Sony 717 and Canon 10D Comparison

Brad Morris said:

This and some other threads reminds me of a joke which I posted in
another thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=5394205

I think that it is appropriate in this thread too

Regards

Ann Chaikin said:

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. Ann
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com

Click to expand...

--
DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 ,
http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

Click to expand...

--

Old Bob I havn't seen a post putting down 7xx (owners)..No doubt the 7xx is the best non dslr out there.I came from a G2,5700,my son has a 717,I have used it...This is how it is...A dslr with a good lens,shot raw with proper post processing cant be touched by any digicam..I have been there,done that..Period...Detail,color,noise,can you shoot iso 800 with nearly no noise?Basic camera speed etc.etc...No they cant be compared..

Old Bob said:

Brad Morris said:

This and some other threads reminds me of a joke which I posted in
another thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=5394205

I think that it is appropriate in this thread too

Regards

Ann Chaikin said:

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. Ann
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com

Click to expand...

--
DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 ,
http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

Click to expand...

--
Old Bob I havn't seen a post putting down 7xx (owners)..No doubt
the 7xx is the best non dslr out there.I came from a G2,5700,my son
has a 717,I have used it...This is how it is...A dslr with a good
lens,shot raw with proper post processing cant be touched by any
digicam..I have been there,done
that..Period...Detail,color,noise,can you shoot iso 800 with nearly
no noise?Basic camera speed etc.etc...No they cant be compared..

Click to expand...

--
MAC
http://www.digi-pictures.com

The 717 better have depth of field sense the CCD is smaller than on the 10D. The smaller the CCD, the bigger the depth of field. Try doing a shot with both cameras wide open and see which one can blur the background. The 10D should be able to do it with a fast lens wide open, the F717 will have a much greater depth of field regardless.

Ann Chaikin said:

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. Ann
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^ http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com

Click to expand...

--
Jacques Giraud/giraud.com

That is really nice Anne. I saw it in your 10d gallery before here and it was my wife and my favorite. The color is superb (and it's in focus .

My project now is to get the dust of my sensor, sigh. You can see it in some of my photos if you look close enough.
--
Gene
http://www.pbase.com/gaocus/

I'm jumping in as I can't read all the posts here, but in the end, I don't think anyone was trying to create a 10D vs 717 post.

They are different types of cameras and each has it's benefits. Regardless of the camera, any of mine can all be seen onscreen as great images regardless of the cam if the shot is exposed well and taken correctly. I hardly doubt anyone here could tell the difference between my Konica, Canon, Nikon or any camera really....onscreen....in a blind test of good images.

The comparisons aren't because of any insecurity or what not....other than between two individuals enjoying a Urinary Olympic Event.

Brad Morris said:

This and some other threads reminds me of a joke which I posted in
another thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=5394205

I think that it is appropriate in this thread too

Regards

Ann Chaikin said:

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. Ann
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com

Click to expand...

--
DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 ,
http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

Click to expand...

--
-tim
Canon 1 0 D, 24-70mm/f2.8 L-Series, 75-300mm/f4-5.6 IS, 4 2 0EX Speedlight
Sony 7 1 7, Nikon 9 9 5 & Konica KD-4 0 0 Z
Accessories....tons of course
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp

complain that their DSLR isn't focusing correctly. just as many who jump to digital typically complain of shutter lag.

just pointing this out as I see a number of DSLR users with good shots complain.

Jacques Giraud said:

Ann Chaikin said:

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. Ann
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^ http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com

Click to expand...

--
Jacques Giraud/giraud.com

Click to expand...

--
-tim
Canon 1 0 D, 24-70mm/f2.8 L-Series, 75-300mm/f4-5.6 IS, 4 2 0EX Speedlight
Sony 7 1 7, Nikon 9 9 5 & Konica KD-4 0 0 Z
Accessories....tons of course
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp

That was the one, though the pics seem to have gone now. No matter -- someone just below him posted 2 equally good shots of kids.

Speaking of Bob Graham, you've probably found this new thread by now but, in case not, take a look. It's a sad commentary on Canon's (and/or their authorised representatives') recalcitrance with problems of any kind in the current climate. He should never have had to fight for a fix to this, and it does serve to endorse Jim's and others' reason to feel less than optimistic about how they'll be dealt with by Canon.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=5401745

M

1ofUs! said:

Here ya go Mike
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=5311619
--

Click to expand...

Bob,

I dont disagree, there are many things that give dSLR advantages over a prosumer model camera, The DSLR plus lenses costs $2000-$3000 and the 7X7 is now about $700.

The flexibility for a DSLR is there simply because of the lens selection available plus other benefits like larger sensor size etc. but you pay to get it and so you should

Thing is that many of the SLR people feel the need to write dispariging remarks about 7x7, Maybe that is because of an insecurty that photos from something 1/3 the cost can in some circles be considered comparible enough to put up unscientific comparisons. All you have to do is look at some of the rude comments on Ann's Pbase comparison page.

I am sure that Ann started this thread up for the sony users considering an upgrade to something like a D10 to make an imformed decision.

Dont forget that a good photographer with a 7x7 will get better photos than a bad photographer with a dslr

Regards

Old Bob said:

Brad Morris said:

This and some other threads reminds me of a joke which I posted in
another thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=5394205

I think that it is appropriate in this thread too

Regards

Ann Chaikin said:

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. Ann
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/comparison
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
http://www.annchaikin.com

Click to expand...

--
DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 ,
http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

Click to expand...

--
Old Bob I havn't seen a post putting down 7xx (owners)..No doubt
the 7xx is the best non dslr out there.I came from a G2,5700,my son
has a 717,I have used it...This is how it is...A dslr with a good
lens,shot raw with proper post processing cant be touched by any
digicam..I have been there,done
that..Period...Detail,color,noise,can you shoot iso 800 with nearly
no noise?Basic camera speed etc.etc...No they cant be compared..

Click to expand...

--

DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 , http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

nczen said:

i think. the advantage of dslr is not DOF at infinity, but the
control of a shallow DOF so one can isolate the subject from the
background.

it would seem to me that in macro shots the ability to isolate the
subject at very close focus would be the goal, so a shallow DOF
would be wanted. this is easy to acheive when zoomed in from some
distance but difficult when shooting very close to the subject.
least that was my expirence with the 707. with the 10d one can
shoot very close and still blur the background to an extreme amount
so that the subject "pops" out in the pic.

Click to expand...

I guess that all depends on your definition of "Macro".

I find for what I call Macro (stuff about 4 inches or less in height) the 717 can create plenty of background blur. Then again, I almost always shoot macro at 190mm or even more with a teleconvertor lens.
--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work

Two more pics from the horse farm with the 28-135 IS USM:





Roberta
http://www.pbase.com/roberta
Canon 10D, Sony 717, Olympus C-3000, Nikon FM