If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
It's warm and cozy in the perfectly lit studios of most reviewers, but do
you really get a really good "buying advise"? I don't think so. The 40D Canon I had, seemed OK at first. Trouble started when I tried to make pictures with any kind of sunlight: the WB was all over the place and the difference between some shots with the same light, aperture and subject, sometimes differ as much as one stop! Here's a picture of the south bank of the river: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon1.JPG Here's another, exactly the same place and time, just 3 secs apart: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon2.JPG Now you would think, that the second picture is lighter, because the camera is more turned to the sun.... BEEP! It's actually turned away from the sun. But all smart people already understood that, since the picture is of the south bank ;-) The exposure increased form 1/400 to 1/250. Close to 1 stop, and the sky is washed out, including some masts on top of the hill. Case in point: not one review shows this, because they all use the studio set-up. So you'll just have to take a camera out for a spin, before you decide which is good and which is not. This one clearly is not. -- Focus |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
"Focus" wrote in message
... It's warm and cozy in the perfectly lit studios of most reviewers, but do you really get a really good "buying advise"? I don't think so. The 40D Canon I had, seemed OK at first. Trouble started when I tried to make pictures with any kind of sunlight: the WB was all over the place and the difference between some shots with the same light, aperture and subject, sometimes differ as much as one stop! Here's a picture of the south bank of the river: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon1.JPG Here's another, exactly the same place and time, just 3 secs apart: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon2.JPG Now you would think, that the second picture is lighter, because the camera is more turned to the sun.... BEEP! It's actually turned away from the sun. But all smart people already understood that, since the picture is of the south bank ;-) The exposure increased form 1/400 to 1/250. Close to 1 stop, and the sky is washed out, including some masts on top of the hill. Case in point: not one review shows this, because they all use the studio set-up. So you'll just have to take a camera out for a spin, before you decide which is good and which is not. This one clearly is not. PS CS3 left the full EXIF in a bitbucket :-) The center points of the picture is different, that may be the culprit. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
"Focus" wrote in message ... It's warm and cozy in the perfectly lit studios of most reviewers, but do you really get a really good "buying advise"? I don't think so. The 40D Canon I had, seemed OK at first. Trouble started when I tried to make pictures with any kind of sunlight: the WB was all over the place and the difference between some shots with the same light, aperture and subject, sometimes differ as much as one stop! Here's a picture of the south bank of the river: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon1.JPG Here's another, exactly the same place and time, just 3 secs apart: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon2.JPG Now you would think, that the second picture is lighter, because the camera is more turned to the sun.... BEEP! It's actually turned away from the sun. But all smart people already understood that, since the picture is of the south bank ;-) The exposure increased form 1/400 to 1/250. Close to 1 stop, and the sky is washed out, including some masts on top of the hill. Case in point: not one review shows this, because they all use the studio set-up. So you'll just have to take a camera out for a spin, before you decide which is good and which is not. This one clearly is not. Buy a clue! The light is clearly different, it appears the sun broke out from the clouds. The studio is the best place to test and compare cameras as natural daylight is too variable and unreliable |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
"OldBoy" wrote in message ... "Focus" wrote in message ... It's warm and cozy in the perfectly lit studios of most reviewers, but do you really get a really good "buying advise"? I don't think so. The 40D Canon I had, seemed OK at first. Trouble started when I tried to make pictures with any kind of sunlight: the WB was all over the place and the difference between some shots with the same light, aperture and subject, sometimes differ as much as one stop! Here's a picture of the south bank of the river: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon1.JPG Here's another, exactly the same place and time, just 3 secs apart: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon2.JPG Now you would think, that the second picture is lighter, because the camera is more turned to the sun.... BEEP! It's actually turned away from the sun. But all smart people already understood that, since the picture is of the south bank ;-) The exposure increased form 1/400 to 1/250. Close to 1 stop, and the sky is washed out, including some masts on top of the hill. Case in point: not one review shows this, because they all use the studio set-up. So you'll just have to take a camera out for a spin, before you decide which is good and which is not. This one clearly is not. PS CS3 left the full EXIF in a bitbucket :-) The center points of the picture is different, that may be the culprit. Not when you use evaluative metering. Centre weighed or spot: yes, understandable. Not good, but understandable ;-) I uploaded straight out of DPP, no change. Just reload. I think now it's even worse. -- Focus |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
"OldBoy" wrote in message
... PS CS3 left the full EXIF in a bitbucket :-) The center points of the picture is different, that may be the culprit. There's something stranger than just that going on here. The aspect between the two pix is different, and not from just having the centre point on a slightly different spot. They are clearly not taken from exactly the same place. One of the pix seems squished somehow - try overlaying any one point on one of the pix onto the same point on the other and you will see what I mean. The amount of angular change of position might accont for this. Strange. Steve |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
"Steve" wrote
... "OldBoy" wrote in message ... PS CS3 left the full EXIF in a bitbucket :-) The center points of the picture is different, that may be the culprit. There's something stranger than just that going on here. The aspect between the two pix is different, and not from just having the centre point on a slightly different spot. They are clearly not taken from exactly the same place. One of the pix seems squished somehow - try overlaying any one point on one of the pix onto the same point on the other and you will see what I mean. The amount of angular change of position might accont for this. Strange. Steve The OP wrote that the pix were taken in the same light. Looks to me the first was in hazy light and in the second the sun had come through fully. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
