Apparently, noise isn't the number one issue to everyone

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

RichA - 27 Nov 2006 17:32 GMT

Most-recent issue (in Canada) of the Brit magazine Amateur Photography
put the Sony A100 against the Canon Rebel XTi. They rated the Sony
higher in most aspects including image quality. What swayed them was
not noise levels but sharpness and detail. The Sony (of the 10 megs
tested so far) seems to do the least post-sensor modification to the
image. Results are similar to what Panasonic's P&Ss used to produce
(as compared to other P&S cameras), high sharpness and detail at the
cost of more noise. However, I think most people would prefer to
handle noise that exists in post-camera software.

Reply to this Message

Quaoar - 27 Nov 2006 22:08 GMT

> Most-recent issue (in Canada) of the Brit magazine Amateur Photography
> put the Sony A100 against the Canon Rebel XTi. They rated the Sony
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> cost of more noise. However, I think most people would prefer to
> handle noise that exists in post-camera software.

This is especially true when printing at reduced size, where the
additional noise is averaged out, making a 'better looking' print than
does Canon's softness. Since most either do not print at all or make
4x6, etc, reduced prints, Sony has a point in their favor for the bulk
of consumers. IMO.

Q

Reply to this Message

frederick - 27 Nov 2006 22:15 GMT

>> Most-recent issue (in Canada) of the Brit magazine Amateur Photography
>> put the Sony A100 against the Canon Rebel XTi. They rated the Sony
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Q

Noise is also a much overrated "fault" when printing large. CA,
fringing, etc are much more problematical IMO.

Reply to this Message

RichA - 27 Nov 2006 22:44 GMT

> > Most-recent issue (in Canada) of the Brit magazine Amateur Photography
> > put the Sony A100 against the Canon Rebel XTi. They rated the Sony
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Q

According to an executive at Canon's lens design division, one of the
key reasons they are now putting more design emphasis (use of exotic
materials, etc) into the APS-C EF lenses is that digital printing is
encouraging people to make larger prints than they used to.

Reply to this Message

David J Taylor - 28 Nov 2006 06:39 GMT

[]

> According to an executive at Canon's lens design division, one of the
> key reasons they are now putting more design emphasis (use of exotic
> materials, etc) into the APS-C EF lenses is that digital printing is
> encouraging people to make larger prints than they used to.

That's possibly true for me, although as I used to take slides on 35mm
film, it's difficult to compare! I suppose as Canon are selling printers,
they might say that!

But certainly, I think that the present worship of complete freedom from
noise is just a fashion that will pass, and people will appreciate the
image content more than its technical perfection. (I'm not saying that
aiming to reduce noise is a bad thing, though).

David

Reply to this Message

Philip Homburg - 27 Nov 2006 22:57 GMT

>Since most either do not print at all or make
>4x6, etc, reduced prints, Sony has a point in their favor for the bulk
>of consumers. IMO.

Doesn't strike me as a good design, a 10 Mpixel sensor for 2 Mpixel prints
(and less than 2 Mpixel displays).

Signature

That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

Reply to this Message

Randall Ainsworth - 28 Nov 2006 02:55 GMT

Maybe someone will buy you a camera for Christmas so you can speak from
a halfway informed point of view.

Reply to this Message