Photo Forum / Digital Photography / Digital Photo / November 2008
What, 2 stop dynamic range?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Rich - 17 Nov 2008 16:12 GMT Lord forgive them.
Dpreview.com: Sony has announced the development of the finest-yet pixel-pitch 1/2.5" sensor. The 12.2MP CMOS sensor has been developed for mobile phone cameras, but is of a size commonly used in compact and super zoom cameras. The IMX060PQ sensor, which Sony brands 'Exmor' in common with its DSLR CMOS sensors, will also be available incorporated into an F2.8 28mm-equiv lens unit with piezoelectric driven autofocus - relatively advanced for a camera phone module.
Calvin Dobbs - 17 Nov 2008 16:26 GMT >Lord forgive them. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >an F2.8 28mm-equiv lens unit with piezoelectric driven autofocus - >relatively advanced for a camera phone module. And yet, I've seen some award-winning photographs presented in a 2-bit depth image. (Posterized pure blacks and whites.) Some of those images are still being printed that way as examples in photography reference books to show you what can be done within such limitations -- IF you are a REAL pro.
That's the part that hurts all of you, doesn't it. Something that you wish you could be by just purchasing the right camera. And yet, we all know that that's never going to happen, don't we.
You people look more and more silly every day, to anyone who is a real pro.
Rich - 17 Nov 2008 22:45 GMT > >Lord forgive them. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > printed that way as examples in photography reference books to show you what can > be done within such limitations -- IF you are a REAL pro. The picture would still be a technical piece of s---.
Deep Reset - 18 Nov 2008 18:35 GMT >>Lord forgive them. >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > depth > image. (Posterized pure blacks and whites.) That would be "1-bit depth", surely?
Deep
CoreyManchester - 18 Nov 2008 19:45 GMT >>>Lord forgive them. >>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Deep For all intents and purposes, the best you can do is 2-*color* depth, that which is allowed by one of more common of file formats (GIF). As far as actual bit-depth goes you need at least one other for parity (that makes 2-bits), or 8-bits more for an alpha channel, or in the instance of GIF files which only allow 2 colors (4-bit, 16-colors, RGB) for its bit-depth. Which then again can only be represented in a bit-depth equal to or greater than that.
Not counting all the extraneous image and digital bits required, then yes, of course it would be 1-bit depth, if nothing else was required to digitally store and retrieve that image.
Don Stauffer - 18 Nov 2008 14:45 GMT > Lord forgive them. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > an F2.8 28mm-equiv lens unit with piezoelectric driven autofocus - > relatively advanced for a camera phone module. How do we get two-stop dynamic range from the paragraph?
MarlinAdams - 18 Nov 2008 15:13 GMT >> Lord forgive them. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >How do we get two-stop dynamic range from the paragraph? From someone that's too big of an idiot to realize that sensor size and pixel-density does not automatically equate to dynamic range. That's one of the huge myths that's been perpetuated by a self-proclaimed "doctor" in this newsgroup that spams this group regularly with his deceptive math bullshit because he can't dazzle anyone with his brilliance. Here's an example of a 1/2.5" sensor that has a 10.3EV dynamic range that totally blows that myth away.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg
Paul Furman - 18 Nov 2008 15:55 GMT >>> Lord forgive them. >>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg Here's an interesting web site to help get some perspective on those kinds of numbers: http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(app areil1)/197|0/(appareil2)/247|0/(appareil3)/240|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(bran d2)/Canon/(brand3)/Panasonic They only have a few P&S... I included a D70 in that link but check it out with a D700, whoah!
 Signature Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com
all google groups messages filtered due to spam
CarlThomas - 18 Nov 2008 16:17 GMT >>>> Lord forgive them. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >They only have a few P&S... I included a D70 in that link but check it >out with a D700, whoah! Oh look. Yet another website that is selling an outrageously over-priced product (with little to no use for a real pro) to pander to those with more money than brains. They have certainly set their target-market and deceptive spam accordingly, to be able to set the price-point of their product to be the most lucrative to themselves.
"A fool and his money are soon parted."
An even bigger fool will lead other fools to their spam trough.
