-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Sony 717 and Canon 10D Comparison
- Thread starter Ann Chaikin
- Start date
Ann Chaikin
Veteran Member
But now that I've looked they don't really bother me. I acknowledged that the comparison was not a scientific one. If folks are offended or threatened by what they saw, so be it. (Isabel, I am not referring to your comment.) I agree that we are more civil here generally and I really like that. But my skin is tough enough and I shouldn't be surprised by reactions. If something is perceived as contraversial then people will get upset. I think that is what happened here. I am not trying to advocate for either camera as I like both. Personally I do like the results with the Canon better on the whole which is a darn good thing considering what I paid for it. 
Ann
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
Ann --
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
Dee Golden
Senior Member
Hi Ann,
I was really floored to read the rude and mean comments people posted. Your well-meant informative comparison sure stirred up a lot of controversy and mis-understanding.
I think the Sony 707/717 is a great camera, I own one. However like any camera out there it has good points as well as areas that need improving.
I like the lack of noise on the Canon 10D, and the interchangeable lenses. However, I've always felt the Canon color was a little "flat" and not true to life -- just my opinion. Before everyone gets all riled up consider this: I can look at my film prints, my color slides and polaroids and say that none of these will match up "real life."
Different films produce different colors. In the digital world a good post processor could probably make a Nikon, Canon and Sony print of the same subject print out the same color on an inkjet printer. The rest of us (speaking for myself) do the best we can.
As for sharpness, I'm in the minority as I prefer and keep my Sony 707 set at -2 sharpening! I'm very happy with that as when I sharpen I don't get the white outlining around contrasty edges.
My favorite sharpening is to use the LAB color space in Photoshop and to apply unsharp mask to the lightness layer especially if I plan to make a large print from my inkjet printer.
For web use, I use RGB and unsharp mask as reducing the size of the image also sharpens it or appears to.
Speaking for myself I'm not ready to go back to lugging a large 35mm camera and two lenses with me wherever I go. My Sony fits in my purse and gives me macro, wide angle, and a 5X zoom. When there is an inexpensive lens similar to the Tokina 35-200 with macro available then I might be convinced to consider switching. And a "real" macro lens -- and I'm back to lugging heavy stuff around! Now that I'm older, that's not an attractive option, LOL!
Where my Sony F707 fails me is when I do product photography and I need things to be un-distorted. I've learned to use distort, and spherize to help straighten things out. However, I don't do enough product photography to pay for a DSLR.
I think it's wonderful that people in this forum are ready to "upgrade" to DSLR and your sharing the comparison has been most interesting.
I'm sure the learning curve can be daunting not only in taking photos but in processing them.
Your straight out of both cameras in auto mode was just wonderful!
Dee
I was really floored to read the rude and mean comments people posted. Your well-meant informative comparison sure stirred up a lot of controversy and mis-understanding.
I think the Sony 707/717 is a great camera, I own one. However like any camera out there it has good points as well as areas that need improving.
I like the lack of noise on the Canon 10D, and the interchangeable lenses. However, I've always felt the Canon color was a little "flat" and not true to life -- just my opinion. Before everyone gets all riled up consider this: I can look at my film prints, my color slides and polaroids and say that none of these will match up "real life."
Different films produce different colors. In the digital world a good post processor could probably make a Nikon, Canon and Sony print of the same subject print out the same color on an inkjet printer. The rest of us (speaking for myself) do the best we can.
As for sharpness, I'm in the minority as I prefer and keep my Sony 707 set at -2 sharpening! I'm very happy with that as when I sharpen I don't get the white outlining around contrasty edges.
My favorite sharpening is to use the LAB color space in Photoshop and to apply unsharp mask to the lightness layer especially if I plan to make a large print from my inkjet printer.
For web use, I use RGB and unsharp mask as reducing the size of the image also sharpens it or appears to.
Speaking for myself I'm not ready to go back to lugging a large 35mm camera and two lenses with me wherever I go. My Sony fits in my purse and gives me macro, wide angle, and a 5X zoom. When there is an inexpensive lens similar to the Tokina 35-200 with macro available then I might be convinced to consider switching. And a "real" macro lens -- and I'm back to lugging heavy stuff around! Now that I'm older, that's not an attractive option, LOL!
Where my Sony F707 fails me is when I do product photography and I need things to be un-distorted. I've learned to use distort, and spherize to help straighten things out. However, I don't do enough product photography to pay for a DSLR.
