Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Look ma, no jaggies...

Reply
Thread Tools

Look ma, no jaggies...

 
 
Giorgis
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2003
Listen GP ... all you want is attention. It is a simple test of a piece
of equipment. You are not in a relationship. No matter what the merits of a
camera, there is no reason for it to dominate ones attention. In any event,
I recon a simple test, to your specs that others agree is acceptable should
settle this. There is one problem though. we need to find people that have
SD9s ... don't tell me SD9 camera users don't have faith. As few of them as
there may be.

Giorgis



"George Preddy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bqf78l$8in$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Giorgis" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:3fcb0241$0$20488$(E-Mail Removed) u...
> > OK OK ... I propose a final and definative test.
> >
> > We put a whole bunch of cropped digital photos.
> > George Preddy and he alone will tell us which have the best colour
> > rendition.
> >
> > Then we reviel the exif info proving if they are from a Sigma or another
> > camera.
> >
> >
> > Your thaughts

>
> I think you're dreaming, there is no way our resident Bayer DSLR owners
> would ever, under any circumstances agree to a fair resolution or

sharpness
> test, they won't even post a full sized image--I had to hunt for an hour

on
> pbase just to find those.
>
> Nice idea, but you are making the erroneous assumption that they don't
> really understand that the 10.3MP SD9 blows 6MP DSLRs out of the water and
> off the beach. They know it full well, they just don't like it.
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
George Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2003

"<Enter Your Full Name>" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Z4Gyb.10531$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Nice idea, but you are making the erroneous assumption that they don't
> > really understand that the 10.3MP SD9 blows 6MP DSLRs out of the water

and
> > off the beach. They know it full well, they just don't like it.
> >

>
> On the contrary. The 3.4MP SD9 blows monkeys. We can't help it if you are
> colour blind as well as edge-obsessed.


Then where's your resolution test shot? All talk, no pics...


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
George Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2003

"Giorgis" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3fcb31e2$0$13498$(E-Mail Removed) u...
> Listen GP ... all you want is attention.


All I want is, a full color picture of this chart from some other DSLRs, in
accordance with the parameters outlined here...

http://www.pbase.com/imageprocessing/resolution_chart

It will never happen.

Do I mind? No.

In this case, the lack of a picture says more than a picture ever could.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Azzz1588
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-01-2003
In article <bqfas8$ckf$(E-Mail Removed)>, "George Preddy"
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

>Do I mind? No.


Liar !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


If you didnt mind, than you would NOT keep resposting all the crap, and
lies that you comtinue to do here !!!

If you didnt care, you wouldnt have presisted in this for soo long.


















"Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."


 
Reply With Quote
 
George Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2003

"Azzz1588" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <bqfas8$ckf$(E-Mail Removed)>, "George Preddy"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
> >Do I mind? No.

>
> Liar !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I love that you can't post a Bayer image for fear of comparison to Foveon.


 
Reply With Quote
 
George Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2003

"Hans Kruse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3fca3ab9$0$154$(E-Mail Removed). ..
> Also I'm not sure what you try to prove. I would agree that the examples

you
> found were not the best quality, maybe the lenses were poor quality.
> See this one from my 10D and a Sigma 15-30mm EX DG lens. Although this

lens
> has some weaknesses and do produce blurry imnages at certain focal lengths
> and aperture, like close to 30mm and each end of the aperture range, I

find
> it a quite excellent lens. So look at this one here i original format.
> http://www.pbase.com/image/23755970/large


Pretty shot. Kind of a lot of jaggies for a no-jaggie thread, though.

> If you browse through my galery
> from Yosemite and Mono Lake you will find a mix of quite sharp pictures

and
> some that are not completely sharp. Some actually taken at 30mm with the
> Sigma lens.


I see some really nice shots, but the only sharp ones have been downsized.
Can you post some of those in original size?


 
Reply With Quote
 
George Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2003

"jriegle" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:7xqyb.132575$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Nice shots! If your comparing cameras to one another, your comparison is
> flawed. The "original" sized shots are much larger with the 10D, around
> 3,000 pixels on the long axis. The SD9 shots are only 2268 pixels. The
> images should be sized the same for a better representation. The cameras
> really need to be side by side shooting at the same subject for the best
> comparison.


That's a good point, though on sensor count alone the 10D still wouldn't
stand much of a chance, 3.43M pixels is still more than twice the amount of
full color data it captures. And to concede it can't support 6M
interpolated output is really to admit there is no optical benefit to having
only 6M sensors vice 10M.

> The Tiger Woods shot seems to have some side to side motion blur. The

shots
> you call blurry were shot at f/22. Shooting at such small apertures will
> cause an optical phenomenon called diffraction to be prominent and blur

the
> image.