I've tested DxO's software extensively. I keep hoping they get it right, make it useful. Each time that I have I hit uninstall after just a few moments of playing with their useless crap. If their software is that lame, and that high-priced, one can only imagine how they come up with the numbers they do to sell to fools who are willing to throw away their own money on DxO's sh.t.
They certainly have you pegged right!
Either that or you work for them.
SMS - 18 Nov 2008 16:57 GMT > Here's an interesting web site to help get some perspective on those > kinds of numbers: > http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(app areil1)/197|0/(appareil2)/247|0/(appareil3)/240|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(bran d2)/Canon/(brand3)/Panasonic > > They only have a few P&S... I included a D70 in that link but check it > out with a D700, whoah! That's a useful site, but they don't have any smaller P&S models. Not a lot of surprises there; the D-SLRs all have far lower noise, and much better dynamic range than the high-end P&S models.
joel-mcbaine - 18 Nov 2008 17:08 GMT >> Here's an interesting web site to help get some perspective on those >> kinds of numbers: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >lot of surprises there; the D-SLRs all have far lower noise, and much >better dynamic range than the high-end P&S models. Dear Resident-Troll,
Your post is completely off-topic. Here are some topics that befit this newsgroup. Please consider them for future discussions and posts:
1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent wide-angle and telephoto (tel-extender) add-on lenses for many makes and models of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your photography gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can far surpass any range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or will ever be made for larger format cameras.
2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used with high-quality tel-extenders, which by the way, do not reduce the lens' original aperture one bit. Only DSLRs suffer from that problem due to the manner in which their tele-converters work. They can also have higher quality full-frame 180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than any DSLR and its glass in existence. Some excellent fish-eye adapters can be added to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic-aberration nor edge-softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this allows you to seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm equivalent focal-length up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own lens.
3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic Range vs. an APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg
4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent) sensors used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much smaller. Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs. This also allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than DSLR glass which is only good for one aperture setting per lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S glass can out-resolve even the best DSLR glass ever made. After all is said and done, you will spend 1/4th to 1/50th the price that you would have to in order to get comparable performance in a DSLR camera. When you buy a DSLR you are investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips, external flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc. etc. The outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial DSLR body purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their banks.
5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera plus one small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing just a couple pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would require over 10 to 20 pounds of DSLR body and lenses. You can carry the whole P&S kit in one roomy pocket of a wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy backpack. You also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.
6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer, you will not be barred from using your camera at public events, stage-performances, and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots, you won't so easily alert all those within a block around, from the obnoxious noise that your DSLR is making, that you are capturing anyone's images. For the more dedicated wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not endanger your life when photographing potentially dangerous animals by alerting them to your presence.
7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you may capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where any evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance. Without the need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware into remote areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time allotted for bringing back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for unattended time-lapse photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you may capture those unusual or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a rare slime-mold's propagation, that you happened to find in a mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest laptop or other time-lapse hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that CHDK brings to the creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to list them all here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )
8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See: http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast subject motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the need of artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone. Nor will their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane shutter distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when photographed with all DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions example-image link in #10.)
9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including shutter-speeds of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g. http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_%26_Flash-Sync without the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter flash-units that must strobe for the full duration of the shutter's curtain to pass over the frame. The other downside to those kinds of flash units, is that the light-output is greatly reduced the faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed used that is faster than your camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the flash output. Not so when using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash is recorded no matter the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK capable cameras where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the lightning-fast single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is 1/10,000 of a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a second, then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also don't require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may be used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that can compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example: http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html
10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions (focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g. http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortio ns.jpg do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground, 90-degrees from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously loud slapping mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily damaged, expensive repair costs, etc.
11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're not worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete while you do, and not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos that day from having gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous photographer you're no longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of unneeded glass, allowing you to carry more of the important supplies, like food and water, allowing you to trek much further than you've ever been able to travel before with your old D/SLR bricks.
12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the planet can compare in the quality of available-light macro photography that can be accomplished with nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera.