I think it's wonderful that people in this forum are ready to "upgrade" to DSLR and your sharing the comparison has been most interesting.
I'm sure the learning curve can be daunting not only in taking photos but in processing them.
Your straight out of both cameras in auto mode was just wonderful!
Dee
--Ann,
Here's one that I took with the 28-135 IS. It has a lot more DOF
than my flowers taken with the 100mm macro lens. 1/60th sec., f
4.5, ISO 200 with flash.
Roberta
http://www.pbase.com/roberta
Canon 10D, Sony 717, Olympus C-3000, Nikon FM
Gene
http://www.pbase.com/gaocus/
--Ann: The only thing I think the comparison proves is that you
better get to know the 717 a little bit better. Regards, Gary
It's not a scientific comparison with meters and special test
cards. Tonight I decided to take a bunch of pictures with both
cameras of the same subject and see what I got. It was an
interesting experiment. The Sony definitely has better depth of
field. Sometimes this is great (as in the roses image) and sometime
it isn't (as in the wet clamatis image). I love the rich colors of
the 10D. In one case the Sony couldn't handle the red and the 10D
could. I am keeping both cameras.
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
You both are vastly mistaken. Before you criticize someones photographic ability, you should look at their work. Why don't you go visit Anne's galleries and come back here with something more polite to say.
Gene
http://www.pbase.com/gaocus/
Joe Reilly129599
Senior Member
Ann...
I have read only a couple of posts in this thread. I can only hope the rest are more civil than the comments in your gallery. I'm disappointed that a pastime/profession centered on beauty and poignancy can yield this kind of dialogue. Jeepers. I like my 10D, I liked my 717, but neither compare to my (more essential) love of photography. Cheese and rice. I think some folks have lost touch with the stuff that matters most.
One photag to another: Take beautiful pictures, share them with like-minded folks, and let the sun shine in. It doesn't need to be any more complex than that.
Joe
I have read only a couple of posts in this thread. I can only hope the rest are more civil than the comments in your gallery. I'm disappointed that a pastime/profession centered on beauty and poignancy can yield this kind of dialogue. Jeepers. I like my 10D, I liked my 717, but neither compare to my (more essential) love of photography. Cheese and rice. I think some folks have lost touch with the stuff that matters most.
One photag to another: Take beautiful pictures, share them with like-minded folks, and let the sun shine in. It doesn't need to be any more complex than that.
Joe
It's not a scientific comparison with meters and special test
cards. Tonight I decided to take a bunch of pictures with both
cameras of the same subject and see what I got. It was an
interesting experiment. The Sony definitely has better depth of
field. Sometimes this is great (as in the roses image) and sometime
it isn't (as in the wet clamatis image). I love the rich colors of
the 10D. In one case the Sony couldn't handle the red and the 10D
could. I am keeping both cameras.
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
Olivia T. BvG
Senior Member
This is correct. If you don't post-process, it is better to put the sharpness setting up by increments of +1 or +2. I have mine always on +1, and process in photoshop for the rest, if need be.
Olivia
http://www.pbase.com/soulsurfer
http://photos.yahoo.com/whispersfromspirit
--
Olivia
http://www.pbase.com/soulsurfer
http://photos.yahoo.com/whispersfromspirit
Olivia T. BvG
Senior Member
My thanks, alo, to you, Ann! It wasn't a scientific comparison, but something could be gleaned from just looking at the two different sets of pictures. Not sure about most, but I prefer to shoot manual or pre-programmed setting. I usually put the colors, and contrast on neutral whenever possible. I find that ps processes it much better then the in-camera program does. I like the comparisons, since am looking for an upgrade to my second camera(707).
Olivia
http://www.pbase.com/soulsurfer
http://photos.yahoo.com/whispersfromspirit
--
Olivia
http://www.pbase.com/soulsurfer
http://photos.yahoo.com/whispersfromspirit
Olivia T. BvG
Senior Member
Hi Jeremiah,
Most dSLR have no sharpening set(in-camera) unless you set it. When I put mine on +2, the sharpness is much as is what you see from the 717, or my own 707, straight from the camera. But most dSLR users like to sharpen it afterwards in photoshop or any other editing program. Most photo's can be sharpened that way btw.
Olivia
http://www.pbase.com/soulsurfer
http://photos.yahoo.com/whispersfromspirit
Most dSLR have no sharpening set(in-camera) unless you set it. When I put mine on +2, the sharpness is much as is what you see from the 717, or my own 707, straight from the camera. But most dSLR users like to sharpen it afterwards in photoshop or any other editing program. Most photo's can be sharpened that way btw.
