Re: 25 Reasons to Aviod the SD-10 (was 15 Reasons to Aviod the SD-10)

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Paul Howland, May 9, 2004.

  1. Paul Howland

    Paul Howland Guest

    To be properly objective you ought to include referemnces to tests and
    examples that support your claims. For balance, you should also include
    some reasons in favour of the SD10 - it's not all bad. Without these,
    the site is *almost* as one-sided and unsubstantiated as George, and
    that's not good!

    Paul
    (D70 owner)
     
    Paul Howland, May 9, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Paul Howland

    Paul Howland Guest

    Fine - then provide the links, that's all I'm saying. I believe you - I
    chose a Nikon D70. However, as it stands the site is just one viewpoint
    versus another. And to be objective it is worth pointing out any
    stengths the camera has.
     
    Paul Howland, May 9, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Paul Howland

    Alan D-W Guest

    A huge improvement on shite gets you up to bloody crap on the bad camera
    scale. When we reach the SD43 it might just about be a useable camera.
     
    Alan D-W, May 9, 2004
    #3
  4. Paul Howland

    Alan D-W Guest

    He won't. It's a well known fact about the Preddy neanderthal that when put
    on the spot or asked to support his lies he just runs and hides.
     
    Alan D-W, May 9, 2004
    #4
  5. Paul Howland

    Alan D-W Guest

    Erm, let's think....
    ah, it's a nice colour. Black is the new black this season.
     
    Alan D-W, May 9, 2004
    #5
  6. Unless maybe the good ole' "unbiased comparison" at outhousephoto or
    whatever the site was called...

    -JP
     
    Jukka-Pekka Suominen, May 9, 2004
    #6
  7. Paul Howland

    Mikey S. Guest

    Your just digging yourself a deeper grave here GP by proving your stupidity.
    Anyone who needs to use "undelete" 3 times a week, let alone 3 times a year,
    is an absolute idiot.
    But we already knew that about good old GP , didn't we?
     
    Mikey S., May 10, 2004
    #7
  8. Paul Howland

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    Yeah, I can't figure out why this would help with levelling. I have a
    tendency to turn the camera a couple degrees counter-clockwise from
    level (that's what *feels* level to me), and the reason I can't see it
    when I'm shooting is because there just isn't a lot of contrast at the
    edges. Doing it in two steps only reduces the contrast. I'd like a
    border that was a few thin alternating black-and-white lines; I think
    that would straighten me out.
    --
     
    JPS, May 11, 2004
    #8
  9. Paul Howland

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    There are no 13.72MP shots on the card. The RAW files are 3.4MP.
    --
     
    JPS, May 11, 2004
    #9
  10. Paul Howland

    E. Magnuson Guest

    It has notches in the middle on the sides. If your horizon is close to
    the center, you can use the notches to align the horizon. (The reason
    it's a stretch is that you can do the same with the focus point marks on
    other cameras.) And because you can "see through" the bottom frame
    mark, you can do the same if the horizon is near the bottom.
     
    E. Magnuson, May 11, 2004
    #10
  11. Anyone who needs to access the "recycle bin" frequently is an absolute
    idiot.

    -JP
     
    Jukka-Pekka Suominen, May 11, 2004
    #11
  12. Paul Howland

    Alan D-W Guest

    I suppose Sigmas would need pretty big recycle bins to hold all the crap
    shots you would take one look at and say, I'm ditching that.
     
    Alan D-W, May 11, 2004
    #12
  13. Obviously, undelete is valuable only if you delete something by accident
    and then want it back. I have never ever wanted that feature on my
    camera. I normally don't delete anything but absolute failures anyway;
    there's time for sorting later.

    As for the "recycle bin" on Windows, I normally delete things using
    shift-delete, so they are gone permanently in one stroke, so I don't
    have to "empty the recycle bin" sometime later. I don't *want* the
    ability to change my mind later given the extra annoyance.