It's the way high noise level at ISO 400 that I find really shocking. Those
pants are on fire. The 10D is a very noisey camera, even the posted
dpreview sample shots are really noisey, as they declare the camera
completely noise free. This really noisey shot is ISO 400 effective (ISO
800 pulled 1 EV on camera)...
http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/can...s/030329-1548-
22.jpg

Certainly not pro quality, looks like a prosumer Bayer. Really blurry too,
at close range.

ISO 800 is totally out of the question...
http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/can...ls/CRW_8385_RJ.
JPG

ISO 400 is too noisey in low light...
http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/can...s/030316-1520-
37.jpg

Very blurry too. Though it would probably downsize nicely to a proper
1.58MP--de-interpolated--if there is such a word.

> You comment on the 10D's dynamic range, yet you show us a SD9 image with
> blown out whites (see the shot ending in 204). Also, the SD9 or its user

was
> afraid to show the blacks correctly in most of the images. Everything is
> murky grey. In any case, the dynamic range of digital is like that of

slide
> film. It is easy to blow out highlights or lose detail in dark areas if

one
> is not careful.


Yeah, that one was way overexposed, pulled back a lot. Definitely a RAW
save.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Azzz1588
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2003
In article <bqh080$jq8$(E-Mail Removed)>, "George Preddy"
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

>I love that you can't post a Bayer image for fear of comparison to Foveon.




You are still a moron who forgets what he reads the moment he reads it.

I have a C 4040Z asshole, not a DSLR !!!

You want a full C 4040Z image, than let me know.


BTW... You didnt address the question, if you dont care, than why keep
posting ????

Is it obiviously that you DO care, if only for ego reasons ????



Reason I'm in on this thread, is I WANT a DSLR, and was looking
at what is out there. YOU have now made my decision easy.

For a "starter" DSLR, I'm thinking of a Nikon 100, or the Cannon
either Rebel, or (gulp) a 10D

But you, and you alone have cnvinced me that the sd9 and sd 10
are far from ready for prime time.
I could almost live with the jaggies, but the incredibly screwed up
color rendition is too much for me !!!!!!!!

I have you to thank for helping me make a decision here.






















"Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."


 
Reply With Quote
 
George Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2003

"Azzz1588" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <bqh080$jq8$(E-Mail Removed)>, "George Preddy"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:


> You want a full C 4040Z image, than let me know.


2 please. Thanks a lot. Each explained below....

http://www.pbase.com/pennychallenge
http://www.pbase.com/image/23614257

No post processing, thanks, all can do that.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Hans Kruse
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-02-2003
Thanks and I uploaded a full quality jpeg image of the same picture (around
5MB). I don't see jaggies, but I do some less than perfect sharpness at 1:1
pixel to screnn pixel. I'm not sure if this is just slight blurring as it
was not taken on a tripod and probably not at the sharpest focal length and
aperture.
I have just purchased and got a Sigma 50mm macro lens which should be one of
the sharpest lenses around. When I get some good light I will test using
this lens. It's so dark around here so can hardly take pictures at the
moment.
The full resolution pictures take up quite a lot of space and that is why I
don't generally upload the full version. But if there is a specific picture
then I can upload than one.
--Hans

"George Preddy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bqi7ui$fdo$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Hans Kruse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:3fca3ab9$0$154$(E-Mail Removed). ..
> > Also I'm not sure what you try to prove. I would agree that the examples

> you
> > found were not the best quality, maybe the lenses were poor quality.
> > See this one from my 10D and a Sigma 15-30mm EX DG lens. Although this

> lens
> > has some weaknesses and do produce blurry imnages at certain focal

lengths
> > and aperture, like close to 30mm and each end of the aperture range, I

> find
> > it a quite excellent lens. So look at this one here i original format.
> > http://www.pbase.com/image/23755970/large

>
> Pretty shot. Kind of a lot of jaggies for a no-jaggie thread, though.
>
> > If you browse through my galery
> > from Yosemite and Mono Lake you will find a mix of quite sharp pictures

> and
> > some that are not completely sharp. Some actually taken at 30mm with the
> > Sigma lens.

>
> I see some really nice shots, but the only sharp ones have been downsized.
> Can you post some of those in original size?
>
>



 
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
Can I use a look-ahead and a look-behind at the same time? dan.j.weber@gmail.com Perl Misc 4 04-09-2008 10:25 PM
HEXUS.review - Scan Cool Chameleon - A First Look Silverstrand Front Page News 0 07-01-2005 07:15 PM
Why do look-ahead and look-behind have to be fixed-width patterns? inhahe Python 3 01-28-2005 12:50 PM
<tr> with a 1x1 image as a filler on a table with padding of 2 look thicker in netscape but they look ok in IE. Serial # 19781010 HTML 1 08-10-2003 09:05 PM



Advertisments