Reading mode: Light Dark

Look at a REAL 828 shot TAKEN PROPERLY

Go to last post
BaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!
Matthew Cromer said:
http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/DSC/DSC-F828/feat1.html#ccd

The other two pictures are poor snapshots. Looking at them and
trying to judge detail, color edges, etc. is a bit of a fool's
errand since they were not taken properly to show the ultimate
quality of the camera system.

The yarn shot is much better, taken from a tripod, and really shows
the true potential here. Great pixel-level detail. The lens just
resolves the hell out of the detail. The technical problems with
this shot are a bit of shadow noise (in line with the 717 or maybe
a bit less) and I am also seeing just a bit of purple CA in the
corners of the basket, and this will bear watching in Phil's test
shots to see how prevalent of a problem this is.

Yes, it has a lot more noise than the 10D. But the resolution is
excellent, the colors look very very true to life, and so far
(based on this one shot) I am very interested in the camera. I do
want to see how many of the images show CA in the corners when we
have a lens with the final coatings, but otherwise I am ready to
roll with this camera.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
--
Steve
10D
Sony 707
L fever high
 
Matthew Cromer said:
http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/DSC/DSC-F828/feat1.html#ccd

The other two pictures are poor snapshots. Looking at them and
trying to judge detail, color edges, etc. is a bit of a fool's
errand since they were not taken properly to show the ultimate
quality of the camera system.

The yarn shot is much better, taken from a tripod, and really shows
the true potential here. Great pixel-level detail. The lens just
resolves the hell out of the detail. The technical problems with
this shot are a bit of shadow noise (in line with the 717 or maybe
a bit less) and I am also seeing just a bit of purple CA in the
corners of the basket, and this will bear watching in Phil's test
shots to see how prevalent of a problem this is.

Yes, it has a lot more noise than the 10D. But the resolution is
excellent, the colors look very very true to life, and so far
(based on this one shot) I am very interested in the camera. I do
want to see how many of the images show CA in the corners when we
have a lens with the final coatings, but otherwise I am ready to
roll with this camera.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
--
--------------------------------------
http://www.xichlo.com
http://www.cybershotclub.com
 
Ogilvy said:
So to get the best out of the 828 you always need to use a tripod?
Click to expand...
This is NEWS to you?

To get the best out of ANY camera you need a tripod. PARTICULARLY a super-high resolution camera like the 828. On the other hand the 828 should respond superbly well to being braced against something, like the 717 before it. No mirror slap to worry about.
Ogilvy said:
So much for the small form factor you've been preaching about : )
Click to expand...
You can also use a very small and light tripod because of no mirror slap.

Hey, you can shoot handheld if you want -- but don't expect super-sharp pictures from any camera if you do. I shoot handheld a lot -- just not when I need absolute critical sharpness.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
 
Doug Kerr said:
Matthew Cromer said:
I think you are absolutely wrong. Why not upsize a 4MP image from
a 4MP camera and we can compare.
Click to expand...
Why would you upsize it? I would just examine each at the same
on-screen size (or is that the kind of "upsizing" you meant?).

Doug Kerr
Click to expand...
Well you need both images at the same resolution (8 megapixels) to see if the true 8MP image really has more detail.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
 
Matthew Cromer said:
Ogilvy said:
So to get the best out of the 828 you always need to use a tripod?
Click to expand...
This is NEWS to you?

To get the best out of ANY camera you need a tripod. PARTICULARLY
a super-high resolution camera like the 828. On the other hand the
828 should respond superbly well to being braced against something,
like the 717 before it. No mirror slap to worry about.
Click to expand...
Geez are you always this literal? It was a joke mixed in with a little sarcasm. : ) Yes you need a tripod to get the best image quality but only to avoid motion blur intricky situations. with the proper shutter speed and stillness, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference.
Matthew Cromer said:
Matthew Cromer said:
So much for the small form factor you've been preaching about : )
Click to expand...
You can also use a very small and light tripod because of no mirror
slap.
Click to expand...
Oh god Matthew, again it was a joke, but the idea of constantly using a tripod to get fairly acceptable image quality is pretty ridiculous, what was disturbing with the two other pictures were the noise and very poor detail due to aggressive NR, it certainly didn't look like an 8mp output.