    If the Sigma cameras automatically put "deleted" things in the
    equivalent of a recycle bin, how do you actually get the space back to
    reuse for new images?

    Dave
     
    Dave Martindale, May 11, 2004
    #13
  14. (George Preddy) wrote in
    The Sigma has 3.4 M sensor points (with three sensors at each point).
    The 10D has 6 M sensor points (with one sensor at each point).
    In practice this seems to get rather equal resolution, but the
    10D lacks the aliasing artefacts of the Sigma and has better color.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, May 14, 2004
    #14
  15. SNIP
    Obviously wrong, again. You're a slow learner, it has been explained before.

    It samples in 3.4M spatially discrete focal plane positions and interpolates
    that to 13.72 MP.

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, May 14, 2004
    #15
  16. Paul Howland

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    There are only 3.4M sensing locations in the plane of focus. The
    photosensors are stacked 3 deep to get a pseudo-RGB for each pixel.
    Which is nice, if you're going to rotate the image, or align with
    another image for a stictch more accurately, but adds nothing to the
    original image, and is usually totally unnecessary.
    Not a big problem, because in most scenes you can't see the difference
    unless you are using extreme magnification.
    Sigma has 100*(10.29/6.29)-100 = 63.6% more photosensors. They are used
    less efficiently, however, and the Canon has more spatial resolution.
    The Sigma *would* get a higher degree of accuracy, *IF* it didn't have
    color problems and *IF* it had a proper AA filter.
    No such thing happens, idiot. The data recorded is used to the max.
    --
     
    JPS, May 15, 2004
    #16
  17. Paul Howland

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    No, there is data from 6M different places on the focal plane.
    Do you know what "in the plane of focus" means? You really need to
    study remedial English.
    They can exist without unique locations, as in the X3 chip. The top
    layer gets some of the photons that get trapped and converted to charge
    there, then the middle layer gets some more, and the rest are caught in
    the final layer. They are all in the same location, optically. They
    would get more photographically useful information if they were spread
    out.
    --
     
    JPS, May 15, 2004
    #17
  18. Paul Howland

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    You can say that all you want, but the 6MP bayer cameras capture 6M
    luminance points. Not 100% accurate, but nothing is.

    How do you explain the difference between the upper and lower halves of
    this image?

    http://www.pbase.com/image/28980485/original

    The top half is the original pixels from the 10D, with default (minimal)
    ACR sharpening. The lower half is the result of 50% and then 200%
    resizing with bicubic. After putting the two in the same image, I then
    sharpened the entire image with small radii (0.6 at 300% and 0.3 at
    300%). What was there to sharpen in the top image that wasn't in the
    bottom one? It's called "6.29 MP of luminance resolution".
    --
     
    JPS, May 15, 2004
    #18
  19. No, it doesn't. You only need to take 3.4M spatially discrete samples in the
    focal plane, so 3.4M sensors suffice for Luminance resolution.
    pixels?

    There are no RGB sensors, each sensor is sensitive to a broad spectrum of
    wavelengths (roughly 350-1000nm), and all photons collected during exposure
    time are quantized into a single Luminance value. If the light reaching the
    sensor is spectral band filtered, it will represent the average Luminance of
    that transmitted range of wavelengths.

    Whether one measures one or three spectra at the same focal plane position
    is largely irrelevant for Luminance resolution.
    It will potentially help the color accuracy when measured with three
    independent, correctly separated (color spectra and charge storage),
    Luminance sensors.

    Unfortunately, the Foveon sensor, as currently implemented, has poor color
    separation and it has to store 3 charges in the space of one focal plane
    position. That leads to ill-behaved color response, and higher noise levels.

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, May 15, 2004
    #19
  20. Paul Howland

    Crownfield Guest

    so george, if we colocate 6,000,000 pixels at one location,
    how big an image can you make?

    the z axis spatially does nothing for the image.
     
    Crownfield, May 16, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.