Does it also invalidate the portrait in sunlight of the woman. It seems
that the color and also the exposure of the FZ5 are not as pleasing.

I was also thinking of something else. Eventually I am planning on
buying a DRXT or a 20D (if someone does not talk me into getting a Nikon
D70s. Would the Canon S2 results and the Canon DSLR results look closer
since they are both from the Canon family or does that not make a
difference.?

David J Taylor wrote:

Dave Sill wrote:


"David J Taylor"

writes:



Given that the images of the house were taken over two months apart
(look at the EXIF information on the JPEGs), how can one expect the
colours to be the same? Actually, there's some critical point I'm
missing here - given that the images were taken two months apart,
how can the angle of the sun be exactly the same? These aren't
images of real objects, but images of other images! No way can you
compare the colour rendition unless you are buying a camera to
photograph other photographs.


Yes, the house images are photographs of photographs. But that doesn't
invalidate the comparison: the camera has no way of telling that the
photons it sees are reflected from paper rather than real
grass/trees/house.

-Dave



It completely invalidates any colour comparison.

The spectrum of light emitted from the "grass" on a photograph or print
will differ completely from the spectrum from real grass - consider the
near IR reflected from the chlorophyll for example, or the reflectivity in
near-UV of some flowers. The camera's RGB, CMY or RGBC sensors will react
differently to artificial colours than real ones.

David