Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Sanyo

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 13, 2007, 9:56 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
TheTurk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 259
Default

Nice Work!!! Well I must say that the CG6 is brighter than the CG65 (which I have). The CG6 is noiser and the CG65 is slightly blurred, I think this is the way they deal with noise removal. Any noise removal filters in any editing software blurs the image. As you mention its a matter of preferece, I prefer the CG65 image quality.

What I was shocked at was the focus searching on the CG65 compared with the CG6. I really hope they bring out a firmware update that fixes this!!! This annoyed me, I would have imagined that the CG65 being more expensive would at least have been as good if not better but in this instance it falls far short!!!!!
TheTurk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2007, 11:14 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Caelum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,030
Default

blindsight, that's interesting, Ihaven't really looked at the pixel detail of photos. And I also assume that the CG6 and CG65 would have mostly the same hardware, and sensor,except for the AVC chip (and software). But if the video is brighter on the CG6 and stills on the CG65, that's puzzling. I was thinkingthat perhapsthe brightness difference in the videocould bedue tothe CG65's attempt to smooth... it could have an averagering effect onpixel intensities? I do tend to use the CG65 mostly under good lighting and more often outdoors, but certainly there are many low light situations where it will perform less than ideal, especially in full-auto mode. I also imagine that viewed on a regular TV,videos from the CG6 would not lookmuch different fromthe CG65 (other than the light intensity thing).

Also, my impression between the audio recording on the CG65 vs the C6 is that the CG65 does a much smoother job, less white noise,and also has less digital "squeaks". It's difficult to compare here since for the CG6 you say has the air conditioner running in one of them. But it seems the CG65 audio is smoother, has less white noise, than the CG6 (9AF). Again I would have assumed that the audio would be the same, but it appears it is not.
Caelum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2007, 12:13 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 13
Default

"Sanyo makes a specific point about the files being smaller when recordingin TV-HQ with the CG65 becauseit records at a max bit-rate of 1.5Mbps whereas the other SP models record at a fixed 2Mbps in TV-HQ mode."


Where do you found this information?

And in TV-SHQ mode how nuch is the bitrate?

Thanks.
sandan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2007, 2:05 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Caelum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,030
Default

sandan wrote:
Quote:
"Sanyo makes a specific point about the files being smaller when recordingin TV-HQ with the CG65 becauseit records at a max bit-rate of 1.5Mbps whereas the other SP models record at a fixed 2Mbps in TV-HQ mode."


Where do you found this information?

And in TV-SHQ mode how nuch is the bitrate?

Thanks.
Sanyo makes the point at the top oftheir CG65 movie overview page. In the specifications for the CG65 you can find the bit-rates (the CG65 recordswith variable bit-rates therefore the quoted bit-rates are max bit-rates), so TV-SHQ is max 3Mbps. You can compare with the CG6 specifications(fixed bit-rates), for example.
Caelum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2007, 8:29 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 13
Default

Hi,

I'm curious to view the same photo (and noise) at iso 800 with CG65.

Bye................
sandan is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:34 AM.