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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 9, 2007, 1:00 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Wirraway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 421
Default

Good informativereply Jim, I'm afraid Nick here has swallowed everything Sony has put in theirsales pitchhook, line and sinker and refuses to believe in any fact put to him that say's different.
Wirraway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2007, 7:30 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
nickphoto123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,356
Default

Santos,

Is it me or do you seem to be shouting?

Is that vegitation?

What was the Humidity Level and Speed of air flow about the vegetation?

I have no such problems with my H9. Upto 8x10 It satisfies me.

The samples you provide me do not represent the reality that i encountered with my H9 images.

Being a Meticulous Photographer does not mean such a photographer knows when he can capture a moment or not.

If I were a Meticulous Photographer I would not be looking at any small sensor camera.

I am a Capture the Moment Photographer, and believe me, after 10,000 H9 images I have captured many moments that I have been unable to capture with other cameras that I have owned and used in the past.

Like I said, you like it or you don't. no need to shout.

Thank you for the exchange of opinions and ideas. Without them there would be no Sony Forum.

Nicholas

nickphoto123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2007, 7:50 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
nickphoto123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,356
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
How do you know this (that Sony is doing it that way and that they're the first)?

Hi JimC,

This is how I know:

http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/DSC/DSC-T9/advantage/03.html

They are the first because any other competitorof a small sensorcamera (H9)would advertise such processing if they could offer it. Sony is first.

My files require far less PP than those of my R1, F828, Canon D60, Film Scans.

A camera is a tool, as you well know.

The H9 is equiped to make certain photographic descions. You either like it or you don't.

I like if after my extensive Real Life User's Review of the H9.

Glad to see you join the discussion.

Nicholas
nickphoto123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2007, 9:16 PM   #14
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

nickphoto123 wrote:
Quote:
This is how I know:

http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/DSC/DSC-T9/advantage/03.html

They are the first because any other competitorof a small sensorcamera (H9)would advertise such processing if they could offer it. Sony is first.
Sorry Nick. I don't read Japanese. But, I wouldn't believe that Sony's processing in the H9 is the first to take approach for a split second.

I've seen far too much evidence of raw files being pre-processed in the past, and this is not a recent thing (IMO, it's been done for at least 4 years now, based on my examining the raw files from a little Konica pocket camera I've got with Dave Coffin that when he was attempting to duplicate the results of the in camera processing while adding this model to dcraw.c).

Camera manufacturers are not stupid. They've got teams of engineers trying to figure out the best place in the image processing pipeline to reduce averaging errors due to the demosaic process, reduce rounding errors from multipliers being applied to RGB channels for color correction, reduce posterization by avoiding bit depth constraints of variables unique to the final file formats, avoid color space constrants by processing prior to those constraints, and more.

Manufacturers may *think* they've got a unique approach to something, when they don't I've seen that over and over in the past, too. Heck, I can remember laughing at defendor's of Nikon's decision to encrypt metatadata related to WB (implying that the storage techniques were proprietary in the way they have a matrix designed to account for more than one color temperature in the image). Not. It's not unique (Dave Coffin reverse engineered the matrixes for the multipliers by using a variety of camera settings and lighting temperatures and determined how it worked by what was changing in the raw files, and made it obvious to me that they were not unique in that approach.

My conclusion, it's wishful thinking on the part of Sony's marketing staff if they really claim to be first at any kind of preprocessing of raw data, especially since the way the data is being processed is not published by other manufacturers.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2007, 10:11 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
nickphoto123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,356
Default

Hi JimC,

Regardless, the H9 has proved itself to me and the means to the end, selected by Sony,works for me.

It is a great camera, not because I own it, but because it enables me to capture moments sucessfully. MyH9 Real Life User's Review shows how effectve the H9 is. This was not my intent, but simply the H9 'asserted' itself.

It is worth every penny. You can't claim this on too many cameras.

Nicholas
nickphoto123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2007, 6:57 AM   #16
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

A lot of cameras have very good processing.

My little Konica KD-510z was introduced 4 years ago (I got mine in July 2003, two weeks after it started shipping in Japan), and I got involved with getting it added to dcraw.c in 2004. Here's an old post on the subject:

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=20

I've never been able to match the in camera processing, even after spending a number of days working on modifying dcraw.c with advise from both Dave Coffin and another developer that's very familiar with Dave's code after Dave added it to the base dcraw.c source.

That is on my list of things to do now, though (since Dave has made a lot of changes to his code since then, and I've got someone else interested in trying to use raw files from a different Konica model with a hidden raw mode that they sent me some files from).

I've had a number of conversations with Dave over the past few years about what some manufacturers are doing with raw files, and I've been involved in getting more cameras added since then, too.

I don't claim to be an expert on raw files. But, Dave is. He's written code to support raw files from over 260 camera models (so far) in dcraw.c., and that involved a lot of reverse engineering (because the manufacturers don't publish information about them).

He's seen a lot of raw files from a lot of cameras, and when he says the raw files from a camera have been modified in some manner (for example, his observations on Nikon's raw files), I believe him. ;-)

I also don't doubt the post I gave a link to where observations were made about raw files from some of the other camera manufacturers being pre-processed (and they had links to images proving that by noting differences in them when different WB settings were used). IOW, they're not really "raw" (in the sense that they are unmodified data directly from the sensor). The values associated with each photosite just haven't been combined via a demosaic process yet (so that red, green and blue are at each pixel location).

Why wouldn't they advertise that kind of thing? I think it's because users want to believe that the data is pure raw, and that nothing has been done by the manufacturer to pre-process that data yet, so that the user can use more sophisticated algorithms later as software continues to evolve. Manufacturers probably don't want to advertise that they're manipulating the raw data (especially for models that can output a raw file).

