very good and the colour balance looks better than the 707........so you need to do a more accurate comparison before i can truly say that the 5700 pulls better images than the 707.
Helen Betts said:
As requested, I did some more comparisons between the 707 and 5700,
this time without inadvertently leaving Nikon's saturation control
on. Pretty much the same subjects, although there are some
interesting zooms and saturated flower shots. I should note that
they were both set on auto focus, but with the Nikon it's not the
default setting, which I didn't like at all; the exact name for it
is listed on the page.

http://www.pbase.com/helenpb/sony_f707nikon_cp_5700_comparis

--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
Click to expand...
--
http://www.fototime.com/inv/757AE7C15569148
You only live once ,and always suck the lemon.

have a nice day and don't loose your head, it will show your lack of maturity and your age.
 
Thank you, Helen.

My interest in Auto functions had more to do with exposure and saturation than anything else. You choice in focus was fine in both sets.

We asked, and you delivered. :-)

I'm on my way to take a look. More in a bit...
Helen Betts said:
As requested, I did some more comparisons between the 707 and 5700,
this time without inadvertently leaving Nikon's saturation control
on. Pretty much the same subjects, although there are some
interesting zooms and saturated flower shots. I should note that
they were both set on auto focus, but with the Nikon it's not the
default setting, which I didn't like at all; the exact name for it
is listed on the page.

http://www.pbase.com/helenpb/sony_f707nikon_cp_5700_comparis

--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
 
Hi eric -

It's' just a quick look at how the cameras perform. Helen didn't intend for it to be an exhaustive comparison. Just looking at a set of default settings when it comes to base operation in exposure and color.

For easy upload and viewing, she resized them. Of course, your points are correct. But another way to perform a comparison is to shoot in Auto so that you can see what the camera tries to give you on its own. That's how Phil does many of his own comparison photos, sometimes adjusting EV only.
eric noack said:
Helen Betts said:
As requested, I did some more comparisons between the 707 and 5700,
this time without inadvertently leaving Nikon's saturation control
on. Pretty much the same subjects, although there are some
interesting zooms and saturated flower shots. I should note that
they were both set on auto focus, but with the Nikon it's not the
default setting, which I didn't like at all; the exact name for it
is listed on the page.

http://www.pbase.com/helenpb/sony_f707nikon_cp_5700_comparis

--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
Click to expand...
--
http://www.fototime.com/inv/757AE7C15569148
You only live once ,and always suck the lemon.
have a nice day and don't loose your head, it will show your lack
of maturity and your age.
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
 
Eric,

I'm just having fun with a different camera for a few weeks and seeing how it compares to mine, not trying to do a scientific comparison! Quite frankly, I've spent more than enough time on this (and have a terrible sunburn to show for it today) and probably won't do much more in the way of comparisons except maybe to see how its flash and low-light capabilities compare with those of my F707.

I bought the Nikon on behalf of Mike Fitzgerald (as it was much cheaper in Japan than Australia) and will deliver it to him when I see him in Melbourne next month. The first two days of use yielded some pretty bad vignetting and poor focus, so I've basically been trying lots of different things to try to work out the bugs and get to know the camera a bit.

That said, I agree the color looks pretty good from the 5700, although I normally go for the more saturated colors of Sonys (but the red and brightly lit flowers really might make me rethink that). I thought about buying this for myself but have decided to wait and see what comes out next from Sony (not that I need another digital camera, anyway :-)).

Helen
eric noack said:
Not a very accurate comparison Helen,
..............................you really need to make sure both
cameras are on manual with exactly the same settings and exactly
the same focal length,.............................take some
measurements then do it again.
That said, the images from the 5700 look very good and the colour
balance looks better than the 707........so you need to do a more
accurate comparison before i can truly say that the 5700 pulls
better images than the 707.
Click to expand...
--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
 
Hmm.......Helen,............interesting point about the price........$2,342.00au seems to be the going rate here and I was quite frankly amazed at how quickly they got this camera on the market in Oz.

The vignetting, I guess can be attributed to the extra long focal length, which is really stretching the boundaries.
Helen Betts said:
I'm just having fun with a different camera for a few weeks and
seeing how it compares to mine, not trying to do a scientific
comparison! Quite frankly, I've spent more than enough time on this
(and have a terrible sunburn to show for it today) and probably
won't do much more in the way of comparisons except maybe to see
how its flash and low-light capabilities compare with those of my
F707.

I bought the Nikon on behalf of Mike Fitzgerald (as it was much
cheaper in Japan than Australia) and will deliver it to him when I
see him in Melbourne next month. The first two days of use yielded
some pretty bad vignetting and poor focus, so I've basically been
trying lots of different things to try to work out the bugs and get
to know the camera a bit.

That said, I agree the color looks pretty good from the 5700,
although I normally go for the more saturated colors of Sonys (but
the red and brightly lit flowers really might make me rethink
that). I thought about buying this for myself but have decided to
wait and see what comes out next from Sony (not that I need another
digital camera, anyway :-)).

Helen
eric noack said:
Not a very accurate comparison Helen,
..............................you really need to make sure both
cameras are on manual with exactly the same settings and exactly
the same focal length,.............................take some
measurements then do it again.
That said, the images from the 5700 look very good and the colour
balance looks better than the 707........so you need to do a more
accurate comparison before i can truly say that the 5700 pulls
better images than the 707.
Click to expand...
--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
Click to expand...
--
http://www.fototime.com/inv/757AE7C15569148
You only live once ,and always suck the lemon.

have a nice day and don't loose your head, it will show your lack of maturity and your age.
 