13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo audio recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature where a still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong. E.g. recording the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living field-mice. With your P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't miss that once-in-a-lifetime chance to record some unexpected event, like the passage of a bright meteor in the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion, or any other newsworthy event. Imagine the gaping hole in our history of the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras there at the time. The mystery of how it exploded would have never been solved. Or the amateur 8mm film of the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready P&S camera being with you all the time might capture something that will be a valuable part of human history one day.
14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your composition by trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With the ability to overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area alerts (and dozens of other important shooting data) directly on your electronic viewfinder display you are also not going to guess if your exposure might be right this time. Nor do you have to remove your eye from the view of your subject to check some external LCD histogram display, ruining your chances of getting that perfect shot when it happens.
15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and sensors that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as light-levels drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in total darkness by using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other multi-purpose cameras are capable of taking still-frame and videos of nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as well. Shooting videos and still-frames of nocturnal animals in the total-dark, without disturbing their natural behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is not only possible, it's been done, many times, by myself. (An interesting and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly stomped to death by an irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash come from.)
16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100% silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it away nor changing their natural behavior with your existence. Nor, as previously mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your direction. You are recording nature as it is, and should be, not some artificial human-changed distortion of reality and nature.
17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A leaf-shutter or electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will capture your moving subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S photography will no longer lead a biologist nor other scientist down another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.
18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is recorded. In the hands of an experienced photographer that will always rely on prefocusing their camera, there is no hit & miss auto-focusing that happens on all auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This allows you to take advantage of the faster shutter response times of P&S cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that if you really want to get every shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in any camera.
19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately relay the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate preview of what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3 seconds or 1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the crisp sharp outlines of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100% accurately depicted in your viewfinder before you even record the shot. What you see in a P&S camera is truly what you get. You won't have to guess in advance at what shutter speed to use to obtain those artistic effects or those scientifically accurate nature studies that you require or that your client requires. When testing CHDK P&S cameras that could have shutter speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was amazed that I could half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a Dremel-Drill's 30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real time, without ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when lowering shutter speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls, instantly seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never realize what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.
20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of its own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender on the front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would with a DSLR. Framing and the included background is relative to the subject at the time and has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens in use. Your f/ratio (which determines your depth-of-field), is a computation of focal-length divided by aperture diameter. Increase the focal-length and you make your DOF shallower. No different than opening up the aperture to accomplish the same. The two methods are identically related where DOF is concerned.
21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25 and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S camera can't go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S camera can have larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in existence. The time when you really need a fast lens to prevent camera-shake that gets amplified at those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs you can take perfectly fine hand-held images at super-zoom settings. Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures at long focal lengths require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They need high ISOs, you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are some excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to ISO1600 and more.
22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of around $100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today. IF they have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award winning photograph with a cardboard Brownie Box camera made a century ago. If you can't take excellent photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able to get good photos on a DSLR either. Never blame your inability to obtain a good photograph on the kind of camera that you own. Those who claim they NEED a DSLR are only fooling themselves and all others. These are the same people that buy a new camera every year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only had the right camera, a better camera, better lenses, faster lenses, then I will be a great photographer!" Camera company's love these people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will make their photography better, because they never were a good photographer to begin with. The irony is that, by them thinking that they only need to throw money at the problem, they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real problem is. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why these self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras instantly reveal to them their piss-poor photography skills.
23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera gear. They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile and tell them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the look on their face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that lost money, and a sadness just courses through every fiber of their being. Wondering why they can't get photographs as good after they spent all that time and money. Get good on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun experience.
24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust, and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag, hoping that you'll lug it around again some day.
25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you. That's like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS STUPID AND I DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only take it out when needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with all your photos. And should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're not out $20,000. They are inexpensive to replace.
There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just better, all around. No doubt about it.
The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just one short phrase:
"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a foolish thing."
joel-mcbaine - 18 Nov 2008 17:11 GMT >> Here's an interesting web site to help get some perspective on those >> kinds of numbers: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >lot of surprises there; the D-SLRs all have far lower noise, and much >better dynamic range than the high-end P&S models. Dear Resident-Troll,
Your post is completely off-topic. Here are some topics that befit this newsgroup. Please consider them for future discussions and posts:
1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent wide-angle and telephoto (tel-extender) add-on lenses for many makes and models of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your photography gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can far surpass any range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or will ever be made for larger format cameras.
