Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Photography
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-24-2012, 05:26 PM
 
Location: Moon Over Palmettos
5,979 posts, read 19,900,242 times
Reputation: 5102

Advertisements

I thought I'd share this helpful link I ran across. It allows you to compare image quality of two cameras side by side in separate windows. You can enlarge each and compare as best as your eye can see without toggling back and forth. To return to the thumbnails, click your browser's back arrow.

Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-25-2012, 07:27 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,822,592 times
Reputation: 12341
One problem I see with such comparison of images is that they downplay the role of lens. I could take the same shot, with exactly the same settings on a camera but with two different lenses and see noticeable differences including the color rendition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2012, 10:16 AM
 
Location: West Michigan
12,083 posts, read 38,859,793 times
Reputation: 17006
100% agree with EinsteinsGhost. Biggest difference is in the lenses.

Perfect example: Sister-in-law gets a new Canon 50D body and goes on a shooting binge with the lens from her first dslr (a Canon XT). When comparing images between her new 50D and my entry level Sony a200 she was disappointed to see mine were sharper, had better contrast, & color rendition. She was flabbergasted (and a LOT PO'ed) that her much more expensive camera wasn't as "good" as my older entry level camera. I told her that between the two cameras, I had the better quality lens even though it was close to 25 years old, and to see the true capabilities of her new body, she needed to dump the cheapo kit lens.

I don't think anyone in their right mind would argue that an entry level Sony a200 is a "better" body than a Canon 50D. Shoot, I own one and am VERY happy with the images it produces, but it is much more limited in it's abilities than the 50D is. On a site like posted though, someone would think the 50D is an expensive POS if the images posted were from a cheap lens on the 50D and a good lens on the a200. Same could be said for any maker as well. A Nikon D4 with a POS kit lens against a Canon XT with a "L" lens is going to lose in a side-by-side visual comparison.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Photography

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:31 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top