Plus this whole tripod yarn ( hehe, pun ) sounds like an excuse for the two shots, ask yourself this, of the thousands of snapshots Sony has in their database, why show these two? Maybe it was the best? If you were Sony wouldn't you put up the best? And if that's the case, the 828 is not looking good. The yarn shots looked better though.
 
Matthew Cromer said:
Ogre said:
I just have to ask. I have done some knitting and crocheting in my
time and when you buy yarn it comes with a lot number because color
varies from lot to lot. How can one tell "the colors look very very
true to life" from this shot?
Click to expand...
You can tell that the colors have a richness and a subtlety never
before seen in a Sony digicam, and not really seen with any dSLR
either to my judgement.

4 colors really is better than 3 for zeroing in on the differences
between camera RGB response and the human eye RGB response.

I can't tell for sure what the original colors were, but they
certainly LOOK real in a way that other color renditions I have
seen do not. Sort of the difference between video camera color /
TV color, and colors in real life.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
 
Sony could have done better than this. Check out a sample from 300D for example.

http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/eosdigital/downloads/fruits.jpg

Or from 10D:

http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/EOS10D/downloads/portrait1.jpg

Sorry, but it looks like Sony is letting their fans down bigtime.
Matthew Cromer said:
http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/DSC/DSC-F828/feat1.html#ccd

The other two pictures are poor snapshots. Looking at them and
trying to judge detail, color edges, etc. is a bit of a fool's
errand since they were not taken properly to show the ultimate
quality of the camera system.

The yarn shot is much better, taken from a tripod, and really shows
the true potential here. Great pixel-level detail. The lens just
resolves the hell out of the detail. The technical problems with
this shot are a bit of shadow noise (in line with the 717 or maybe
a bit less) and I am also seeing just a bit of purple CA in the
corners of the basket, and this will bear watching in Phil's test
shots to see how prevalent of a problem this is.

Yes, it has a lot more noise than the 10D. But the resolution is
excellent, the colors look very very true to life, and so far
(based on this one shot) I am very interested in the camera. I do
want to see how many of the images show CA in the corners when we
have a lens with the final coatings, but otherwise I am ready to
roll with this camera.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
 
Ogilvy said:
Oh god Matthew, again it was a joke, but the idea of constantly
using a tripod to get fairly acceptable image quality is pretty
ridiculous, what was disturbing with the two other pictures were
the noise and very poor detail due to aggressive NR, it certainly
didn't look like an 8mp output.
Click to expand...
You aren't likely to get much that looks like "8 MP output" without using a tripod. You think the shots showed overly aggressive NR but I suspect simple blurring. You must use good technique to use 5MP well, you must use better technique to use 8MP well.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
 
The problem Ogilvy, is that many didn't see the sarcasm and some new uninformed individuals looking for a good starter (upper end prosumer) might take your comments as enough to look some place else.

I didn't catch the sarcasm, I just thought you were clueless - sorry.
Ogilvy said:
Matthew Cromer said:
Ogilvy said:
So to get the best out of the 828 you always need to use a tripod?
Click to expand...
This is NEWS to you?

To get the best out of ANY camera you need a tripod. PARTICULARLY
a super-high resolution camera like the 828. On the other hand the
828 should respond superbly well to being braced against something,
like the 717 before it. No mirror slap to worry about.
Click to expand...
Geez are you always this literal? It was a joke mixed in with a
little sarcasm. : ) Yes you need a tripod to get the best image
quality but only to avoid motion blur intricky situations. with the
proper shutter speed and stillness, you'd be hard pressed to tell
the difference.
Ogilvy said:
Ogilvy said:
So much for the small form factor you've been preaching about : )
Click to expand...
You can also use a very small and light tripod because of no mirror
slap.
Click to expand...
Oh god Matthew, again it was a joke, but the idea of constantly
using a tripod to get fairly acceptable image quality is pretty
ridiculous, what was disturbing with the two other pictures were
the noise and very poor detail due to aggressive NR, it certainly
didn't look like an 8mp output.

