PDA

View Full Version : Shootout hits close to home!



Billiam
10-28-2004, 09:05 PM
Seen the G6 vs. DSC-V3 photo shootout that Jeff posted today? The one where he was apparently "desperate" for suitable subjects? The lake shots were taken within a mile of my home here in Lodi (and across the street from where I work)! The tower and brick building are at Stockton's University of the Pacific, alma mater of my fiancee, and likely to be the site of my impending marriage.

Hey Jeff, no more cheap shots at my adopted home town, OK? :D

(Obligatory photography content - I can't say I'm liking the Sony shots too much. What's with the color cast in the third shot? On my uncalibrated monitor, the white trim is yellow, the grass is neon green...)

Jeff Keller
10-29-2004, 12:39 AM
Seen the G6 vs. DSC-V3 photo shootout that Jeff posted today? The one where he was apparently "desperate" for suitable subjects? The lake shots were taken within a mile of my home here in Lodi (and across the street from where I work)! The tower and brick building are at Stockton's University of the Pacific, alma mater of my fiancee, and likely to be the site of my impending marriage.

Actually I liked Lodi! I even wrote an apology (http://lostworld.pair.com/blog/archives/000422.html) in my blog today about it. Now Stockton is another story! Though UOP is beautiful...

John_Reed
10-29-2004, 07:03 AM
The G6 got consistently higher photo quality than the DSC-V3. I looked at my favorite bugaboo, i.e., greenery, and the Sony got it soft and lost detail on leaves, etc., whereas the G6 did a very clean job on the green stuff. In the shadows, the Sony's images looked noisier and less sharp; and the Sony showed more CA (red & purple) by far than the G6. Good job, Canon! :D

Gizmoboy
10-29-2004, 09:54 AM
The G6 got consistently higher photo quality than the DSC-V3. I looked at my favorite bugaboo, i.e., greenery, and the Sony got it soft and lost detail on leaves, etc., whereas the G6 did a very clean job on the green stuff. In the shadows, the Sony's images looked noisier and less sharp; and the Sony showed more CA (red & purple) by far than the G6. Good job, Canon! :D

Have you looked what the shots were taken at? There F-stops aren't equivalent (unless I am missing something). Should they not be taken at the same aperture?

Gizmo

John_Reed
10-30-2004, 07:11 AM
Have you looked what the shots were taken at? There F-stops aren't equivalent (unless I am missing something). Should they not be taken at the same aperture?

GizmoNope, I just presented my subjective impressions of the images as I saw them. If you saw them differently, so be it; you're perfectly entitled to your own views. I imagine Jeff's photos were basically of the "Point and Shoot" variety, where the cameras were each allowed to choose their own preferred settings, but I could be wrong about that. :o

haikai
10-30-2004, 09:00 AM
on the new photos it looks like the canon still comes out on top. maybe it's the aggressive sharpening of the v3, but sony's cam has a certain "digital video looking" quality to it. the g6 looks a tad softer, but warmer and more pleasant to me.

anyway, i'm impressed the images were updated with the same exposure so quickly. good job on the photo shoot-out! :)

hai

tournesol
10-30-2004, 09:12 AM
...the g6 looks a tad softer, but warmer and more pleasant to me.

Warmer?! I believe all the G6 pictures have a bluish tone to them, whereas the V3 has a more yellow tone, which makes the V3 pictures seem more vibrant and warm. Am I all wrong here?

chauncey
10-30-2004, 11:59 AM
OK--since I must be digitally challenged-- I thought the G6 photos looked duller and the V3s were more "alive." Would sure appreciate Jeff's opinion since he posted that he sees an obvious difference, and he's the one with the new V3! Could be my computer screen is not reproducing the images exactly as one would hope.

Chauncey

tournesol
10-30-2004, 05:04 PM
I also believe the V3 looks more alive.

I'm watching the pictures on a PowerBook G4 with a super sharp 32 bit display and Colorsync, and I believe pictures a very sharp for both cameras, but in my opinion the V3 has the edge (more contrast, more saturated and vivid). I'm not sure wether this is due to digital sharpening on the V3, but lets face it, when we have to look for small satellite dishes miles away on a tall building, to decide which camera is sharpest, well then both have won :)

Question: why does the exif data for the V3 show 72dpi and the G6 180dpi?

haikai
10-30-2004, 08:48 PM
Warmer?! I believe all the G6 pictures have a bluish tone to them, whereas the V3 has a more yellow tone, which makes the V3 pictures seem more vibrant and warm. Am I all wrong here?

no, i agree in some respects, and i think i spoke too soon :o ... the image i was referring to was the road which looks warmer to me with the g6, but you're right that the church/tower thing and the brick house look warmer on the v3. i don't see a bluish tinge to the g6 images though... the v3 definitely is more saturated, but that's not the same as warmth (or apparent lack thereof on the g6).

in any case, saturation and hue is something that is fairly easy to change on the computer, but the details lost in the v3's leafy details and the extra sharpening can't be fixed so easily (that is, if you consider it a problem at all, which i do).

hai

tournesol
10-31-2004, 01:47 AM
You are right about the roadpicture, it looks warmer on the G6, but the other pictures look warmer on the V3.

I guess this discussion, however interesting, is a bit stupid on all parts since we are watching the pictures on a computerscreen with 72-96dpi resolution. I think we should have real prints in 20x30cm to really see if the difference is worth discussing.

Does anyone have an idea about why the V3 is 72dpi and the G6 is 180dpi if you look at the exif data for both cameras.

tournesol
10-31-2004, 04:18 AM
Another thing, how is it possible to take pictures exactly the same time of day with such big differences in shutterspeed and aperture:

exif for the same picture...

sony V3 exposure time 1/640 s
and F-number 7.1

canon G6 exposure time 1/250 s
and F_nubber 4

Looks like the Sony has closed out A LOT more light than the G6. It has a much higher shutterspeed and a much higher aperture. Maybe that is why there is more noise in the V3 pictures because it has somehow compensated for the lower light coming in through the lens.

This could be a very good indication that the ISO was not the same for both cameras. ISO is also missing from the G6 exif. If for ex the G6 was on iso 50 that would explain why is has to let in more light through the lens - therefore the slower shutterspeed and smaller aperture.

NeoteriX
10-31-2004, 06:39 AM
Does anyone have an idea about why the V3 is 72dpi and the G6 is 180dpi if you look at the exif data for both cameras.

It's probably what each manf. set as the default JPEG encoding/image processing setting. I would hazard a guess that Canon always does 180 dpi since the photos my Canon S1 produces are also of 180 dpi.

In either case, it's largely irrelevant.

The dpi is information in all image files that is only useful when printing, and still not even significantly so -- the dpi is basically the what it says it is, the "dots per inch" so it's a function of how "large" the photo is in "imaginary" land, or the conversion factor from pixels into normal standards of length measurement. Because there is no innate thing that governs how big a pixel is (the pixels on your screen can be big or small depending on your screen size and resolution) you need some kind of conversion factor.

It's easier to understand with an example.

Say you have an image that's 300x300 pixels. If you set the dpi to be 300dpi, then the image (when printed or in la la land) is 1x1". You can just as easily set the dpi to 150dpi and the image will be 2x2", and the image itself on a pixel level hasn't changed. You can look at both side by side on your computer and they're exactly the same, because a pixel is a pixel on a computer. Furthermore, you can have an image 1 pixel big which might look pretty small on a monitor at 1024x768, and print with a dpi of 1, in which case you'd have a inch by inch big "pixel".

Hope that cleared things up.