Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Disservice to Sony? (dcresource's "examples" of Sony DSC-F282)

Reply
Thread Tools

Disservice to Sony? (dcresource's "examples" of Sony DSC-F282)

 
 
ThomasH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-17-2003
I just saw on dpreview.com that 2 galleries with examples made with
a long awaited 8Mpix Sony DSC-F828 were finally presented. One of
them in on dcresource.com:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so.../gallery.shtml

Whoever was doing the shooting, he or she did a disservice to Sony!
One especially nasty example:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...SC02545-pp.JPG

or this:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...SC02558-pp.JPG

They should rather take these images away and replace by something
more believable.

Thomas
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
H
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-17-2003
ThomasH wrote:
> I just saw on dpreview.com that 2 galleries with examples made with
> a long awaited 8Mpix Sony DSC-F828 were finally presented. One of
> them in on dcresource.com:
>
> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so.../gallery.shtml
>
> Whoever was doing the shooting, he or she did a disservice to Sony!
> One especially nasty example:
>
> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...SC02545-pp.JPG


The real life example is at
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...w/DSC02545.JPG

>
> or this:
>
> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...SC02558-pp.JPG


This is a downsampled version again the real is:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...w/DSC02545.JPG

>
> They should rather take these images away and replace by something
> more believable.
>
> Thomas


There are some noise in the sky in the first one, but nothing that not
NI can not fix

But what is your problem with the bridge pix? The detail is staggering IMO.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
ThomasH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-17-2003


H wrote:
>
> ThomasH wrote:
> > I just saw on dpreview.com that 2 galleries with examples made with
> > a long awaited 8Mpix Sony DSC-F828 were finally presented. One of
> > them in on dcresource.com:
> >
> > http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so.../gallery.shtml
> >
> > Whoever was doing the shooting, he or she did a disservice to Sony!
> > One especially nasty example:
> >
> > http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...SC02545-pp.JPG

>
> The real life example is at
> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...w/DSC02545.JPG


Yeah, I see than: http://www.dcresource.com/images/dcr...ff_message.gif

I can see only these *-pp.JPG's, which are, as you say, down sampled,
but precisely the quality of this process is unworthy such a site.
Look at these moiré patterns all over the place.

>
> >
> > or this:
> >
> > http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...SC02558-pp.JPG

>
> This is a downsampled version again the real is:
> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...w/DSC02545.JPG
>
> >
> > They should rather take these images away and replace by something
> > more believable.
> >
> > Thomas

>
> There are some noise in the sky in the first one, but nothing that not
> NI can not fix
>
> But what is your problem with the bridge pix? The detail is staggering IMO.


Indeed: The detail is ok:
http://www.dcresource.com/images/dcr...ff_message.gif
I am being sarcastic. I see only the small images, no access here to
these "non donwsampled" binaries, sorry.

Thomas
 
Reply With Quote
 
ThomasH
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-17-2003
ThomasH wrote:
>
> H wrote:
> >
> > ThomasH wrote:


I got it! Direct link does not work, you must follow it on their web page itself.

> > > or this:
> > >
> > > http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...SC02558-pp.JPG

> >
> > This is a downsampled version again the real is:
> > http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...w/DSC02545.JPG
> >
> > >
> > > They should rather take these images away and replace by something
> > > more believable.
> > >
> > > Thomas

> >
> > There are some noise in the sky in the first one, but nothing that not
> > NI can not fix
> >
> > But what is your problem with the bridge pix? The detail is staggering IMO.


You are kidding me! Look at the shadow detail of the pylon:
Its a nasty noisy mush of reddish and bluish pixels!!!
Its a bright daylight, this is really very noisy. It this
sensor really than bad?

Thomas
 
Reply With Quote
 
H
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-17-2003
ThomasH wrote:
> You are kidding me! Look at the shadow detail of the pylon:
> Its a nasty noisy mush of reddish and bluish pixels!!!
> Its a bright daylight, this is really very noisy. It this
> sensor really than bad?
>
> Thomas


Hmmm, i look for the detail and you look for the noise. And
you *are* right there are noise in this image! But a little
dab of NeatImage cleaned that up very well.

Still compared to the same image taken with the Fuji s7000
and the Minolta A1, i really belive that the Sony 828 is the
winner.
IMO that is.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bowser
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-17-2003
NI works to a point, but you can't beat low-noise images from the camera.
Clearly, this camera has noise problems, even at low (ISO 64) speeds.

