[SteveB]

Small differences in noise/detail are hard to judge on the Comparometer but it's still useful info. I find it more use for colour accuracy, and I would hazard a guess from the first set of pictures that the Sony can't do full reds properly, they look orange and I doubt it's white balance wrong as whites are white.

[séamuis]

none of this matters. because you are comparing a 24x36mm sensor against an APS-C sensor. it wouldnt matter which camera and lens combo came out better in terms of opinionated IQ. it proves nothing.

[Adam_T4]

Hahahahaha - "Measurebators" - that sums up the endless technical discussions of minutiae perfectly. As Ken Rockwell has argued, if I may agree with him, the camera / lens is MUCH LESS important then the HEART and EYE behind the equipment. Maybe DREAMS and Visions are just too hard to describe ...

[séamuis]

Hahahahaha - "Measurebators" - that sums up the endless technical discussions of minutiae perfectly. As Ken Rockwell has argued, if I may agree with him, the camera / lens is MUCH LESS important then the HEART and EYE behind the equipment. Maybe DREAMS and Visions are just too hard to describe ...

take your own advice. and stop listening to Ken Rockwell. this is a forum dedicated to discussing these very things. you walk into a bar and go tell a group of guys discussing footbal to "just go out and play!"? we all use our cameras. we all come here to talk about them.

[Ash]

Lots of sense coming through here from all the pixelpeeping...

A reasonably cheap FF camera is out there if someone really wants it - then ask yourself, how much more can this FF really do for me to what I can capture with my lowly APS-C cam?

[Adam_T4]

take your own advice. and stop listening to Ken Rockwell. this is a forum dedicated to discussing these very things. you walk into a bar and go tell a group of guys discussing footbal to "just go out and play!"? we all use our cameras. we all come here to talk about them.

I take your point. I should probably confine myself here to threads about creative technique or other practical matters, and leave the relative merits of equipment discussions to those that can afford to pay for them. And all I can say is Rockwell cured me of equipment envy quite nicely, and seemed to offer pretty solid advice in general. To each his own

[séamuis]

I take your point. I should probably confine myself here to threads about creative technique or other practical matters, and leave the relative merits of equipment discussions to those that can afford to pay for them. And all I can say is Rockwell cured me of equipment envy quite nicely, and seemed to offer pretty solid advice in general. To each his own

I don't have equipment envy, and I sure don't want that sony. I just thought it was a bit ridiculous to come into a thread about such things in a sub-forum thats basically dedicated to it, just to tell people to go use their cameras. as if you know we care more about gear than photography...

[pentaxmz]

Hahahahaha - "Measurebators" - that sums up the endless technical discussions of minutiae perfectly. As Ken Rockwell has argued, if I may agree with him, the camera / lens is MUCH LESS important then the HEART and EYE behind the equipment. Maybe DREAMS and Visions are just too hard to describe ...

Well yes and no.... I also own a Canon SD770 IS and although I have taken some pretty good photos with it (many tricked out by zooming in and using multiple overlapping images to make one large image), it is still no match for probably any DSLR. Many of my Flickr and Panoramio photos were taken with a P&S, simply because I can't carry a DSLR with me all the time. But my DSLR photos are always sharper, more detailed and vibrant.

All the HEART and EYE is the world won't matter if you're using crappy equipment. But I think I am ignoring the essence of what you are saying.

Yes, within reason, "Measurbating" isn't very useful.

[pentaxmz]

I take your point. I should probably confine myself here to threads about creative technique or other practical matters, and leave the relative merits of equipment discussions to those that can afford to pay for them. And all I can say is Rockwell cured me of equipment envy quite nicely, and seemed to offer pretty solid advice in general. To each his own

Hmmm.... Interesting comment.

You just made me realize there seems to be VERY LITTLE discussion about creativity, techniques, etc... in the Pentax Forum. On the other hand, there is a lot of talk about praising ones various Pentax products, or complaining about one's Pentax products.

I am guilty of not straying past the "Pentax DSLR Discussion" group very often so I might be wrong. But definitely this group needs some improvement or we need a group dedicated to creativity and techniques (if one doesn't already exist).

In terms of the later, complaints and praise bandwagon.... I think I am done with this nonsense!

[GLXLR]

OMG! Please stop with this comparometer stuff!

The comparison images prove very little, if anything at all.

I swear, some of you people go at this with a disturbing religious zeal, looking for anything that will prove that your Camera is better than another.

You are not comparing apples to apples here. Many of the images on Comparometer use dissimilar lenses, lens focal length (or magnification), lighting is sometime different, camera angle, exposure parameters, camera settings, lens aperture settings, white balance, and the list go on....

The above posted comparison photos should do nothing more than prove my point. Citing any example on this site to 'prove' your camera is better just makes you look foolish!

Sorry, no offence intended to C.W Tsorotes or anyone else that fell into this trap.