--Ann... I like the comparison
stepped up from the s70. Anyhow... Here is how I see it... is color
really as important as sharpness and clarity? I know there are
going to be some nuts out there who will take this wrong or
something... But from my observations with your simple test the
s717 produces sharper, clearer, and over all better looking
pictures. The 10D might have something on the f717 with color. But
you can correct color fairly easily in Photoshop... try correcting
an unclear picture... not so easyThis is a simple and to the
point test, and produces what's important... "which just looks
better to me"... hey thats whats important isn't it?... and in my
opinion, the Sony is the winner here.
That guy who said DSLR owners should have a license... what a
moron, come on now... is that guy just jealous because a camera
that cost hundreds less is producing great pictures? Not to mention
a Sony
personally like Sony... so blah
Jeremiah
[email protected]
Olivia
http://www.pbase.com/soulsurfer
http://photos.yahoo.com/whispersfromspirit
the 717 is good for walk around and still life at ISO 100 and performs pretty good in Shay's studio with the Bees! And is less costly by a factor of at least 3 when you consider lenses.
The 10d is much more versatile for action and high ISO. Here are some impressions of the 10d:
http://www.shutterfreaks.com/Forum/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=Canon&Number=115233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
MAC
http://www.digi-pictures.com
The 10d is much more versatile for action and high ISO. Here are some impressions of the 10d:
http://www.shutterfreaks.com/Forum/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=Canon&Number=115233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
--It's not a scientific comparison with meters and special test
cards. Tonight I decided to take a bunch of pictures with both
cameras of the same subject and see what I got. It was an
interesting experiment. The Sony definitely has better depth of
field. Sometimes this is great (as in the roses image) and sometime
it isn't (as in the wet clamatis image). I love the rich colors of
the 10D. In one case the Sony couldn't handle the red and the 10D
could. I am keeping both cameras.
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
MAC
http://www.digi-pictures.com
Brad Morris
Senior Member
It is sad that there is a percentage of people in the world who get off on hiding behind an anonymous medium like the internet.
Must be related to the mental state that drives people to make obscene phone calls.
Brad
DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 , http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628
Must be related to the mental state that drives people to make obscene phone calls.
Brad
--But now that I've looked they don't really bother me. I
acknowledged that the comparison was not a scientific one. If folks
are offended or threatened by what they saw, so be it. (Isabel, I
am not referring to your comment.) I agree that we are more civil
here generally and I really like that. But my skin is tough enough
and I shouldn't be surprised by reactions. If something is
perceived as contraversial then people will get upset. I think that
is what happened here. I am not trying to advocate for either
camera as I like both. Personally I do like the results with the
Canon better on the whole which is a darn good thing considering
what I paid for it.
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 , http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628
I found this comment in your gallery particularly and needlessly demeaning:
"From: Ron ([email protected]) Date: 17-Jun-2003 18:54
Hi,
I have never seen such a senseless comparison before! Buying a DSLR should require a license or so. It seems a P&S styled cam like the F717 is already overstyled for you.
Sorry for this harsh words...
Ron"
Perhaps, instead, posting in a public forum should require a license in civility!
Are people who post messages like this as insulting in person, or does the Internet bring out the worse in them?
"From: Ron ([email protected]) Date: 17-Jun-2003 18:54
Hi,
I have never seen such a senseless comparison before! Buying a DSLR should require a license or so. It seems a P&S styled cam like the F717 is already overstyled for you.
Sorry for this harsh words...
Ron"
Perhaps, instead, posting in a public forum should require a license in civility!
Are people who post messages like this as insulting in person, or does the Internet bring out the worse in them?
Ann Chaikin
Veteran Member
Hi Dee,
I am also not a spring chicken so am a bit daunted by the size of the camera. However I've actually found it not to be too heavy or large. I carried it around all morning recently at a PT Cruiser gathering and didn't mind the weight. I kept one lens on it most of the time - the Sigma 15-30 which is large but again not too heavy.
I used to have film SLR cameras so should be able to get back to the technique. Right now I'm a bit frustrated because I really don't have time to give this new camera my full attention. And we are going to be traveling soon and I want to use it while we do. What is frustrating me more than the focus or color is its tendency to over expose. I'm working on fixing that. I miss that easy button and wheel in the Sony to raise and lower the EV and the ability to see the result before I shoot.