But, noise reduction is often employed as part of the conversion process anyway. So, you've got a pretty blurred line as to what is being pre-processed and what is not being pre-processed when in camera algorithms are involved (i.e., are they changing the values of individual photosites prior to the demosaic part of the conversion or not).

What it really boils down to is the final image you get from a camera (either shooting jpeg or shooting raw and converting it later), no matter what technique is used to achieve it (and only the camera manufacturers know for sure exactly what is being done by the cameras's internal processing, since they don't publish the algorithms they use).

If you like Sony's processing, great. But, I wouldn't assume that it's unique (and they shouldn't either). Heck, I think that manufacturers assuming that they've got some unique way of doing things is a big part of the problem with documentation of raw formats (they're probably worried that they'd be giving trade secrets away. not realizing that other manufacturers are uising the same approaches)

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2007, 7:39 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
nickphoto123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,356
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
nickphoto123 wrote:
Quote:
This is how I know:

http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/DSC/DSC-T9/advantage/03.html

They are the first because any other competitorof a small sensorcamera (H9)would advertise such processing if they could offer it. Sony is first.
Sorry Nick. I don't read Japanese.

Hi JimC,

A picture is worth a thousand words. In the above link Sony shows that they reduce noise first then send the image to the Bionz processor.

Almost every other camera that creates Jpegs, reduces the Raw data to Jpeg and then use NR.

It is possible that Sony does this at both ends under certain conditions.

But all this techno stuff was mentioned to answer the original question of this thread. I believe my answer to that question still stands as a proper, accurate answer.

It is a hot summer day today in New York.

Today I am planning a Bee Macro Safari with my H9.

Stay Coooool,

Nicholas
nickphoto123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2007, 8:36 AM   #18
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

nickphoto123 wrote:
Quote:
Almost every other camera that creates Jpegs, reduces the Raw data to Jpeg and then use NR.
I doubt that any manufacturer waits until it's been converted to jpeg before applying noise reduction. It's probably done as part of the demosaic process in most models, or immediatly after the demosaic piece, before the it's converted to an 8 bit jpeg output (to decrease posterization caused by rounding errors).

Ditto for other processing (contrast curves, etc.). You want to do that kind of thing prior to the conversion to 8 bits per channel.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2007, 9:03 AM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 86
Default

nickphoto123 wrote:
Quote:
Santos,

Is it me or do you seem to be shouting?

Is that vegitation?

What was the Humidity Level and Speed of air flow about the vegetation?

I have no such problems with my H9. Upto 8x10 It satisfies me.

The samples you provide me do not represent the reality that i encountered with my H9 images.

Being a Meticulous Photographer does not mean such a photographer knows when he can capture a moment or not.

If I were a Meticulous Photographer I would not be looking at any small sensor camera.

I am a Capture the Moment Photographer, and believe me, after 10,000 H9 images I have captured many moments that I have been unable to capture with other cameras that I have owned and used in the past.

Like I said, you like it or you don't. no need to shout.

Thank you for the exchange of opinions and ideas. Without them there would be no Sony Forum.

Nicholas
Nick:

If I sounded like I was shouting, I apologize.

I would have purchased the H9 sight unseenthis pastspring for a vacation to Europe, as a backup to my R1, but it wasn't available then. Since then, I've been looking at several ultrazooms and trying to choose one. My image quality requirements are quite simple, I want to get good 8x10 and acceptable 11x14 prints on landscape subjects, and I don't believe that's asking too much from an 8 MP camera.

I agree that capturing a momenthas very different requirements from making large prints of landscape or architecture. And the H9 does this quite well. I would also agree that image quality is secondary for this type of photography.

But I like to make prints, so I've been downloading images from the H9 reviews on dcresource and dpreviews, and printing them with an Epson R1800 printer. And after half a dozen prints, I'm very disappointed with the H9, the prints are simply unacceptable. I'm not comparing it to the R1, but to similar cameras such as the Sony H5, which produces noticeably crisper and more detailed prints. That's why, in my opinion, the Bionz processor, which produceslower noiselevels at the expense of imagedetail,is inferior to the earlier Sony processor.

Those image crops are cypress trees from a standard shot that Jeff Keller, the reviewer in dcresources, includes in most of his reviews. I chose it because it has fine image detail.

Here are the links to his galleries for the H9 and H5 if you want to look at the original files.

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sony/dsc_h9-review/gallery.shtml



http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sony/dsc_h5-review/gallery.shtml



Keller recently posted a gallery of images from the Canon S5 IS. That camera uses the same Sony CCD chip as the H9, and comparing images of the same subject matter is very interesting....here's the link.

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_s5-review/gallery.shtml[/b]



cheers...
Santos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2007, 9:11 AM   #20
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Santos:

Do me a favor.... Please don't change your text color from the defaults, because it makes it unreadable with some of the board themes.

It's a long story.... But, the "Shades" theme here is designed to match the colors of the main site at http://www.steves-digicams.com

It's a custom board theme, and all of the colors don't remap correctly. As a result, if someone is using the "Default" Board Theme (as many of us do), it can make some text colors unreadable (you may think you're posting white on black, and we see white on a light background). Leaving text color at the defaults when posting gets around the problem (and it's our problem, but please don't change it anyway). ;-)

If you go to your preferences tab under "My Account" and change the Board Theme to Default, you'll see what I mean. Here's a direct link to change it:

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo..._preferences=1

This is what your last post looks like to me using the Default Board Theme (downsized for posting)

Attached Images
 
JimC 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 4:25 AM.