2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used with high-quality tel-extenders, which by the way, do not reduce the lens' original aperture one bit. Only DSLRs suffer from that problem due to the manner in which their tele-converters work. They can also have higher quality full-frame 180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than any DSLR and its glass in existence. Some excellent fish-eye adapters can be added to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic-aberration nor edge-softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this allows you to seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm equivalent focal-length up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own lens.
3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic Range vs. an APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg
4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent) sensors used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much smaller. Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs. This also allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than DSLR glass which is only good for one aperture setting per lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S glass can out-resolve even the best DSLR glass ever made. After all is said and done, you will spend 1/4th to 1/50th the price that you would have to in order to get comparable performance in a DSLR camera. When you buy a DSLR you are investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips, external flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc. etc. The outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial DSLR body purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their banks.
5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera plus one small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing just a couple pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would require over 10 to 20 pounds of DSLR body and lenses. You can carry the whole P&S kit in one roomy pocket of a wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy backpack. You also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.
6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer, you will not be barred from using your camera at public events, stage-performances, and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots, you won't so easily alert all those within a block around, from the obnoxious noise that your DSLR is making, that you are capturing anyone's images. For the more dedicated wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not endanger your life when photographing potentially dangerous animals by alerting them to your presence.
7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you may capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where any evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance. Without the need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware into remote areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time allotted for bringing back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for unattended time-lapse photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you may capture those unusual or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a rare slime-mold's propagation, that you happened to find in a mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest laptop or other time-lapse hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that CHDK brings to the creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to list them all here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )
8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See: http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast subject motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the need of artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone. Nor will their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane shutter distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when photographed with all DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions example-image link in #10.)
9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including shutter-speeds of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g. http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_%26_Flash-Sync without the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter flash-units that must strobe for the full duration of the shutter's curtain to pass over the frame. The other downside to those kinds of flash units, is that the light-output is greatly reduced the faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed used that is faster than your camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the flash output. Not so when using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash is recorded no matter the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK capable cameras where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the lightning-fast single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is 1/10,000 of a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a second, then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also don't require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may be used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that can compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example: http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html
10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions (focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g. http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortio ns.jpg do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground, 90-degrees from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously loud slapping mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily damaged, expensive repair costs, etc.
11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're not worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete while you do, and not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos that day from having gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous photographer you're no longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of unneeded glass, allowing you to carry more of the important supplies, like food and water, allowing you to trek much further than you've ever been able to travel before with your old D/SLR bricks.
12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the planet can compare in the quality of available-light macro photography that can be accomplished with nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera.
13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo audio recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature where a still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong. E.g. recording the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living field-mice. With your P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't miss that once-in-a-lifetime chance to record some unexpected event, like the passage of a bright meteor in the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion, or any other newsworthy event. Imagine the gaping hole in our history of the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras there at the time. The mystery of how it exploded would have never been solved. Or the amateur 8mm film of the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready P&S camera being with you all the time might capture something that will be a valuable part of human history one day.
14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your composition by trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With the ability to overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area alerts (and dozens of other important shooting data) directly on your electronic viewfinder display you are also not going to guess if your exposure might be right this time. Nor do you have to remove your eye from the view of your subject to check some external LCD histogram display, ruining your chances of getting that perfect shot when it happens.
15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and sensors that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as light-levels drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in total darkness by using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other multi-purpose cameras are capable of taking still-frame and videos of nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as well. Shooting videos and still-frames of nocturnal animals in the total-dark, without disturbing their natural behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is not only possible, it's been done, many times, by myself. (An interesting and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly stomped to death by an irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash come from.)
16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100% silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it away nor changing their natural behavior with your existence. Nor, as previously mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your direction. You are recording nature as it is, and should be, not some artificial human-changed distortion of reality and nature.
17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A leaf-shutter or electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will capture your moving subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S photography will no longer lead a biologist nor other scientist down another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.
