Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Which camera has the best dynamic range?

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Which camera has the best dynamic range?

 
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2008
ASAAR wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:20:34 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> If you feel I have not backed up my opinions sufficiently, I will
>> try and expand or explain.

>
> No, I don't believe that you will. You have only to examine the
> quotes in your own replies to see the issues you've avoided
> addressing. That goes for this latest reply of yours. You've had
> many opportunities to expand or explain, but it's not even a matter
> of backing up your opinions sufficiently. You have yet to make a
> reasonable start. It means nothing to you to have me repeatedly say
> that Fuji doesn't provide full resolution 12MP shots at its highest
> ISOs, and Fuji makes this clear on their website, in their catalogs
> and in their manuals. You continue to state that you wouldn't trust
> a company that offers those high ISOs with 12mp shots, when even the
> most clueless dummy knows by now that Fuji doesn't and has never
> offered that in any of their cameras. You're quick to see insults
> before they materialize, yet you don't mind tarnishing your own
> reputation with what now can only be described as your own
> incorrigible behavior, which continues year after year. You can
> only play "rope-a-dope" for so long before everyone catches on.


ASAAR,

The statement that I made was, quite intentionally, intended to be that an
acceptable 12MP ISO 12,800 image is an unreasonable expectation from a
small sensor camera. Indeed, it would be interesting to do the sums and
see just what physical size of sensor was required to do this. I did
/not/ intend to say that Fuji (or any other company) provided this
combination of settings in their camera.

You say that 6 x 4 inch photos might be usable from the ISO 12,800 setting
offered by Fuji - so being kind that might be a 1200 x 800 pixel image,
i.e. about 1MP. This may be consistent with the other claims made for
some Fuji cameras. It would be interesting to have a link to an ISO
12,800 image - I didn't see a full review on the D P Review Web site.

I still trust engineering and physics more than marketing claims.

David


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
ASAAR
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2008
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 06:20:27 GMT, David J Taylor weaseled:

> The statement that I made was, quite intentionally, intended to be that an
> acceptable 12MP ISO 12,800 image is an unreasonable expectation from a
> small sensor camera.


It appears that you're now trying to make us believe that you
can't or won't read. Nobody has ever said that 12MP ISO 12,800
images were possible. You've been explicitly told several times
that at the highest ISOs, the Fuji camera only is capable of taking
reduced resolution pictures. What you've done is warned people that
not only a particular Fuji camera, but all cameras made by Fuji are
suspect, because YOU would have a problem with any company that
offers features that only you are aware of. What's unreasonable is
getting a straight answer from you.



> Indeed, it would be interesting to do the sums and
> see just what physical size of sensor was required to do this. I did
> /not/ intend to say that Fuji (or any other company) provided this
> combination of settings in their camera.


You're really adept at using what are called "weasel" words,
David. No, you didn't explicitly state anything. But you imply
much, and this is what you said :

> Does the F100fd offer 12MP at ISO 12,800? If so, I would expect the
> results to be completely unusable, and hence I would have considerable
> reduced trust in a camera (or should it be the company?), which has
> unusable settings?


When you ask that question and then repeatedly ignore the answer,
most likely because it contradicted your unreasonable assumptions,
it only leads us to have considerable reduced trust in you and your
motivations.


> You say that 6 x 4 inch photos might be usable from the ISO 12,800 setting
> offered by Fuji - so being kind that might be a 1200 x 800 pixel image,
> i.e. about 1MP. This may be consistent with the other claims made for
> some Fuji cameras. It would be interesting to have a link to an ISO
> 12,800 image - I didn't see a full review on the D P Review Web site.


1MP is one of the resolutions offered at ISO 12,800. Since I
replied to you that the F100fd can "produce small 4"x6" snapshots of
usable, if not good quality", you're free to assume either that I
know this because I took some pictures myself with the camera at
that setting, or that I saw some of the 12,800 ISO images in a
review. Hint: read my reply to the OP. DPReview doesn't test all
cameras. When they miss one, Google can be your friend.


> I still trust engineering and physics more than marketing claims.