Point taken Ulysses.....its just that I always like to see a critical comparison.
Ulysses said:
My interest in Auto functions had more to do with exposure and
saturation than anything else. You choice in focus was fine in both
sets.

We asked, and you delivered. :-)

I'm on my way to take a look. More in a bit...
Helen Betts said:
As requested, I did some more comparisons between the 707 and 5700,
this time without inadvertently leaving Nikon's saturation control
on. Pretty much the same subjects, although there are some
interesting zooms and saturated flower shots. I should note that
they were both set on auto focus, but with the Nikon it's not the
default setting, which I didn't like at all; the exact name for it
is listed on the page.

http://www.pbase.com/helenpb/sony_f707nikon_cp_5700_comparis

--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
Click to expand...
--
http://www.fototime.com/inv/757AE7C15569148
You only live once ,and always suck the lemon.

have a nice day and don't loose your head, it will show your lack of maturity and your age.
 
Helen Betts said:
As requested, I did some more comparisons between the 707 and 5700,
this time without inadvertently leaving Nikon's saturation control
on. Pretty much the same subjects, although there are some
interesting zooms and saturated flower shots. I should note that
they were both set on auto focus, but with the Nikon it's not the
default setting, which I didn't like at all; the exact name for it
is listed on the page.

http://www.pbase.com/helenpb/sony_f707nikon_cp_5700_comparis

--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
Click to expand...
I'd like to thank you for posting these shots, Helen. Both cameras performed admirably and it kinda restored my confidence a bit in the CP5700. I've seen many shots that looked soft or noisy to me but yours look fine. It would've been nice to have had at least of the full size images posted though but beggars can't be choosy.
 
Terry, I'd be happy to post the full-size images if you like. I just don't do that as a rule since it takes so long to upload. Just tell me which ones you want -- or all of them?

Helen
Terry Thorn said:
I'd like to thank you for posting these shots, Helen. Both cameras
performed admirably and it kinda restored my confidence a bit in
the CP5700. I've seen many shots that looked soft or noisy to me
but yours look fine. It would've been nice to have had at least of
the full size images posted though but beggars can't be choosy.
Click to expand...
--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
 
I definitely agree with you. These photos do not seem representative of other F707 photos I have taken, for example:

http://www.pbase.com/image/3461901

Regards, ;)

Willa
http://www.pbase.com/willa
Christian said:
First of all: same ISO settings - the 707 exposes automatically ca.
twice as much as cp5700 (see exposure times and f-stop). The
pictuires of 707 look IMHO overexposed.
--
Christian

http://www.christian-bruenig.de
nigt shots with 707: http://www.christian-bruenig.de/nacht
http://www2.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc.php4?mypics=2488
Click to expand...
 
I meant to say in my previous post "These photos do not seem representative of other F707 photos i have SEEN" (not 'taken'). Sorry for the boo-boo.

Regards, ;)

Willa
http://www.pbase.com/willa
Willa said:
http://www.pbase.com/image/3461901

Regards, ;)

Willa
http://www.pbase.com/willa
Christian said:
First of all: same ISO settings - the 707 exposes automatically ca.
twice as much as cp5700 (see exposure times and f-stop). The
pictuires of 707 look IMHO overexposed.
--
Christian

http://www.christian-bruenig.de
nigt shots with 707: http://www.christian-bruenig.de/nacht
http://www2.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc.php4?mypics=2488
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Willa,

Well, these photos are quite representative of what my particular F707 will do with brilliantly colored flowers in bright sunlight shot in an auto mode, without any kind of setting adjustment or post processing. The photo you referred to appears to have been taken in somewhat low-light conditions, at a slow shutter speed, plus it's a very soft color, so I don't really think it's a valid comparison.

I think I've gotten some good results from the camera, but definitely not in that area. If you knew just how much I had to go through to get a 707 that actually worked properly, you would understand how happy I am to get some good results from it.

Helen
Willa said:
Regards, ;)

Willa
http://www.pbase.com/willa
Willa said:
I definitely agree with you. These photos do not seem
representative of other F707 photos I have taken, for example:

http://www.pbase.com/image/3461901

Regards, ;)

Willa
http://www.pbase.com/willa
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
 
Please! I never meant to insult your photos! They were quite nice, and perhaps I should also mention that lots of these images, once reduced, and taking each person's monitor settings into consideration, anything can happen. Again, please know that I meant no offense. I've seen your work and think you are a good photographer!

And one more thing: you should be commended for caring enough to even post comparison photos. You were doing us all a favor, so please DO keep doing things like that! I am glad you FINALLY got a cybersausage (F-707) that works!

Best regards,

Willa
Helen Betts said:
Well, these photos are quite representative of what my particular
F707 will do with brilliantly colored flowers in bright sunlight
shot in an auto mode, without any kind of setting adjustment or
post processing. The photo you referred to appears to have been
taken in somewhat low-light conditions, at a slow shutter speed,
plus it's a very soft color, so I don't really think it's a valid
comparison.

I think I've gotten some good results from the camera, but
definitely not in that area. If you knew just how much I had to go
through to get a 707 that actually worked properly, you would
understand how happy I am to get some good results from it.

Helen
Willa said:
Regards, ;)

Willa
http://www.pbase.com/willa
Willa said:
I definitely agree with you. These photos do not seem
representative of other F707 photos I have taken, for example:

http://www.pbase.com/image/3461901

Regards, ;)

Willa
http://www.pbase.com/willa
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Helen
---
http://community.webshots.com/user/helenpb_
http://pbase.com/helenpb
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2456
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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