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
|
|||
|
|||
Google phone versus $3500 Sony FF
On 24/11/2018 20:55, RichA wrote:
https://petapixel.com/2018/11/24/goo...ight-shootout/ I have no idea how these really do, but look at the shot of the scene with water and clouds. Notice the motion blur with the Sony versus the phone? ========================================== I have one of the Pixel 3 phones, and confirm how good the low light capability actually is. Indeed, it was the camera features which made me choose that phone over any other - it's about three times the price of the last phone I bought. Effectively it is just long exposure, but done in a way that camera shake is less important than it might otherwise be. I have no expectation that it's anything like as good as even my MFT camera with the f/1.7 pancake lens, but I have it woth me 24 hours a day, and that's important! Folks may be interested in: https://petapixel.com/2018/11/14/goo...near-darkness/ and the details from Google: https://ai.googleblog.com/2018/11/ni...-on-pixel.html No reason why some of these features might start appearing in other cameras, of course (except patents, perhaps?). -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Google phone versus $3500 Sony FF
In article , David Taylor
wrote: I have one of the Pixel 3 phones, and confirm how good the low light capability actually is. Indeed, it was the camera features which made me choose that phone over any other - it's about three times the price of the last phone I bought. Effectively it is just long exposure, but done in a way that camera shake is less important than it might otherwise be. it's not a long exposure. it's stacked multiple exposures where the shutter speed is dynamically optimized based on subject movement, which are then combined using machine learning. I have no expectation that it's anything like as good as even my MFT camera with the f/1.7 pancake lens, but I have it woth me 24 hours a day, and that's important! it's likely better. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Google phone versus $3500 Sony FF
In article ,
RichA wrote: Since the m4/3rds camera (thanks to great IBIS) can shoot about a second long exposure at f/1.7, likely it will take a better night shot than the phone. not likely, because the phone is using computational photography and the m4/3rds camera is stuck in the past. Dpreview compared a night-mode video camera with a Nikon D5. Problem was, the D5 and the lens they used had no stabilization so it was limited to 1/30th without blurring the image, at 20,000 ISO. Dual IBIS and a 50mm lens will yield practical exposures of seconds long so unless there is fast movement in the image, it's a better solution. Not only that, you can drop the ISO so the image doesn't look like crap. not relevant. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Google phone versus $3500 Sony FF
On 26/11/2018 10:01, RichA wrote:
[] Since the m4/3rds camera (thanks to great IBIS) can shoot about a second long exposure at f/1.7, likely it will take a better night shot than the phone. Yes, that's my expectation as well, as I said. DPreview compared a night-mode video camera with a Nikon D5. Problem was, the D5 and the lens they used had no stabilization so it was limited to 1/30th without blurring the image, at 20,000 ISO. Dual IBIS and a 50mm lens will yield practical exposures of seconds long so unless there is fast movement in the image, it's a better solution. Not only that, you can drop the ISO so the image doesn't look like crap. As I understand it, the Pixel has, effectively, post-exposure image stabilisation, having taken a sequence of images. It does this by image macting rather than movement compensation. That's why I said that other cameras might be able to use the same technique. In practice, these days, I don't even have a full-frame DLSR, and I'm unlikely to carry around my MFT unless I'm on a photograhic expedition. But I will have my phone, so I'm grateful for the extended facilities it provides. -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Google phone versus $3500 Sony FF
In article , David Taylor
wrote: As I understand it, the Pixel has, effectively, post-exposure image stabilisation, having taken a sequence of images. It does this by image macting rather than movement compensation. That's why I said that other cameras might be able to use the same technique. you understand wrong. the pixel uses machine learning to combine multiple exposures, similar to hdr but optimized for low light. it also varies the exposure of each photo based on subject movement. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Google phone versus $3500 Sony FF
In article ,
RichA wrote: Since the m4/3rds camera (thanks to great IBIS) can shoot about a second long exposure at f/1.7, likely it will take a better night shot than the phone. not likely, because the phone is using computational photography and the m4/3rds camera is stuck in the past. Computational photography is guesswork, partly, it's like how a CD or DVD player avoids skipping, except the CD or DVD player can actually read-ahead whereas the camera cannot predict with precision (most of the time) what a subject is going to do. nope. cd/dvd players use extensive error correction, with cd-rom/dvd-rom even more so. a minor error in an audio or video stream isn't a big deal, but *any* error in a data file *is*. computational photography is not error correction. it computes what should be there, and the results are quite good and getting better all the time. Dpreview compared a night-mode video camera with a Nikon D5. Problem was, the D5 and the lens they used had no stabilization so it was limited to 1/30th without blurring the image, at 20,000 ISO. Dual IBIS and a 50mm lens will yield practical exposures of seconds long so unless there is fast movement in the image, it's a better solution. Not only that, you can drop the ISO so the image doesn't look like crap. not relevant. It is if the goal is to produce a better static image such as the one referenced. No IBIS or stabilization on night shots is crippling, unless you have a tripod. a nikon d5 and a video camera are not relevant to a phone camera and isp. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sony launches 12MP module for camera phone | Alfred Molon[_4_] | Digital Photography | 0 | November 17th 08 01:17 PM |
Capture DNG Raw images from Google Android Mobile Phone | Tea Vui Huang | Digital Photography | 0 | February 14th 08 02:24 AM |
MPG movie files (I recorded on my Sony Cybershot) will not playback on my phone (Sony Ericsson k750i) | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 7 | February 16th 07 09:58 PM |
New Sony Camera Group plus site (Google) | Scott Smith | Digital Photography | 0 | August 6th 06 11:54 AM |
Sony Alpha versus Canon 30D | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 6 | June 21st 06 05:55 PM |