Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > why so little written on the Sony 828?

Reply
Thread Tools

why so little written on the Sony 828?

 
 
Mango
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004
I would have thought by now that this newsgroup would be flooded with the
latest 8 meg camera from Sony.

Is it that bad?

Mango


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.561 / Virus Database: 353 - Release Date: 1/13/2004


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004
"Mango" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:bukjp7$j7d24$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de...
> I would have thought by now that this newsgroup would be flooded with the
> latest 8 meg camera from Sony.
>
> Is it that bad?


No not really. It's pretty much what everyone was expecting...
Noisy, lifeless, low contrast images (a la F717), with a few added
surprises like horrid chromatic aberration/purple fringing and major
color shifts to cyan on some saturated greens..

Rick


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
CBM
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004
It sucks
"Rick" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bukll7$ikf87$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de...
> "Mango" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message

news:bukjp7$j7d24$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de...
> > I would have thought by now that this newsgroup would be flooded with

the
> > latest 8 meg camera from Sony.
> >
> > Is it that bad?

>
> No not really. It's pretty much what everyone was expecting...
> Noisy, lifeless, low contrast images (a la F717), with a few added
> surprises like horrid chromatic aberration/purple fringing and major
> color shifts to cyan on some saturated greens..
>
> Rick
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
John Eppley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004
The F828 reviews has certainly caused some confusion. I have read every
possible review of the camera, downloaded most of the samples from every
possible source and carefully examined each and every photo. Then I examined
some (many) of my slides and prints from the 1950's to 1998. Many of the
complaints of this group and the mentioned reviews are evident in some of my
ancient film. So what ??

I purchased the F828 two days ago, and I am still "playing" with the camera.
Does it have some faults?, probably. Does it have "grain" at the higher ISO
numbers? Yes, but at the 4X6 print size, it really doesn't matter. Again so
what!!!. Every camera I have owned in 50 years has some faults. So do I.
Unfortunately, some of the members of this group are completely without
fault. God bless them. Photographic perfection at such an early age must be
an awesome burden to manage. Instant perfection is admirable.

Anyway, I am enjoying the camera very much. It is even better than I
expected and is extremely versatile for it size and delivers a commendable
product. And you know what.....I probably would be just as happy with
several other cameras, Minolta, Canon, Nikon etc.

My point is this.......enjoy whatever camera fits your needs. Someone will
gladly tell you why you made a stupid mistake.

John



 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul H.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004

"John Eppley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ErlPb.36492$(E-Mail Removed). ..
> The F828 reviews has certainly caused some confusion. I have read every
> possible review of the camera, downloaded most of the samples from every
> possible source and carefully examined each and every photo. Then I

examined
> some (many) of my slides and prints from the 1950's to 1998. Many of the
> complaints of this group and the mentioned reviews are evident in some of

my
> ancient film. So what ??
>
> I purchased the F828 two days ago, and I am still "playing" with the

camera.
> Does it have some faults?, probably. Does it have "grain" at the higher

ISO
> numbers? Yes, but at the 4X6 print size, it really doesn't matter. Again

so
> what!!!. Every camera I have owned in 50 years has some faults. So do I.
> Unfortunately, some of the members of this group are completely without
> fault. God bless them. Photographic perfection at such an early age must

be
> an awesome burden to manage. Instant perfection is admirable.
>
> Anyway, I am enjoying the camera very much. It is even better than I
> expected and is extremely versatile for it size and delivers a commendable
> product. And you know what.....I probably would be just as happy with
> several other cameras, Minolta, Canon, Nikon etc.
>
> My point is this.......enjoy whatever camera fits your needs. Someone will
> gladly tell you why you made a stupid mistake.


Virtues or faults of the 828 aside, why would you buy an 8MP camera to print
4x6's?





 
Reply With Quote
 
philipp
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004
I think that you could have gotten by with a 2mp for 4x6 prints & saved
a lot of $$$$$$

John Eppley wrote:

> The F828 reviews has certainly caused some confusion. I have read every
> possible review of the camera, downloaded most of the samples from every
> possible source and carefully examined each and every photo. Then I examined
> some (many) of my slides and prints from the 1950's to 1998. Many of the
> complaints of this group and the mentioned reviews are evident in some of my
> ancient film. So what ??
>
> I purchased the F828 two days ago, and I am still "playing" with the camera.
> Does it have some faults?, probably. Does it have "grain" at the higher ISO
> numbers? Yes, but at the 4X6 print size, it really doesn't matter. Again so
> what!!!. Every camera I have owned in 50 years has some faults. So do I.
> Unfortunately, some of the members of this group are completely without
> fault. God bless them. Photographic perfection at such an early age must be
> an awesome burden to manage. Instant perfection is admirable.
>
> Anyway, I am enjoying the camera very much. It is even better than I
> expected and is extremely versatile for it size and delivers a commendable
> product. And you know what.....I probably would be just as happy with
> several other cameras, Minolta, Canon, Nikon etc.
>
> My point is this.......enjoy whatever camera fits your needs. Someone will
> gladly tell you why you made a stupid mistake.
>
> John
>
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004
> Virtues or faults of the 828 aside, why would you buy an 8MP camera to
print
> 4x6's?


