Dpreview just can't bring itself to criticize Canon

Read the comments below the images where a Sony clearly wipes the
floor with a Canon under test.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyw80/page6.asp

In article . com, Rich
says...
Read the comments below the images where a Sony clearly wipes the
floor with a Canon under test.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyw80/page6.asp

"At ISO 400 it's clear that Sony is using stronger noise reduction in
the W80 than Canon does in the SD800 IS, which - along with the slightly
stronger sharpening and bolder colors means that the W80's output has a
more immediate appeal that will suit the social 'point and shoot' market
perfectly well. Of course we can complain that the noise reduction is
too high (with the attendant loss of low contrast detail) and that the
files are ill-suited to post-processing, but for the W80's typical user
the output at ISO 400 will, I'm sure, be perfectly acceptable."

Phil must have smoked something when he wrote that. The Canon images are
blurry and noisy, while the Sony ones are clean and show lots of detail.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E3X0, E4X0 and E5X0 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

Phil must have smoked something when he wrote that. The Canon images are
blurry and noisy, while the Sony ones are clean and show lots of detail.

phil can smoke all he wants; simon did the review.

nospam wrote:
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

Phil must have smoked something when he wrote that. The Canon images are
blurry and noisy, while the Sony ones are clean and show lots of detail.

phil can smoke all he wants; simon did the review.


There's so many whines about DPReview "bias".
Can't disagree with the OP here though - this one is either
blatant bias, or a serious mistake.
Perhaps they labeled the samples wrong?

"Tom" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 21:06:33 +1300, frederick wrote:

nospam wrote:
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

Phil must have smoked something when he wrote that. The Canon images
are
blurry and noisy, while the Sony ones are clean and show lots of
detail.

phil can smoke all he wants; simon did the review.


There's so many whines about DPReview "bias".
Can't disagree with the OP here though - this one is either
blatant bias, or a serious mistake.
Perhaps they labeled the samples wrong?

I have e-mailed DPRreview asking if they have left and right
mixed up. I also mentioned the newsgroup so that should they
be so minded to join in they know the address.
I've always found DPReview to be an invaluable guide. Mind you I
prefer Canon.

Tom.

At ISO 800 the comment was that there was not a lot to choose between them
yet the Sony shot is clearly a lot better.

"Rich" wrote in message
ups.com...
Read the comments below the images where a Sony clearly wipes the
floor with a Canon under test.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyw80/page6.asp

Simon said the Sony had more appeal. I think they both suck. The Sony
sharpening is too high. Look at the halos. Ugh.
Just more example of the crap they are foisting on the consumer.

"Pete D" wrote in message
...
..
Perhaps they labeled the samples wrong?

I have e-mailed DPRreview asking if they have left and right
mixed up.

The Sony pics don't load for me, the Canon ones do. Are they trying to fix
something?

"Rich" wrote in message
ups.com...
Read the comments below the images where a Sony clearly wipes the
floor with a Canon under test.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyw80/page6.asp


I wonder how many gifts they get from them. I always wondered what they were
thinking when they compared a Nikon with a Canon. The Nikon was clearly
sharper, but they manage to say something like: but the Canon has a more
soft picture. Bull****: it´s called UNSHARP.

On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:20:52 GMT, Tom wrote:

Here we go folks...........do a google on the OP?? Well!!

If you can;t argue the facts, attack the messenger.
Rich is right on this one, admit it.

On Oct 12, 12:48 am, Alfred Molon wrote:

"At ISO 400 it's clear that Sony is using stronger noise reduction in
the W80 than Canon does in the SD800 IS, which - along with the slightly
stronger sharpening and bolder colors means that the W80's output has a
more immediate appeal that will suit the social 'point and shoot' market
perfectly well. Of course we can complain that the noise reduction is
too high (with the attendant loss of low contrast detail) and that the
files are ill-suited to post-processing, but for the W80's typical user
the output at ISO 400 will, I'm sure, be perfectly acceptable."


There seems to have been some editing of the review. Here's how it
reads now (I've used * to highlight the changes):

"At ISO 400 it's clear that Sony is using stronger *(and arguably in a
camera like this, more effective)* noise reduction in the W80 than
Canon does in the SD800 IS, which - along with the slightly stronger
sharpening and bolder colors means that the W80's output has a more
immediate appeal that will suit the social 'point and shoot' market
perfectly well.

"Of course we can complain that the noise reduction *in both cameras*
is too high (with the attendant loss of low contrast detail) and that
the files are ill-suited to post-processing, but for the W80's typical
user the output at ISO 400 will, I'm sure, be perfectly acceptable,
*and I was pleasantly surprised by how good it is.*"