"H" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news55Eb.3701$7U1.30108@amstwist00...
> ThomasH wrote:
> > You are kidding me! Look at the shadow detail of the pylon:
> > Its a nasty noisy mush of reddish and bluish pixels!!!
> > Its a bright daylight, this is really very noisy. It this
> > sensor really than bad?
> >
> > Thomas

>
> Hmmm, i look for the detail and you look for the noise. And
> you *are* right there are noise in this image! But a little
> dab of NeatImage cleaned that up very well.
>
> Still compared to the same image taken with the Fuji s7000
> and the Minolta A1, i really belive that the Sony 828 is the
> winner.
> IMO that is.



 
Reply With Quote
 
jriegle
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-17-2003
8mp crammed on a tiny chip. I'm not surprised there will be some noise
visible. Some chromatic aberration is noticeable as well as lower contrast.
Can't wait for the gadget geeks to buy 'em and boast here how it is better
than the 6mp SLRs.
John

"ThomasH" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> ThomasH wrote:
> >
> > H wrote:
> > >
> > > ThomasH wrote:

>
> I got it! Direct link does not work, you must follow it on their web page

itself.
>
> > > > or this:
> > > >
> > > >

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...SC02558-pp.JPG
> > >
> > > This is a downsampled version again the real is:
> > > http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...w/DSC02545.JPG
> > >
> > > >
> > > > They should rather take these images away and replace by something
> > > > more believable.
> > > >
> > > > Thomas
> > >
> > > There are some noise in the sky in the first one, but nothing that not
> > > NI can not fix
> > >
> > > But what is your problem with the bridge pix? The detail is staggering

IMO.
>
> You are kidding me! Look at the shadow detail of the pylon:
> Its a nasty noisy mush of reddish and bluish pixels!!!
> Its a bright daylight, this is really very noisy. It this
> sensor really than bad?
>
> Thomas



 
Reply With Quote
 
Todd Walker
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-18-2003
In article <Wy5Eb.209077$Ec1.7559948@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
> 8mp crammed on a tiny chip. I'm not surprised there will be some noise
> visible. Some chromatic aberration is noticeable as well as lower contrast.
> Can't wait for the gadget geeks to buy 'em and boast here how it is better
> than the 6mp SLRs.
> John
>


Oh they've already been boasting and no one even has one yet. I can't
believe anyone would pay $1000 for the 828 when you can get the 300D
with a lens for the same price. But hey, to each his own (or there's a
sucker born every minute, take your pick.)

--
__________________________________
Todd Walker
Canon 10D
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
__________________________________
 
Reply With Quote
 
gr
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-18-2003
"Todd Walker" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
>
> Oh they've already been boasting and no one even has one yet. I can't
> believe anyone would pay $1000 for the 828 when you can get the 300D
> with a lens for the same price. But hey, to each his own (or there's a
> sucker born every minute, take your pick.)


Ah yes, the Canon fanboys are bashing it already, and it's barely released.

So, can your 10D do histogram preview? Does it have a rotating LCD preview
screen for macro shooting? Can it do movies? Does it have a removable IR
blocking filter for superb infrared capability?

I really wish the dSLR folks would realize that not everybody wants a
crippled digital camera, just so they can boast it's an SLR. The SLR was
great for film, but it's a broken concept for digital IMO. Take all the
disadvantages of film, and force it on to digital... what's the point?

If I wanted a bulky camera, I'd rather have a big sensor on a digicam format
than an SLR format.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Leonard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-18-2003
jriegle wrote:
> 8mp crammed on a tiny chip. I'm not surprised there will be some noise
> visible. Some chromatic aberration is noticeable as well as lower contrast.


The pixel pitch is not significantly smaller than the 5mp on 1/1.8
sensors which seem to be everywhere. So the noise performance while
it is never going to look good against an SLR or even the 717 should
be on a par with the DSC-P10 - if not then Sony have dropped the ball
somewhat.

- Len

 
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
Python's website does a great disservice to the language CppNewB Python 39 11-04-2005 03:04 AM
Hey, Free Sony PSP. Best thing since sliced bread! It's So easy,and 100% legal! GET A FREE SONY PSP! !!NO CATCH!! Sarah Stewart Computer Support 0 05-08-2005 08:47 AM
Disservice to All Frorger Hoerllerruer MCSE 19 07-08-2004 03:43 AM
looking for opinions on QUALITY OF PICTURES for Sony S85 vs Sony F717 if any ... alex Digital Photography 2 08-01-2003 10:30 PM
Sony TRV230 vs. Sony TRV245 (UK Models) J.B. Digital Photography 3 07-17-2003 01:03 AM



Advertisments