Plus this whole tripod yarn ( hehe, pun ) sounds like an excuse for
the two shots, ask yourself this, of the thousands of snapshots
Sony has in their database, why show these two? Maybe it was the
best? If you were Sony wouldn't you put up the best? And if that's
the case, the 828 is not looking good. The yarn shots looked better
though.
Click to expand...
 
(reference to the yarn pic omitted)
Matthew Cromer said:
You can tell that the colors have a richness and a subtlety never
before seen in a Sony digicam, and not really seen with any dSLR
either to my judgement.
Click to expand...
No offence intended, but I find that statement to be completely nonsensical when we haven't seen the actual yarn. Yarn isn't skin; it can come in any color at all, and the yarn that shows yellow in the pic could have been green for all we know. Very realistic looking color that's totally wrong isn't good color.

When we see a pic of something of a known color, then and only then will we be able to make comparatory statements about the 828 and any other camera, or be able to tell how good its color is.

There will be plenty of time later for saying it has the best color reproduction of any camera ever made.
 
...Kodak probably did with their early catastrophic samples of their DCS 14n. But the final production camera is junk anyway... LOL I woudn't take 3 of them in exchange of my D60!!
These Sony pictures still lack the punch and lifelike colors of the Canons...

Guillaume
http://www.at-sight.com
Sports & general event photography
 
That wasn't motion blur, that was plain blur, I didn't see any streaks with the highlights, it's just a muddy image.
Matthew Cromer said:
Matthew Cromer said:
Oh god Matthew, again it was a joke, but the idea of constantly
using a tripod to get fairly acceptable image quality is pretty
ridiculous, what was disturbing with the two other pictures were
the noise and very poor detail due to aggressive NR, it certainly
didn't look like an 8mp output.
Click to expand...
You aren't likely to get much that looks like "8 MP output" without
using a tripod. You think the shots showed overly aggressive NR
but I suspect simple blurring. You must use good technique to use
5MP well, you must use better technique to use 8MP well.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
 
Actually zang, my comment was really more on the idea that to get an acceptableshot from this camera one needs a tripod, I don't think that's so, adequate shutter speed and good handholding should be able to get a good shot without the need for a tripod. Again the snapshots were pretty bad but the yarn shot was ok, maybe it fares better indoors.
Zang said:
I didn't catch the sarcasm, I just thought you were clueless - sorry.
Ogilvy said:
Matthew Cromer said:
Ogilvy said:
So to get the best out of the 828 you always need to use a tripod?
Click to expand...
This is NEWS to you?

To get the best out of ANY camera you need a tripod. PARTICULARLY
a super-high resolution camera like the 828. On the other hand the
828 should respond superbly well to being braced against something,
like the 717 before it. No mirror slap to worry about.
Click to expand...
Geez are you always this literal? It was a joke mixed in with a
little sarcasm. : ) Yes you need a tripod to get the best image
quality but only to avoid motion blur intricky situations. with the
proper shutter speed and stillness, you'd be hard pressed to tell
the difference.
Zang said:
Zang said:
So much for the small form factor you've been preaching about : )
Click to expand...
You can also use a very small and light tripod because of no mirror
slap.
Click to expand...
Oh god Matthew, again it was a joke, but the idea of constantly
using a tripod to get fairly acceptable image quality is pretty
ridiculous, what was disturbing with the two other pictures were
the noise and very poor detail due to aggressive NR, it certainly
didn't look like an 8mp output.

Plus this whole tripod yarn ( hehe, pun ) sounds like an excuse for
the two shots, ask yourself this, of the thousands of snapshots
Sony has in their database, why show these two? Maybe it was the
best? If you were Sony wouldn't you put up the best? And if that's
the case, the 828 is not looking good. The yarn shots looked better
though.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
More Sigma 12 mm pictures, Astro shots included
Replies
7
Views
3K
jm10
J
Matt2134
Another RF image - forest textures
Replies
2
Views
936
SdeGat
SdeGat
DNature
S5II V-Log looking a bit soft, VND issue or something else?
Replies
7
Views
223
DNature
DNature
Richard Murdey
TTartisan 40mm F2 Z-mount / review and samples
Replies
6
Views
6K
Richard Murdey
Richard Murdey
ProfHankD
A few Taky photos (300mm f/4 SMC Takumar)
Replies
1
Views
1K
Tom Caldwell
T

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