Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > I got my new digital camera today

Reply
Thread Tools

I got my new digital camera today

 
 
Jack White
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-11-2003
Todd Walker <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
> http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
> > It's just that this is one of the toughest tests for any digital
> > camera or camcorder so that's one of the reasons why I used it.
> >

>
> No it isn't. How can you suggest that to be the case when the resolution
> of even the cheapest digital camera is many times that of the
> television? Beyond that, there are so many variables that determine how
> the picture is going to come out, there is no way this can be any kind
> of test at all.


I certainly have to disagree that the resolution of even the cheapest
digital camera is many times more than that of the television.
I figure the tv in question The Sony KV-20V80 has around 320,640
pixels, and I've seen plenty of cheap digital cameras with 307,200 or
less pixels.
You have to remember that the horizontal resolution of tvs is measured
across only 3/4th of the tv screen so a tv with 540 lines of
horizontal resolution will have at least 720x480 resolution.
There are plenty of RP HDTVs with 9" crts whose native resolution
probably comes close to the 2,073,600 pixel 1080I spec.
There are certainly also Front Projection Systems that use 9" or
larger crts and have well over 2 million pixel resolution, sure they
cost a lot more than most people's new cars, but if you've got money
to burn then they're worth it.
It was never really originally meant to be a test for the digital
camera.
I originally took pics of the test pattern with my camcorder and a
webtv plus and the results were not great.
The ONLY problem I've been having has been the 6.75mhz circle, and
just about any digital camera will do fine with the other 95% of the
test pattern.
Here is 1 of the original pics I took with the camcorder.
http://www.fujifilm.com.sg/storage/p...picture_7.jpeg

Here are 2 pics with the HP Photosmart 120.
http://www.fujifilm.com.sg/storage/p...f/IM000020.JPG

http://www.fujifilm.com.sg/storage/p...f/IM000009.JPG

Here are 2 pics from the new Cameara
http://www.fujifilm.com.sg/storage/p...fc6f/TEST2.jpg

http://www.fujifilm.com.sg/storage/p...fc6f/TEST4.jpg
You can see that the Photosmart 120 is the worst, and it's even much
worse than the Camcorder at showing detail in the 6.75mhz circle.
I'm not saying that this is a good test to test a camera.
I'm not really a photography guy so that's why I'm a lot more
interested in electronics, videogames, analog rgb monitors(for classic
videogame systems), comuter monitors(for computers AND Sega
Dreamcast), etc than I am in cameras.
I'd spend $500 on a subwoofer before I'd spend $500 on a digital
camera.
It was never originally my intention to test the cameras using the
6.75mhz circle, it was just that none of the cameras seemed to show it
as it really was.
If the tv in question had rock solid detail in the 6.75mhz circle then
it would be easy to photograph, but it's the fact that there's only
partail detail that makes it so tough to photograph. Look at how the
Photosmart 120 turns the 6.75 mhz circle into total mush while even
the camcorder and the new camera show the very tiniest bit of detail
in the circle.
I should never have said that it was a tough test for a digital
camera, I should have said that in and around my house it was the
toughest test I could find.






>
> If you want to take pictures of resolution charts and truly find out
> what the camera is capable of, you need to get yourself a PIMA/ISO 12233
> resolution test chart and take pictures of it:


Thanks for the info, but I figure that that digital camera
manufacturers don't like about resolution as much as tv manufacturers
do, besides my online photo album tells me the exact resolution of
each pic I upload, and my camera instruction manual gives me the jpg
compression ratio too.

>
> http://www.dpreview.com/learn/Glossa...olution_01.htm
>
> --
> ________________________________
> Todd Walker
> http://twalker.d2g.com
> Olympus E20
> Canon G2
> My Digital Photography Weblog:
> http://twalker.d2g.com/dpblog.htm
> _________________________________

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
Jack White wrote:

> Ron Hunter <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<PdAPa.469$(E-Mail Removed)2.webusenet.com>.. .
>
>>Todd Walker wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
>>>(E-Mail Removed) says...
>>>
>>>
>>>>It's just that this is one of the toughest tests for any digital
>>>>camera or camcorder so that's one of the reasons why I used it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>No it isn't. How can you suggest that to be the case when the resolution
>>>of even the cheapest digital camera is many times that of the
>>>television? Beyond that, there are so many variables that determine how
>>>the picture is going to come out, there is no way this can be any kind
>>>of test at all.
>>>
>>>If you want to take pictures of resolution charts and truly find out
>>>what the camera is capable of, you need to get yourself a PIMA/ISO 12233
>>>resolution test chart and take pictures of it:
>>>
>>>http://www.dpreview.com/learn/Glossa...olution_01.htm
>>>

>>
>>VERY TRUE.
>>
>>The resolution on even a very GOOD TV is only as good as the source,
>>which is something like 600x525. This is pretty lousy compared to even
>>a 1.3 megapixel camera. Worse, the TV screen is refreshing 30 times a
>>second so that taking a picture of it gives you only half of that
>>maximum resolution at an exposure. For the same reason, displaying a
>>digital camera's pictures on a TV will give results between lousy and
>>horrible.

>
>
>
> So I guess it's a safe bet that HD-DVHS is not one of your video
> source components then?
> I also take it that you don't have a Runco Front Projection System in
> your basement that costs more than a Mercedes Benz E class sedan and
> is capable of doing 1080p(1920x1080 progressive scan) either.
> Don't worry, I don't have such a setup either and neither do like
> 99.999% of the people out there, but it still doesn't mean it doesn't
> exist.
> It's really a very broad generalization to say that all tvs are this
> or that because tvs come in many different flavors from little mystery
> brand tvs with just 270 lines of horizontal resolution to rear
> projection and front projection monsters with 9" crts and native
> resolutions that would make most computer monitors green with envy.


Even the very BEST of TVs (and I did NOT mention HDTV) don't come up to
what a decent 3 mp digital camera records. They are just different.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jack White
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
Todd Walker <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed) >,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
> > I also take it that you don't have a Runco Front Projection System in
> > your basement that costs more than a Mercedes Benz E class sedan and
> > is capable of doing 1080p(1920x1080 progressive scan) either.
> >
> >

>
> Oh come on now Jack. I assume you are talking about the DTV-1200 -- I
> found it for $38,000. You can't buy an E class for that!
>


That's because I didn't just mean the front Projector alone, I also
included the price of either a Faroudja DVP-5000 Video
Processor/Scaler or a Runco VFC-4404 Ultra.
> --
> ________________________________
> Todd Walker
> http://twalker.d2g.com
> Olympus E20
> Canon G2
> My Digital Photography Weblog:
> http://twalker.d2g.com/dpblog.htm
> _________________________________

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Whoa Who! I Just Got A New Toy Today! Rita Berkowitz Digital Photography 22 12-04-2007 03:07 AM
I did it. . . I got the new digital camera TwoGuns Digital Photography 4 08-04-2005 04:11 AM
Fastest 5 mp Digital Camera ? Fastest 4 mp Digital Camera? photoguysept102004@yahoo.com Digital Photography 6 10-28-2004 11:33 AM
Digital Video camera - zoom pics VS Digital photo camera - zoom pics. Hellenic Mensa Digital Photography 1 08-30-2004 03:44 PM
Got a new dvd today Smoke & Mirrors DVD Video 1 06-22-2004 03:23 AM



Advertisments