Cropping, for a start.

David


 
Reply With Quote
 
Dan Sullivan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004

"Paul H." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:GSmPb.21317$(E-Mail Removed) link.net...
>
> "John Eppley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:ErlPb.36492$(E-Mail Removed). ..
> > The F828 reviews has certainly caused some confusion. I have read every
> > possible review of the camera, downloaded most of the samples from every
> > possible source and carefully examined each and every photo. Then I

> examined
> > some (many) of my slides and prints from the 1950's to 1998. Many of the
> > complaints of this group and the mentioned reviews are evident in some

of
> my
> > ancient film. So what ??
> >
> > I purchased the F828 two days ago, and I am still "playing" with the

> camera.
> > Does it have some faults?, probably. Does it have "grain" at the higher

> ISO
> > numbers? Yes, but at the 4X6 print size, it really doesn't matter. Again

> so
> > what!!!. Every camera I have owned in 50 years has some faults. So do I.
> > Unfortunately, some of the members of this group are completely without
> > fault. God bless them. Photographic perfection at such an early age must

> be
> > an awesome burden to manage. Instant perfection is admirable.
> >
> > Anyway, I am enjoying the camera very much. It is even better than I
> > expected and is extremely versatile for it size and delivers a

commendable
> > product. And you know what.....I probably would be just as happy with
> > several other cameras, Minolta, Canon, Nikon etc.
> >
> > My point is this.......enjoy whatever camera fits your needs. Someone

will
> > gladly tell you why you made a stupid mistake.

>
> Virtues or faults of the 828 aside, why would you buy an 8MP camera to

print
> 4x6's?


Why do people buy cars that can go 130 MPH to drive their kids to school?

Or buy huge SUVs that never get off the streets of NYC?


 
Reply With Quote
 
John Eppley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004
Why a Mpixel camera rather than a smaller less expensive camera.?? The
answer is as simple as my cabinet making experiences. I stock 8' boards or
longer when available. Why??....so I can make 18', 2' or 3' or 4' or even 8
foot pieces when required. The philosophical similarity between the two
crafts is identical. Almost every 8' board has some defects. So, the
craftsman either eliminates and discards the defect in the board or
minimizes the defect in a cosmetic manner. You simply do not throw out the
baby with the bath water. I have tried for 50 years to make 8 foot pieces
out of smaller stock. No luck.

The point I was trying to make is quite simple. My F828 in the 8mp mode
results in a printing size of APPROXIMATELY 30 x 40 inches . Even if the
resulting photo is quite grainy (noisy), when reduced to the "real world
sizes", the noise is practically invisible. Example 4 x 6.

John


 
Reply With Quote
 
Rick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-21-2004
"John Eppley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:JxzPb.64574$(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Why a Mpixel camera rather than a smaller less expensive camera.?? The
> answer is as simple as my cabinet making experiences. I stock 8' boards or
> longer when available. Why??....so I can make 18', 2' or 3' or 4' or even 8
> foot pieces when required. The philosophical similarity between the two
> crafts is identical. Almost every 8' board has some defects. So, the
> craftsman either eliminates and discards the defect in the board or
> minimizes the defect in a cosmetic manner. You simply do not throw out the
> baby with the bath water. I have tried for 50 years to make 8 foot pieces
> out of smaller stock. No luck.
>
> The point I was trying to make is quite simple. My F828 in the 8mp mode
> results in a printing size of APPROXIMATELY 30 x 40 inches . Even if the
> resulting photo is quite grainy (noisy), when reduced to the "real world
> sizes", the noise is practically invisible. Example 4 x 6.


What good is 8MP of resolution when ~25% of it is lost to noise
and chromatic aberration? E.g. in comparative reviews a 6MP
Rebel consistently outresolves the F828.

And BTW your 30x40" print size is a crock. Even at marginal
inkjet resolutions (e.g. 240dpi) 8MP works out to only 10x13.5".

Rick


 
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
Generally, are the programs written by C++ slower than written by C10% ? KaiWen C++ 102 09-14-2011 11:12 PM
1 little 2 little 3 little Kennedys dale Digital Photography 0 03-23-2008 01:03 PM
why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 4 12-21-2006 01:15 PM
findcontrol("PlaceHolderPrice") why why why why why why why why why why why Mr. SweatyFinger ASP .Net 2 12-02-2006 03:46 PM
Re: Can a usercontrol written in C# be used in Web Forms that is written in VB.Net? Steve C. Orr, MCSD ASP .Net 1 08-24-2003 12:06 AM



Advertisments