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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 1, 2004, 4:51 AM   #41
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 182
Default

Finally! A great unbiased review at www.imaging-resource.com of the Sony V3! It's complete and it's excellent! I can't believe how sharp it is. Look at the black and white lines on that test Dave does. The V3 is so sharp! That's my kind of camera! Go see it everyone. The review has been completed!: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/V3/V3A.HTM
kski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2004, 7:07 AM   #42
blr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 339
Default

kski wrote:
Quote:
Finally! A great unbiased review at http://www.imaging-resource.com of the Sony V3! It's complete and it's excellent! I can't believe how sharp it is. Look at the black and white lines on that test Dave does. The V3 is so sharp! That's my kind of camera! Go see it everyone. The review has been completed!: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/V3/V3A.HTM
As it has been pointed out allready, perceived sharpness (or edge contrast, whichhas nothing to do with fine detail resolution) can be increased in post processing. Some cameras apply more sharpening some less. Let me tell you this, cameras that apply more sharpening produce nice looking crisp images viewed on screen but the results are less spectacular when printed. Many cameras can be set in terms of sharpening. Olympus for instance offers no less than 11 steps of sharpness adjustment in their better cameras. So, if high perceived sharpness is what you like you can achieve the same result in many cameras just turn the sharpness up. Alternatively you can do it in PS in several seconds afterwards. I usually use the softest setting of the camera (-5 in Oly5050) or better yet shot in RAW and sharpen in PSP if neccessary
blr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2004, 7:34 AM   #43
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 436
Default

Well, I think you are right. The issues that everybody were wringing their hands over seem to have been shown to be a minimal significance and certainly nothing that can cancel out the good points of the V3.

I see no mention of Purple Fringing and only passing reference to the 'aperture' issue.

I expect that, if the aperture thing hadn't been given such attention in the 'first' review over at dcresource, that it probably wouldn't have even been noticed by Steve or Dave. :shock:

I was pleased to see some reports on the quality of the accessory lenses, even though they were not given a full review. They appear to be worth consideration.


Meryl Arbing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2004, 8:12 AM   #44
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 98
Default

I agree. This "huge" issue was started as an overreaction by dcresource, followed by a "Sheep/biased" mentality by Steve. Those folks at imaging resource appear to be truly professional and unbiased and did not let any ongoing drama influence them. Thanks for pointing that site out. I have not visited them in a while.
chrisdsa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2004, 11:39 AM   #45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 182
Default

blr wrote:
Quote:
As it has been pointed out allready, perceived sharpness (or edge contrast, whichhas nothing to do with fine detail resolution) can be increased in post processing. Some cameras apply more sharpening some less. Let me tell you this, cameras that apply more sharpening produce nice looking crisp images viewed on screen but the results are less spectacular when printed.
You seem to be confused. When test images are posted on imaging-resource.com they are as is out of the camera, not post processing. So as for the Canon comparison, it too was not post processing. They were both as is and no one can deny that the Sony V3 is much sharper! Which is very important to many consumers. And your comment that the picture won't look crisp off screen....well you couldn't be more wrong. In fact when I had my photos printed, they looked even sharper and more colorful in prints. Whoo hoo!! The perfect camera! Sony does it again!!
kski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2004, 11:50 AM   #46
Senior Member
 
photosbyvito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,710
Default

kski...

if you don't know this already....the camera itself, processing the images after the shot is take (except in RAW shooting)

it adds contrast, saturation, sharpness and white balance, then compresses the file in the JPEG format. that isn't post processing on the pc, but it does, for the most part, the same thing, but the camera does it.

wat we (me and blr) are saying, is that the 'sharpness' is affected by how much processing the camera does.

you have much more control sharpening on the PC.

Vito


photosbyvito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2004, 5:19 PM   #47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 182
Default

Yes, I know that there is in-camera processing but you are missing the point. Let me explain again:

First the reviewer takes a photo with the Canon G6 and it processes it inside automatically to turn it into a jpeg file = the G6 test photo

Second the reviewer takes a photo with the Sony V3 and it processes it inside automatically to turn it into a jpeg file = The Sony V3 test photo.

Third, the reviewer puts the two in-camera processed photos side by side and the Sony V3 is the sharpest photo!

Is that simple enough? Am I not typing in english?

The test photos coming directly from both cameras are what they are comparing, not post processing with the computer.

Again the Sony is the better picture taker. Enough Said!
kski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2004, 8:39 PM   #48
Senior Member
 
photosbyvito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,710
Default

lol, i know exactly wat you're saying..but you're not getting my point

by comparing two shot straight out of the camera, and one looks sharper, that just means that the in camera processeradded more sharpening than the other.

how much sharpening the camera adds differs from company to company. in this case, the canon adds less sharpening to the shot than the sony did

Vito
photosbyvito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2004, 11:09 PM   #49
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 76
Default

I understand what you are saying photosbyvito, but the point is the pictures look better (at the level of sharpness most people would want ) straight out of the camera. This is the point I think kski is trying to make. Probably because of statements like this one from dcresource..."How does the V3 compare to the PowerShot G6? They perform quite similarly in most areas, with the V3 having sharper photos with more saturated colors. Then again, I got better photos out of the box on the G6, with no need for messing with the aperture." This statement is just not true. The reality is that the V3 takes better pictures straight out of the box in every situation except for f8.

It seems the topic is hung up on sharpness. It is also clear that the V3 has less noise than the G6 at every ISO. Look at the Imatest results... http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/V3/V3IMATEST.HTM

Imatest is a computer program that generates a report. Can't possibly get a more unbiased review than that!

Another point would be color saturation. the Imatest report shows that the V3 has about 3% more oversaturation than the G6. Well beauty is in the eye of the beholder on that topic, but the V3 pictures seem to look better in that area as well.

I believe the pictures look excellent out of the box on the V3. I would bet that with most of the pictures taken with the G6 many people would open them up in Photoshop and say "hmmm, let's sharpen that a little, let's saturate the colors just a little..." and end up with a picture that looks more like a V3 picture before photoshop. I have heard some complaints in the Canon forum...
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...20&forum_id=15
...about the G6 having undersaturated colors, many have complained that the color saturation looked better on the G5 (which was a little more saturated) see for yourself...compare G5 to G6 sample photos and then to V3.

So the topic seemed to be photo quality straight out of the camera which Imatest widely favored in the noise category and seemed to at least somewhat favor in other areas such as detail. I would think the unbiased human eye would as well.

So to change the subject a just a little. The auto-focus and photo quality of the V3 in near or total darkness would leave the G6 in the dust!

stallen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2004, 11:59 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 182
Default

Thanks Stallen,

that was what I meant. I'm sorry I wasn't able to express that properly. I tried.

Buy you put it very well.
kski 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 9:10 PM.