A better example would have been the van with the stickers. The M6 and FLE did a nice job but the Samsung would have provided a similar image. Unless you’re planning on magnifying it a thousand times and checking the corner's.
It’s good to see Daisy.
madNbad wrote:
A better example would have been the van with the stickers. The M6 and FLE did a nice job but the Samsung would have provided a similar image. Unless you’re planning on magnifying it a thousand times and checking the corner's.
It’s good to see Daisy.
Let's be honest here. It's just an excuse for me to post pics of Daisy.
chez wrote:
Two totally different colours. Which is the real colour?
Are you sure? How strange! I only used two different film stocks, different lenses, and the lighting was different in the pics.
One was in overcast conditions, while the other was in 'golden hour'.
Surely none of that would effect the colour balance of the images?
Desmolicious wrote:
Are you sure? How strange! I only used two different film stocks, different lenses, and the lighting was different in the pics.
One was in overcast conditions, while the other was in 'golden hour'.
Surely none of that would effect the colour balance of the images?
Sure the lighting was totally different…but which photo shows the real colour of the mutt. They are way different…more than what I’d expect due to the lighting. Your mutt is either brown or grey…not both.
This is not scientifical enough. One must shoot a flat wall with a poster of Free Mason symbols to determine how sharp it is in the last .01% of the corner, where all the most important stuff is in a photo.
This proves that both are boxes that hold film, lenses, and shutters - suitable for picture taking. The first is a centered composition - whereas the second seems to be rule of thirds adjacent. I prefer the first. There are people in this group that can accomplish this with no lens, or mechanical shutter plus use a camera body (the box) that resembles a childs' building block. Maybe they could weight in on this comparison.
James Markus wrote:
This proves that both are boxes that hold film, lenses, and shutters - suitable for picture taking. The first is a centered composition - whereas the second seems to be rule of thirds adjacent. I prefer the first. There are people in this group that can accomplish this with no lens, or mechanical shutter plus use a camera body (the box) that resembles a childs' building block. Maybe they could weight in on this comparison.
Yeh, comparing two snapshots and claiming the “snapshot camera” is just as good…duh yeh. Throw something challenging and with the snapshot camera…you get, well a snapshot. Nothing wrong with that if that is what one strives for, but some strive for something a bit more challenging,
James Markus wrote:
This proves that both are boxes that hold film, lenses, and shutters - suitable for picture taking. The first is a centered composition - whereas the second seems to be rule of thirds adjacent. I prefer the first.
That’s all the excuse I needed. Another one from the R9:
Wait, what’s that I hear? How about Riley? Fine, here he is via R9 and Lux 50:
I'm guessing if you shot both lenses with a FF 63mp sensor and enlarged the results to 13x19 or larger you might see a difference. But consumer film and web display are a great equaliser.
Geoff D F wrote:
I'm guessing if you shot both lenses with a FF 63mp sensor and enlarged the results to 13x19 or larger you might see a difference. But consumer film and web display are a great equaliser.
When I ‘pixel peep’ of course there is no contest. And I don’t need to pixel peep to see that going away from center.
The lens in the Samsung Zoom is good enough for nice pics.
But with any of these p&s cameras, you need to use the fixed focal length ones to get better IQ. And even some of those are lacking. I had a Minolta Prod 20s (styled to kind a look like a Leica) with a 35mm 4.5 that was pretty cr@p.
Whereas the Samsung AF Slim non zoom has a fantastic 35mm 3.5.
The one p&s camera with a great zoom lens is the Rollei QZ 35 series. But those were super pricey.