18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is recorded. In the hands of an experienced photographer that will always rely on prefocusing their camera, there is no hit & miss auto-focusing that happens on all auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This allows you to take advantage of the faster shutter response times of P&S cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that if you really want to get every shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in any camera.
19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately relay the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate preview of what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3 seconds or 1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the crisp sharp outlines of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100% accurately depicted in your viewfinder before you even record the shot. What you see in a P&S camera is truly what you get. You won't have to guess in advance at what shutter speed to use to obtain those artistic effects or those scientifically accurate nature studies that you require or that your client requires. When testing CHDK P&S cameras that could have shutter speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was amazed that I could half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a Dremel-Drill's 30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real time, without ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when lowering shutter speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls, instantly seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never realize what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.
20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of its own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender on the front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would with a DSLR. Framing and the included background is relative to the subject at the time and has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens in use. Your f/ratio (which determines your depth-of-field), is a computation of focal-length divided by aperture diameter. Increase the focal-length and you make your DOF shallower. No different than opening up the aperture to accomplish the same. The two methods are identically related where DOF is concerned.
21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25 and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S camera can't go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S camera can have larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in existence. The time when you really need a fast lens to prevent camera-shake that gets amplified at those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs you can take perfectly fine hand-held images at super-zoom settings. Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures at long focal lengths require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They need high ISOs, you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are some excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to ISO1600 and more.
22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of around $100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today. IF they have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award winning photograph with a cardboard Brownie Box camera made a century ago. If you can't take excellent photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able to get good photos on a DSLR either. Never blame your inability to obtain a good photograph on the kind of camera that you own. Those who claim they NEED a DSLR are only fooling themselves and all others. These are the same people that buy a new camera every year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only had the right camera, a better camera, better lenses, faster lenses, then I will be a great photographer!" Camera company's love these people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will make their photography better, because they never were a good photographer to begin with. The irony is that, by them thinking that they only need to throw money at the problem, they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real problem is. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why these self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras instantly reveal to them their piss-poor photography skills.
23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera gear. They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile and tell them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the look on their face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that lost money, and a sadness just courses through every fiber of their being. Wondering why they can't get photographs as good after they spent all that time and money. Get good on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun experience.
24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust, and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag, hoping that you'll lug it around again some day.
25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you. That's like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS STUPID AND I DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only take it out when needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with all your photos. And should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're not out $20,000. They are inexpensive to replace.
There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just better, all around. No doubt about it.
The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just one short phrase:
"If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a foolish thing."
nospam - 18 Nov 2008 16:10 GMT > From someone that's too big of an idiot to realize that sensor size and > pixel-density does not automatically equate to dynamic range. actually it does. all things being equal, a larger sensor will have a greater dynamic range than a smaller sensor.
PeterHanson - 18 Nov 2008 16:27 GMT >> From someone that's too big of an idiot to realize that sensor size and >> pixel-density does not automatically equate to dynamic range. > >actually it does. all things being equal, a larger sensor will have a >greater dynamic range than a smaller sensor. And, as they say, "therein lies the rub." All things are *NEVER* equal between sensors of different sizes. Newer technology, newer materials, new manufacturing processes, new interpolation algorithms, newer circuitry. This is why many of the newer smaller sensors easily outdo all the ancient larger sensors of the past. Upon which all of you amazingly lame DSLR-trolls base your profound ignorance.
nospam - 18 Nov 2008 16:55 GMT > >> From someone that's too big of an idiot to realize that sensor size and > >> pixel-density does not automatically equate to dynamic range. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > the newer smaller sensors easily outdo all the ancient larger sensors of the > past. and that same technology can be put into a larger sensor which will then have greater dynamic range than the smaller sensor.
the fact remains that for a given sensor technology, larger sensors *will* have a greater dynamic range.
BobZ - 18 Nov 2008 17:12 GMT >and that same technology can be put into a larger sensor which will >then have greater dynamic range than the smaller sensor. > >the fact remains that for a given sensor technology, larger sensors >*will* have a greater dynamic range. Translation: Smaller sensor cameras will always be ahead of the game.
nospam - 18 Nov 2008 17:16 GMT > >and that same technology can be put into a larger sensor which will > >then have greater dynamic range than the smaller sensor. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Translation: Smaller sensor cameras will always be ahead of the game. wrong.
Adam P Gaines - 18 Nov 2008 17:52 GMT >> >and that same technology can be put into a larger sensor which will >> >then have greater dynamic range than the smaller sensor. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >wrong. Any developer of any product or new technology is always going to take the "least cost" route. Would you rather test a newer technology on a smaller product, more inexpensive to make, and faster turn-around to new designs, than an expensive one where people only invest in a new camera once every 3-5 years? The smaller sensor camera will always be ahead of the game by at least 2 years.
But then you're just a low-life virtual-photographer DSLR-troll of usenet. What would you know.
Justin C - 18 Nov 2008 21:30 GMT > Any developer of any product or new technology is always going to take the > "least cost" route. Would you rather test a newer technology on a smaller [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > But then you're just a low-life virtual-photographer DSLR-troll of usenet. What > would you know. Yup, Formula 1 motor racing they get all their technology filtered down from Kia, Proton, and Daewoo.
Those huge early computers got all their tech second hand from the people who made pocket calculators.
Plate cameras were derivative and so far behind the curve, playing catchup to those wonderful P&S models of the time.
Yup, you sure know your stuff, the budget end of the market is always at the cutting edge.
Let me re-phrase that: You know nothing.
Oh, and before you lambast me with as some DSLR something or other, I don't own a DSLR.
Justin.
 Signature Justin C, by the sea.
LibbyLarson - 18 Nov 2008 22:32 GMT >> Any developer of any product or new technology is always going to take the >> "least cost" route. Would you rather test a newer technology on a smaller [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Yup, Formula 1 motor racing they get all their technology filtered down >from Kia, Proton, and Daewoo. Red-herring non-sequitur. Those are custom-built cars, not production consumer cars. Prototypes that you will never buy on your own nor will they ever be in a car dealer's show-room. I.e. You can't buy them, they won't be available to the consumer. Your DSLR is cheap off-the-rack 2nd-hand crap made 2 years or later after the innovations were already in P&S cameras as tried and tested technology.
Example: P&Ss have had "live-view" and video modes since their inception over a decade ago. Now you can't wait to buy a DSLR with those features. Next you'll be clamoring for audio recording too. You are SO far behind the curve that it's more than funny.
You people that try to relate cars to cameras are also hilarious. I doubt that someone like you even knows what a clutch is.
>Those huge early computers got all their tech second hand from the >people who made pocket calculators. You really are this daft, aren't you.
All the advances in software were made on home-PC platforms. Mind you, the greatest advances were also made on open-platform PCs, not secretive OSs and proprietary Macs. (This is why people are clamoring for an open platform camera firmware. The closest we'll find to this is the CHDK revolution--for now.)
Mind you too, the "mainframes" didn't get their technology until it was perfected in the pocket-calculator. I was still using numeric neon-tube decade displays on mainframes in the early 1970's while pocket calculators were first being sold with a pi-constant button included on an LED display (cost $180 with pi, $140 without the pi button). The mainframe was too much of an investment to replace it as quickly as you can a new pocket-calculator from month to month. The same is true of the DSLR. Same thing all over again. DSLR = outdated, invested too much (must also conserve historical lens investment), mainframe with neon-tube display and no pi button. VS. P&S = innovative, inexpensive, newest technology (innovative optics designs with every model), pocket calculator with the pi button.
>Plate cameras were derivative and so far behind the curve, playing >catchup to those wonderful P&S models of the time. Since when did plate cameras take advantage of 35mm film? The advances were always made in the smaller and more inexpensive to produce item.
You're not only an idiot, you invent outlandish red-herrings to try to support your psychotic beliefs.
Can you BE any more transparent in your virtual-photographer troll-dumb?
>Oh, and before you lambast me with as some DSLR something or other, I >don't own a DSLR. That's quite obvious. You don't own ANY cameras.
Maybe if you actually bought and used some cameras in your life, you wouldn't be this amazingly ignorant.
nospam - 18 Nov 2008 21:37 GMT > Any developer of any product or new technology is always going to take the > "least cost" route. Would you rather test a newer technology on a smaller > product, more inexpensive to make, and faster turn-around to new designs, than > an expensive one where people only invest in a new camera once every 3-5 > years? no, they put it in expensive high margin products to recover r&d expenses, then it trickles down to the mass market consumer products.
> The smaller sensor camera will always be ahead of the game by at least 2 > years. wrong.
Don Stauffer - 19 Nov 2008 14:36 GMT >> From someone that's too big of an idiot to realize that sensor size and >> pixel-density does not automatically equate to dynamic range. > > actually it does. all things being equal, a larger sensor will have a > greater dynamic range than a smaller sensor. I can buy the general trend, but not the quantification originally listed. One could make such a quantification only if the camera were photon noise limited, and I don't believe most are.
David J. Littleboy - 19 Nov 2008 14:54 GMT >>> From someone that's too big of an idiot to realize that sensor size and >>> pixel-density does not automatically equate to dynamic range. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > One could make such a quantification only if the camera were photon noise > limited, and I don't believe most are. The usual suspect*, in particular, figure 5, indicates that except for the larger-pixel dSLRs at ISO 100 and 200, most digital cameras are, in fact, photon noise limited. The 6.1 micron and smaller pitch cameras are linear throughout their range, whereas the larger pixel cameras have a region where DR is limited by other factors.
*: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary/index.html
 Signature David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan
Martin Hills - 19 Nov 2008 16:41 GMT >>>> From someone that's too big of an idiot to realize that sensor size and >>>> pixel-density does not automatically equate to dynamic range. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >*: >http://www.spamlink.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary/index.html And yet, this simple graph proves wrong everything that that spamming Clark troll has spewed all these years.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg
If you're going to cite online troll info as reputable data, at least find one that can't be disproved so easily. He only posts that nonsense to get controversy going, his only goal is trying to sell his bad photography that nobody wants. Nobody would ever go to his website and view any of his "for sale" images otherwise.
nospam - 19 Nov 2008 16:51 GMT > And yet, this simple graph proves wrong everything that that spamming Clark > troll has spewed all these years. actually, your 'simple graph' confirms it.
Keith Thompson - 19 Nov 2008 16:57 GMT >> And yet, this simple graph proves wrong everything that that spamming Clark >> troll has spewed all these years. > >actually, your 'simple graph' confirms it. Everything you have ever posted in this newsgroup has been proved completely wrong. This comment of yours easily goes into the same column.
John Sheehy - 20 Nov 2008 01:35 GMT Don Stauffer <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote in news:49242477$0$89392 $815e3792@news.qwest.net:
> I can buy the general trend, but not the quantification originally > listed. One could make such a quantification only if the camera were > photon noise limited, and I don't believe most are. None are even close. Most sensors have several less stops less difference between saturation and where 1:1 SNR falls because of the total system read noise, at base ISO.
... and that's just statistically. Statistics lie, and shot noise is actually much less annoying, disturbing, and obscuring than a statistically equivalent amount of mean read noise. A camera with only shot noise would be the stuff dreams are made of. ISO would only affect metering, and the brightness of the review image and default conversion, and have no effect on absolute SNR.
Paul Furman - 21 Nov 2008 14:15 GMT > Don Stauffer <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote in news:49242477$0$89392 > $815e3792@news.qwest.net: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > brightness of the review image and default conversion, and have no effect > on absolute SNR. John, What do you think of the charts on these new comparisons: http://www.dxomark.com The summary numbers are kind of meaningless but the 'compare cameras' format is fascinating: http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(app areil1)/205|0/(appareil2)/265|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Sony also: http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Insights/More-pixels-offsets-noise! I suppose read noise isn't counted in any of this. Hmmm... http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=30060231
 Signature Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com
all google groups messages filtered due to spam
AlbertW - 21 Nov 2008 16:31 GMT >> Don Stauffer <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote in news:49242477$0$89392 >> $815e3792@news.qwest.net: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >Hmmm... >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=30060231 Too bad you've been citing them as a source. There's a lengthy discussion at dpreview where they found all kinds of huge errors in DxO's tests and proved it.
You'll learn. (no, that's impossible, someone like you is incapable of learning)
Paul Furman - 25 Nov 2008 06:30 GMT
|
|
|