"TRoss" wrote in message ... On Thu, 22 May 2008 14:21:40 +0100, "Focus" wrote: It's warm and cozy in the perfectly lit studios of most reviewers, but do you really get a really good "buying advise"? I don't think so. The 40D Canon I had, seemed OK at first. Trouble started when I tried to make pictures with any kind of sunlight: the WB was all over the place and the difference between some shots with the same light, aperture and subject, sometimes differ as much as one stop! Here's a picture of the south bank of the river: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon1.JPG Here's another, exactly the same place and time, just 3 secs apart: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon2.JPG Now you would think, that the second picture is lighter, because the camera is more turned to the sun.... BEEP! It's actually turned away from the sun. But all smart people already understood that, since the picture is of the south bank ;-) The exposure increased form 1/400 to 1/250. Close to 1 stop, and the sky is washed out, including some masts on top of the hill. Case in point: not one review shows this, because they all use the studio set-up. So you'll just have to take a camera out for a spin, before you decide which is good and which is not. This one clearly is not. Just curious. Is the camera set up for auto exposure bracketing? Shooting in Aperture Priority with a 1-stop AEP will give you the results you got. LOL! I think I would remember going thru the menu and putting it on AEB. Besides, then I would have 3 different ones. Maybe it's SEB: Surprise Exposure Bracketing ;-) -- Focus |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
"G Paleologopoulos" wrote in message news:1211474580.693519@athprx04... "Steve" wrote ... "OldBoy" wrote in message ... PS CS3 left the full EXIF in a bitbucket :-) The center points of the picture is different, that may be the culprit. There's something stranger than just that going on here. The aspect between the two pix is different, and not from just having the centre point on a slightly different spot. They are clearly not taken from exactly the same place. One of the pix seems squished somehow - try overlaying any one point on one of the pix onto the same point on the other and you will see what I mean. The amount of angular change of position might accont for this. Strange. Steve The OP wrote that the pix were taken in the same light. Looks to me the first was in hazy light and in the second the sun had come through fully. Nope. Not a cloud in the sky. look at where there's a space between the houses. Right above there's a bush with shadow. looks the same in both pics, but of course less bright. Same at the front of the ship. There's a little reflection from the top and a little lower. Same in both. -- Focus |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
On 2008-05-22 11:13:31 -0700, "Focus" said:
"TRoss" wrote in message ... On Thu, 22 May 2008 14:21:40 +0100, "Focus" wrote: It's warm and cozy in the perfectly lit studios of most reviewers, but do you really get a really good "buying advise"? I don't think so. The 40D Canon I had, seemed OK at first. Trouble started when I tried to make pictures with any kind of sunlight: the WB was all over the place and the difference between some shots with the same light, aperture and subject, sometimes differ as much as one stop! Here's a picture of the south bank of the river: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon1.JPG Here's another, exactly the same place and time, just 3 secs apart: http://photos-of-portugal.com/Canon2.JPG Now you would think, that the second picture is lighter, because the camera is more turned to the sun.... BEEP! It's actually turned away from the sun. But all smart people already understood that, since the picture is of the south bank ;-) The exposure increased form 1/400 to 1/250. Close to 1 stop, and the sky is washed out, including some masts on top of the hill. Case in point: not one review shows this, because they all use the studio set-up. So you'll just have to take a camera out for a spin, before you decide which is good and which is not. This one clearly is not. Just curious. Is the camera set up for auto exposure bracketing? Shooting in Aperture Priority with a 1-stop AEP will give you the results you got. LOL! I think I would remember going thru the menu and putting it on AEB. Besides, then I would have 3 different ones. Maybe it's SEB: Surprise Exposure Bracketing ;-) Not true. If the drive setting is at one shot you will move through the brackets one at a time. -- thepixelfreak |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
What the reviewers don't view...
"Focus" wrote in message ... "G Paleologopoulos" wrote in message news:1211474580.693519@athprx04... "Steve" wrote ... "OldBoy" wrote in message ... PS CS3 left the full EXIF in a bitbucket :-) The center points of the picture is different, that may be the culprit. There's something stranger than just that going on here. The aspect between the two pix is different, and not from just having the centre point on a slightly different spot. They are clearly not taken from exactly the same place. One of the pix seems squished somehow - try overlaying any one point on one of the pix onto the same point on the other and you will see what I mean. The amount of angular change of position might accont for this. Strange. Steve The OP wrote that the pix were taken in the same light. Looks to me the first was in hazy light and in the second the sun had come through fully. Nope. Not a cloud in the sky. look at where there's a space between the houses. Right above there's a bush with shadow. looks the same in both pics, but of course less bright. Same at the front of the ship. There's a little reflection from the top and a little lower. Same in both. The light on the building and boats is clearly different, look at the highlights and shadows. Exposure can't create that. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Why did the professional camera reviewers totally miss a serious flaw in the camera? | Jeanette Guire | Digital Photography | 93 | October 26th 07 12:49 AM |
What is the best way to view and delete photos in a full page view | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 3 | September 29th 07 05:04 PM |
Why did reviewers not pick up on the Leica M8 problems? | Scott W | Digital Photography | 29 | November 17th 06 10:37 AM |
Some reviewers need a good..... | Rich | Digital SLR Cameras | 10 | August 28th 05 01:47 AM |
How reviewers shade the truth | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 29 | July 22nd 05 04:13 AM |