Well if you bought 3 Canon lenses and each of them had to be serviced twice in a year (70-200mm f/2.8 USM L 28-70mm USM L, and 50mm f/1.4), would you keep shooting Canon?

Nope, and that's why I am here. I think his comment makes perfect sense and he just puts it out there.

[GLXLR]

Hmmm.... Interesting comment.



In terms of the later, complaints and praise bandwagon.... I think I am done with this nonsense!

lol... Going to another Pentax, Canon, or Nikon forum won't really change much. There are brand zealots everywhere...

GL HF DD.

Maybe you should check out other parts of the forum... After all, the dSLR portion is like 1/50th of the entire forum.

[pingflood]

Well yes and no.... I also own a Canon SD770 IS and although I have taken some pretty good photos with it (many tricked out by zooming in and using multiple overlapping images to make one large image), it is still no match for probably any DSLR. Many of my Flickr and Panoramio photos were taken with a P&S, simply because I can't carry a DSLR with me all the time. But my DSLR photos are always sharper, more detailed and vibrant.

All the HEART and EYE is the world won't matter if you're using crappy equipment. But I think I am ignoring the essence of what you are saying.

Yes, within reason, "Measurbating" isn't very useful.

Yeah, people tend to see it as a black or white issue: either the equipment doesn't matter AT ALL, or the equipment is ALL that matters. Reality is that the equipment does have an impact (or we'd all be shooting with Holgas), as does the guy/girl behind the camera (or every high end DSLR owner would put out great work). It seems like people love to entrench themselves in either camp though just so they can carry on some retarded argument instead of actually taking pictures.

[KungPOW]

Yeah, people tend to see it as a black or white issue: either the equipment doesn't matter AT ALL, or the equipment is ALL that matters. Reality is that the equipment does have an impact (or we'd all be shooting with Holgas), as does the guy/girl behind the camera (or every high end DSLR owner would put out great work). It seems like people love to entrench themselves in either camp though just so they can carry on some retarded argument instead of actually taking pictures.

I'm entrenched in the "Its all the photographer" camp.

Because its the photographer that chooses what camera to shoot with.

If you choose the wrong gear, you will get the wrong results.

[nostatic]

The online comparisons are of little interest to me because they weren't done by me, taking pictures under what would be my typical conditions/subjects. It is hard to really get a good test, but I did one yesterday, taking my K20d w/31ltd to my local shop and shooting indoors in not great light (a typical set of conditions for me) along with a CF card. I also used a D700 w/50/1.4 and 5Dmk2 w/50/1.4. Not rigorously controlled, but me snapping away at various iso levels so I could take a look at the files later.

This actually was prompted by a shoot I did on Friday where I was indoor/low light and really was wanting a few extra stops.

So, what I found was:

The D700 and 5Dmk2 were better at iso3200 and 6400, with the Nikon beating everyone.

The D700 images tended to be more crisp and detailed.

The D700 images tended to be cooler.

The 5Dmk2 felt better in my hand than the D700.

If I just looked at the over all images the K20d had the best colors and look.

What does this mean? Well, to you, perhaps very little. I can say that there is no hiding place from physics, and FF gives you real advantages. iso6400 on the Nikon was about equivalent to 1600 on the Pentax. And just for the record, much of the "which is better" was according to my g/f, who is an artist for a living and has sold quite a few photo prints for 4-5 figures (despite mostly doing sculpture). And it was a "blind" test for her - she didn't know which camera shot which shot. On the crops she consistently picked the Nikon. But often when the Pentax would come up she preferred that look.

So at this point I'm actually leaning towards getting a FF camera for those days when I absolutely have to shoot low light and have the best possible images. But I doubt that I will want to lug around a D700 or 5Dmk2 on the street to shoot my "typical" images. So I'm thinking of ditching the K20d and FAltds and getting a K7 and one or two DAltds. It will give a better image than the E-P1 and actually will be a bit quieter. Then I have the p&s for when I want to have the smallest possible camera (and an S90 may be on the buy list).

So, right tool for the right job. No one camera can solve all your needs unless you have a small number of needs. Currently I'm high quality p&s, u4/3, APS-C. I think I'll end up at high quality p&s, APS-C, FF. With a progressive jump in iq.

The D700 images tended to be cooler.

If I just looked at the over all images the K20d had the best colors and look.

.

On a moderate-low dynamic range situation I agree 100% with that. Pentax colors are usually well balanced, richer and have more contrast. The images you can get from Pentax are as good as it gets. The colors of Nikon before PP are not to my likes. As you say, they are on the cold side. It is easy to solve by chimping the configuration on camera. I rather prefer to shoot NEF. Once that you get a hold on how to process the colors, the images of the Nikon are superb. Nikon is famous for being pretty hands off in terms of saturation on default settings.

On a high dynamic range situation the differences between the D700 and the Pentax K20d or the Canon 40d are just plain silly.