I've read the book and even had the camera in my hand as I read it but in the field I don't remember what I read. I know this will change over time and I'll just know what to do. But right now I don't. Perhaps this is a sign of age. LOL
I don't find the colors flat but rather more rich. Must just be my eye. Anyhow, I really appreciate your comments. I like your work very much and am very pleased that this comparison has been helpful to you.
Take care, Ann
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
I am also not a spring chicken so am a bit daunted by the size of the camera. However I've actually found it not to be too heavy or large. I carried it around all morning recently at a PT Cruiser gathering and didn't mind the weight. I kept one lens on it most of the time - the Sigma 15-30 which is large but again not too heavy.
I used to have film SLR cameras so should be able to get back to the technique. Right now I'm a bit frustrated because I really don't have time to give this new camera my full attention. And we are going to be traveling soon and I want to use it while we do. What is frustrating me more than the focus or color is its tendency to over expose. I'm working on fixing that. I miss that easy button and wheel in the Sony to raise and lower the EV and the ability to see the result before I shoot.
I've read the book and even had the camera in my hand as I read it but in the field I don't remember what I read. I know this will change over time and I'll just know what to do. But right now I don't. Perhaps this is a sign of age. LOL
I don't find the colors flat but rather more rich. Must just be my eye.
Anyhow, I really appreciate your comments. I like your work very much and am very pleased that this comparison has been helpful to you.Take care, Ann
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
Ann Chaikin
Veteran Member
Thanks Joe,
I agree 100% Those comments sure were rude but I am choosing not to take them to heart. It would be interesting to see if their photos are as unlovely as their comments. Ann
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
I agree 100% Those comments sure were rude but I am choosing not to take them to heart. It would be interesting to see if their photos are as unlovely as their comments.
Ann --
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
For what actual information is available regarding the 10D and focusing go to http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=UBB8
and run a search for "westfall" on the Canon 10D forum. You can find many of his posts by looking under "poster" for
"Chuck Westfall
Director/Technical Information Dept.
Camera Division/Canon U.S.A., Inc. "
But to see them all you have to read all the posts containing "westfall" - some of his replies are most illuminating. He is a member of the R Galbraith forum and quite often replies or comments on Canon issues. As you will see by his title - it is difficult to imagine a person in a position to know more.
Steven C.
Leading Member
Apples and oranges.It's not a scientific comparison with meters and special test
cards. Tonight I decided to take a bunch of pictures with both
cameras of the same subject and see what I got. It was an
interesting experiment. The Sony definitely has better depth of
field. Sometimes this is great (as in the roses image) and sometime
it isn't (as in the wet clamatis image). I love the rich colors of
the 10D. In one case the Sony couldn't handle the red and the 10D
could. I am keeping both cameras.
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com
You cant compare the two, as the 10d has all sorts of lenses available for it.
Smack a $2000 maco lens on that 10d and watch it blow the sony out of the water DOF wise.
Steven
--
My gallery, for your perusal.
http://calgary-steven.deviantart.com/thumbnails/?PHPSESSID=0e1df2609361a0bf3ad66db20e71ffe6
doyle shafer
Leading Member
It's true! I have both cameras and still use both about the same. What gets me is how defensive people are who apparently only use 10Ds! Geez get the rock out your butts!
B
Billy
Guest
That's exactly the point Steven. You have to go out and buy a $2000.00 macro for the D10 to blow away the $700 Sony 717. I had the D10 and sold it. I had bought it to complement my soon-to-be-sold Canon EF Lenses. Good riddance! If you're not shooting professionally, there is absolutely no need for the D10. Plus it has a crappy feel.
The D10 has TERRIBLE auto focusing...especially in vertical mode. Yes, the D10 is sweet, but the 717 seems to do everything well, without hardly breaking a sweat. Let's face it, the 717 IS the most perfectly balanced prosumer digicam on the market. I always enjoy using it...something that I cannot say about the D10.
The D10 has TERRIBLE auto focusing...especially in vertical mode. Yes, the D10 is sweet, but the 717 seems to do everything well, without hardly breaking a sweat. Let's face it, the 717 IS the most perfectly balanced prosumer digicam on the market. I always enjoy using it...something that I cannot say about the D10.
Mike Fitzgerald
Veteran Member
Totally agree, Joe. I felt very tempted to e-mail him, but then decided that since he was obviously too obtuse to bother looking at the stuff in Ann's main galleries wherein he might get a true take on her abilities, nothing I could say would fix his outlook.
Mike
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum