What a sharp DSLR picture looks like

I think the difference in noise is apparent.

I'd like to see some good 717 images taken with flash to compare, as I tend to shoot handheld / available light.
--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/featured_art&page=1

I may agree that noise is a little bit more but not on other points. Regarding sharpness, read my second post in the thread, but with all that your example doesn't look any sharper than mine. May be due to way too shallow DOF.

Dmitry

Ron Parr said:

To my eyes, that shot is significantly less sharp, has chromatic
aberration and more noise.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Click to expand...

we have seen enough to know that. If one doesn't KNOW what they look like they must be living in the dark ages. NO one says the Canon 10d is not a wonderful camera. YOU PAID BIGGA BUCKS for that Canon 10d too! So what's your point? This is old hat! We love our Sony's and this is a SONY forum for lots of different reasons. ONE BEING it's a damn good camera at a LOT LESS PRICE! Right now we are busy waiting for our 828 lol we already know about the Canon's that are out!
Cherylm

If this was intended as a discussion between prime and zoom lenses then it belongs in a Lens Talk forum or at least in a dSLR forum. When Sony comes out with fixed-focal-length variants of an F-series camera then we can talk.

The fact is that you rarely see posts like these anywhere else. You would NEVER find this on the Kodak talk forum (nothing against them but you never do). Are they not deserving of the insight?

magnu said:

Jogger said:

Ron Parr said:

This isn't a troll post. I'm not saying that everybody needs to
buy a camera that produces shots like this instead of some other
camera.

What I am doing is showing people here what a sharp shot from a
Canon DSLR looks like. With good lenses, these cameras are capable
of taking very sharp photos that are quite impressive with the
default settings and no additional processing.

This from my D60, shot in RAW with default process except that I
did exposure compensation in RAW conversion. This is necessary
because of the regrettable way the D60 handles flash shots using
Canon's flashes. (The short version is that it tends to
underexpose, unless you do a flash exposure lock, which is
impractical for kids.) The end result is that you will see a
little noise in the background.

This shot was taken with the sub $100 50mm 1.8 lens.

http://www.pbase.com/image/23883902

You'll notice that the DOF is very shallow, but that what's in
focus is extremely sharp. Shots taken with cheap zooms will not be
this sharp.

If this shot looks so good to you that you're willing to get a
largish camera and swap lenses (or buy very big and heavy lenses),
then a digital SLR with a large sensor may be a good choice for
you. If you look at this shot and it doesn't look any better than
what you've seen from an a small sensor camera, then you probably
shouldn't get a digital SLR.

[FWIW: For me, having the ability to get this kind of result is
worth the bother. I'd really like if you understood that there is
a difference between this kind of result and what you get from a
small sensor, but I'll think no less of you if you don't think the
difference is worth the effort.]

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

...someone seems to be on my line of thought

Cheryl Meisel said:

we have seen enough to know that. If one doesn't KNOW what they
look like they must be living in the dark ages. NO one says the
Canon 10d is not a wonderful camera. YOU PAID BIGGA BUCKS for that
Canon 10d too! So what's your point? This is old hat! We love
our Sony's and this is a SONY forum for lots of different reasons.
ONE BEING it's a damn good camera at a LOT LESS PRICE! Right now
we are busy waiting for our 828 lol we already know about the
Canon's that are out!
Cherylm

Click to expand...

Yes, many said that 10D, or DSLR in general, tend to produce soft image. I believe that is what Ron tried to disprove.

If you look at many of the replies posted, to them, it's not that "sharp" compare to their 717. It seems to me many people are just looking at sharpness and completely ignore the noise factor in it. Yes, if you just care about sharpness, use the +2 setting on your 717 and your shot will be as sharp as a knife, especially around the edges. However, that doesn't mean anything because portrait shot with +2 is unusable due to artifact, halo, and such.

with F717 shot just like this one (no sharpening, just color adjustment)



or this (very sharp at fullsize which I don't have with me now)



I can easily claim this is sharper or equal DSLR shot. However, Ron's shot can be easily sharpen up to match this w/o introduce noise while these 717 shots will surely shows lots of noise. At 16x20, his shot will be much better than this one. Some will claim they don't care about 16x20, but that's not the point in his post.

--
Lance
http://www.pbase.com/lhphoto

--- Art critic doesn't have to be an artist ----

Jogger said:

Scenario:

I show up at a housing project in my BMW. "sorry to disturb you
folks. I just wanted to show you what a BMW sounds and looks like.
see those rims...they're only 500 dollars a pop. see how smooth and
polished they are....and not a nick is sight...oh, if you're used
to walking or not eating then a BMW is probably not for
you...oh...really though I'm not here to cause trouble I'm just so
happy with my BMW and I was in the neighborhood"

Click to expand...

What's a "housing project?" Why would "folks" there be 'disturbed' because you show up in your BMW? What's the fascination with un-nicked rims? Why haven't these "folks" ever been introduced to riding and eating? What did you go there to cause? Rekon any "folks" on this forum are in a housing project? That was just great.

I must say that I'm genuinely surprsied that you find the particular picture you presented to be anything like the one I presented in any of the dimensions we're considering.

I guess we're justing to have to disagree here since we don't have an objective test.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Jogger said:

I show up at a housing project in my BMW. "sorry to disturb you
folks. I just wanted to show you what a BMW sounds and looks like.
see those rims...they're only 500 dollars a pop. see how smooth and
polished they are....and not a nick is sight...oh, if you're used
to walking or not eating then a BMW is probably not for
you...oh...really though I'm not here to cause trouble I'm just so
happy with my BMW and I was in the neighborhood"

Click to expand...

These days, some digital SLRs with big sensors are less expensive then (or comparable in price to) the latest cameras with small sensors and many people are asking questions about which is best suited to their needs.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Jogger said:

If this was intended as a discussion between prime and zoom lenses
then it belongs in a Lens Talk forum or at least in a dSLR forum.
When Sony comes out with fixed-focal-length variants of an F-series
camera then we can talk.

The fact is that you rarely see posts like these anywhere else. You
would NEVER find this on the Kodak talk forum (nothing against them
but you never do). Are they not deserving of the insight?

Click to expand...

I happen to read STF and I happen to notice a lot of posts here from people pondering the pros and cons of the different systems.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Jogger said:

Scenario:

I show up at a housing project in my BMW. "sorry to disturb you
folks. I just wanted to show you what a BMW sounds and looks like.
see those rims...they're only 500 dollars a pop. see how smooth and
polished they are....and not a nick is sight...oh, if you're used
to walking or not eating then a BMW is probably not for
you...oh...really though I'm not here to cause trouble I'm just so

Click to expand...

happy with my BMW and I was in the neighborhood"

What's a "housing project?" Why would "folks" there be 'disturbed' because you show up in your BMW? What's the fascination with un-nicked rims? Why haven't these "folks" ever been introduced to riding and eating? What did you go there to cause? Rekon any "folks" on this forum are in a housing project? That was just great.

Cheryl Meisel said:

we have seen enough to know that. If one doesn't KNOW what they
look like they must be living in the dark ages. NO one says the
Canon 10d is not a wonderful camera. YOU PAID BIGGA BUCKS for that
Canon 10d too! So what's your point? This is old hat! We love
our Sony's and this is a SONY forum for lots of different reasons.
ONE BEING it's a damn good camera at a LOT LESS PRICE! Right now
we are busy waiting for our 828 lol we already know about the
Canon's that are out!

Click to expand...

Actually, there are lots of posts from people who are openly wondering about the pros and cons of the different approaches and there is a lot of brand chauvinism and misinformation flying around too.

In this context, I don't think an example that contradicts some common misconceptions, along with an explanation of some of the issues involved in using such a camera is inappropriate.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

I really like the composition of this shot! However, it also inadvertantly shows the limitations of a prosumer camera. The shot is plenty sharp in the focused area, but unfortunately the camera's autofocus chose to focus on the closest/contrastiest part of the picture (the hand against the dark background). On an SLR lens with FT-M (full-time manual focus), the photographer could compensate for this and make a small manual adjustment during autofocus to move the focus point to subject instead (the eyes of the hamster), while in a prosumer this would require navigating through menus to select manual mode. To use such a shallow DOF on a shot requires very precise focusing, and the combined auto+manual focusing ability of SLR's is an advantage for shots like these.

I believe that Ron sees this image as "not sharp" because the hamster itself is clearly not as sharp as the hand, due to its position slightly behind the (very shallow) plane of focus. A small manual adjustment on an FT-M SLR lens could have easily fixed this. Also, this sort of focus problem is very difficult to spot on the electronic viewfinders or LCD screens of prosumer cameras (simply because of 5MP image vs 100k EVF/LCD resolution).

I will add that I don't think anyone can rationally dispute that the 717 is more convenient as a smaller, more "all-in-one" package than a DSLR like the Digital Rebel, which relies on having multiple lenses at different focal lengths. However, I think it would also be rather disingenuous for anyone to imply that there are no gains in image quality in using a DSLR vs a prosumer P&S. DSLR do offer more control, greater flexibility, and cleaner images, or else no one would be willing to put up with their added weight, bulk, and the most important part--price.

I also agree with Ron in that the differences between the technical limitations of a prosumer P&S and a DSLR don't show up well on web images. This difference is most dramatic in larger prints--and this is not just megapixels, or else the Nikon D1 wouldn't still be selling for many times the cost of a F717. On an 11x14 or larger print, the noise difference between a DSLR and a prosumer camera is very clear when compared side-by-side. And there are other issues beside from just noise, such as much wider ISO latitude, better flash control, greater DOF range across long focal lengths, etc. However, most of this is not at all relevant for people who are just looking to print snapshots--nor should it be, really.

It's been said many times that the comparison between a DSLR and a prosumer digicam is like comparison apples and oranges, but sometimes you have to taste both to really cement the difference in your mind. And there's nothing wrong with being satisfied with one of them if it already suits your own needs.

DaShiv

Dmitry K said:

F717, no post-processing either. Believe me this wasn't sudden
luck; I have enough shots of such quality.

I don't blaming you but see no reason to share your excitement. The
shot is very good in composition and mood; quality is very good
either but isn't something extraordinary though.

http://www.katemirov.com/public_images/DSC00080.JPG

Dmitry

Click to expand...

Ron has done nothing over the years but try to give us info to take better pictures.

He deserves respect no matter what forum he's on....

Tracey

LanceD said:

tko said:

Much better than the Canon shot, showing it's the photogapher, not
the camera. If that's his best shot with his Canon he wasted his
money.

Click to expand...

--
Lance
http://www.pbase.com/lhphoto

--- Art critic doesn't have to be an artist ----

Click to expand...

I agree that focal plane is a little bit shifted. However should I be one who took the shot, I'd just pre-focus camera on the pet (this is gvinea pig BTW ) before finalizing composition. In given conditions this should work equally well as manual adjustment you've suggested.

Dmitry

DaShiv said:

I believe that Ron sees this image as "not sharp" because the
hamster itself is clearly not as sharp as the hand, due to its
position slightly behind the (very shallow) plane of focus. A
small manual adjustment on an FT-M SLR lens could have easily fixed
this. Also, this sort of focus problem is very difficult to spot
on the electronic viewfinders or LCD screens of prosumer cameras
(simply because of 5MP image vs 100k EVF/LCD resolution).

I will add that I don't think anyone can rationally dispute that
the 717 is more convenient as a smaller, more "all-in-one" package
than a DSLR like the Digital Rebel, which relies on having multiple
lenses at different focal lengths. However, I think it would also
be rather disingenuous for anyone to imply that there are no gains
in image quality in using a DSLR vs a prosumer P&S. DSLR do offer
more control, greater flexibility, and cleaner images, or else no
one would be willing to put up with their added weight, bulk, and
the most important part--price.

I also agree with Ron in that the differences between the technical
limitations of a prosumer P&S and a DSLR don't show up well on web
images. This difference is most dramatic in larger prints--and
this is not just megapixels, or else the Nikon D1 wouldn't still be
selling for many times the cost of a F717. On an 11x14 or larger
print, the noise difference between a DSLR and a prosumer camera is
very clear when compared side-by-side. And there are other issues
beside from just noise, such as much wider ISO latitude, better
flash control, greater DOF range across long focal lengths, etc.
However, most of this is not at all relevant for people who are
just looking to print snapshots--nor should it be, really.

It's been said many times that the comparison between a DSLR and a
prosumer digicam is like comparison apples and oranges, but
sometimes you have to taste both to really cement the difference in
your mind. And there's nothing wrong with being satisfied with one
of them if it already suits your own needs.

DaShiv

Dmitry K said:

F717, no post-processing either. Believe me this wasn't sudden
luck; I have enough shots of such quality.

I don't blaming you but see no reason to share your excitement. The
shot is very good in composition and mood; quality is very good
either but isn't something extraordinary though.

http://www.katemirov.com/public_images/DSC00080.JPG

Dmitry

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Me too. Usually I avoid taking part in senseless discussions "DSLR (Canon) vs prosumer (Sony)" but in this particular case I was too much confused why just an ordinary shot is declared to be beyond the reach of good prosumer cam, couldn't resist to comment.

Dmitry

Jogger said:

Cheryl Meisel said:

we have seen enough to know that. If one doesn't KNOW what they
look like they must be living in the dark ages. NO one says the
Canon 10d is not a wonderful camera. YOU PAID BIGGA BUCKS for that
Canon 10d too! So what's your point? This is old hat! We love
our Sony's and this is a SONY forum for lots of different reasons.
ONE BEING it's a damn good camera at a LOT LESS PRICE! Right now
we are busy waiting for our 828 lol we already know about the
Canon's that are out!
Cherylm

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

to find the CTF to compare photos I wouldn't have bought my 717! )))
I surely would have bought a Canon dslr!! )))))

Cheryl Meisel said:

we have seen enough to know that. If one doesn't KNOW what they
look like they must be living in the dark ages. NO one says the
Canon 10d is not a wonderful camera. YOU PAID BIGGA BUCKS for that
Canon 10d too! So what's your point? This is old hat! We love
our Sony's and this is a SONY forum for lots of different reasons.
ONE BEING it's a damn good camera at a LOT LESS PRICE! Right now
we are busy waiting for our 828 lol we already know about the
Canon's that are out!
Cherylm

Click to expand...

I just click on the CANON forum and get all the info I need right there. This is Sony so I am really interested here in how we get the SONY pics as clear as possible, tricks, tips, hints, pics, assesories, anything SONY. I'm sorry but I'm just not interested in the canon anything HERE. That's why they have a Canon forum which is neat also. Maybe they should have a ALL CAMERA forum huh?

Member said:

Actually, there are lots of posts from people who are openly
wondering about the pros and cons of the different approaches and
there is a lot of brand chauvinism and misinformation flying around
too.

In this context, I don't think an example that contradicts some
common misconceptions, along with an explanation of some of the
issues involved in using such a camera is inappropriate.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Click to expand...

--
Cherylm

Cheryl Meisel said:

I just click on the CANON forum and get all the info I need right
there. This is Sony so I am really interested here in how we get
the SONY pics as clear as possible, tricks, tips, hints, pics,
assesories, anything SONY. I'm sorry but I'm just not interested
in the canon anything HERE. That's why they have a Canon forum
which is neat also. Maybe they should have a ALL CAMERA forum huh?

Click to expand...

Do you treat the people who ask the 300D vs. 828 questions in this forum with such courtesy, or do you reserve this for people who offer answers?

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Cheryl Meisel said:

I just click on the CANON forum and get all the info I need right
there. This is Sony so I am really interested here in how we get
the SONY pics as clear as possible, tricks, tips, hints, pics,
assesories, anything SONY. I'm sorry but I'm just not interested
in the canon anything HERE. That's why they have a Canon forum
which is neat also. Maybe they should have a ALL CAMERA forum huh?

Click to expand...

I don't think I am the only one here who is interested in both Canon and Sony and the others can easily avoid posts like this one since the subject tells you it's not about Sony. Is it so bad to post something like this? It helps me and perhaps also others to decide whether to buy a Sony or e.g. a 300D.

Cheryl Meisel said:

Cheryl Meisel said:

Actually, there are lots of posts from people who are openly
wondering about the pros and cons of the different approaches and
there is a lot of brand chauvinism and misinformation flying around
too.

In this context, I don't think an example that contradicts some
common misconceptions, along with an explanation of some of the
issues involved in using such a camera is inappropriate.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Click to expand...

--
Cherylm

Click to expand...