As do most reasonable people. But it appears that you're using it
here to defend your bogus assumption that Fuji's camera provided a
12MP 12,800 ISO option. Where's the marketing claim that you trust
less? Only in your imagination. Fuji *never* made that claim, and
stating this yet again, after being told that such a claim and such
an option never existed shows how little you care about the truth.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-01-2008
ASAAR wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 06:20:27 GMT, David J Taylor weaseled:
>
>> The statement that I made was, quite intentionally, intended to be
>> that an acceptable 12MP ISO 12,800 image is an unreasonable
>> expectation from a small sensor camera.

>
> It appears that you're now trying to make us believe that you
> can't or won't read. Nobody has ever said that 12MP ISO 12,800
> images were possible. You've been explicitly told several times
> that at the highest ISOs, the Fuji camera only is capable of taking
> reduced resolution pictures. What you've done is warned people that
> not only a particular Fuji camera, but all cameras made by Fuji are
> suspect, because YOU would have a problem with any company that
> offers features that only you are aware of. What's unreasonable is
> getting a straight answer from you.
>
>
>
>> Indeed, it would be interesting to do the sums and
>> see just what physical size of sensor was required to do this. I did
>> /not/ intend to say that Fuji (or any other company) provided this
>> combination of settings in their camera.

>
> You're really adept at using what are called "weasel" words,
> David. No, you didn't explicitly state anything. But you imply
> much, and this is what you said :
>
>> Does the F100fd offer 12MP at ISO 12,800? If so, I would expect the
>> results to be completely unusable, and hence I would have
>> considerable reduced trust in a camera (or should it be the
>> company?), which has unusable settings?

>
> When you ask that question and then repeatedly ignore the answer,
> most likely because it contradicted your unreasonable assumptions,
> it only leads us to have considerable reduced trust in you and your
> motivations.
>
>
>> You say that 6 x 4 inch photos might be usable from the ISO 12,800
>> setting offered by Fuji - so being kind that might be a 1200 x 800
>> pixel image, i.e. about 1MP. This may be consistent with the other
>> claims made for some Fuji cameras. It would be interesting to have
>> a link to an ISO 12,800 image - I didn't see a full review on the D
>> P Review Web site.

>
> 1MP is one of the resolutions offered at ISO 12,800. Since I
> replied to you that the F100fd can "produce small 4"x6" snapshots of
> usable, if not good quality", you're free to assume either that I
> know this because I took some pictures myself with the camera at
> that setting, or that I saw some of the 12,800 ISO images in a
> review. Hint: read my reply to the OP. DPReview doesn't test all
> cameras. When they miss one, Google can be your friend.
>
>
>> I still trust engineering and physics more than marketing claims.

>
> As do most reasonable people. But it appears that you're using it
> here to defend your bogus assumption that Fuji's camera provided a
> 12MP 12,800 ISO option. Where's the marketing claim that you trust
> less? Only in your imagination. Fuji *never* made that claim, and
> stating this yet again, after being told that such a claim and such
> an option never existed shows how little you care about the truth.


ASAAR,

I made no assumption about the brand of camera in my statement about
small-sensor cameras and very high ISO speeds. If you want to read in an
assumption - that's up to you. I have never claimed that any camera
offered 12MP at ISO 12,800, and therefore stick by my point that I would
highly mistrust any that did (with the present state of sensor
development). You would as well.

I have advised people that:

- if they want to use such high ISOs check the results. Perhaps it would
be helpful if you could provide a link to such an image.

- Fuji have made high dynamic range sensors, with dual photosites.

- To check whether any particular Fuji camera does, or does not, include
such a sensor.

You are correct that I have less trust in a company which makes claims for
its cameras which are not backed by either practical results or the
relevant physics. So I would place less trust in a company which claimed
4 stops of image stabilisation when independent tests showed only 1-2
stops, or claims that simply setting a high shutter speed was "image
stabilisation". The latter claim seems, to me at least, to be
deliberately misleading.

David


 
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
Re: Which camera has the best dynamic range? ray Digital Photography 16 09-08-2008 09:15 PM
Re: Which camera has the best dynamic range? SMS Digital Photography 0 09-08-2008 05:04 PM
Re: Which camera has the best dynamic range? ASAAR Digital Photography 0 08-31-2008 06:40 PM
Re: Which camera has the best dynamic range? ASAAR Digital Photography 0 08-31-2008 09:49 AM
Which digital camera over 3 Mega pixels has best C/P value? T.T. Lee Digital Photography 0 08-23-2003 01:20 AM



Advertisments