nazdravanul
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Nikon/Canon/Sony Image Quality SUCKS vs Panasonic's Multi-Shot High-Res Mode | |
hiepphotog wrote:
nazdravanul wrote:
molson wrote:
nazdravanul wrote:
I've been and still am (present tense) a subscriber for almost 10 years. A few months from now, a 70MP Sony / Canon / Nikon body with multishot capabilites (one can only wish) could make those comments obsolete, don't you think ?
If you've been reading his reviews for that long, then you know that he often changes his mind about the merits of a product once he discovers some little glitch, or gets frustrated when he can't figure out how something works because he didn't read the manual... 
I guess others are getting tired of Lloyd's hysterics as well... he send me an email this morning begging me to pre-order an A7R IV through his affiliate link because B&H won't give him a review copy otherwise. How pathetic.
He sent everyone the same email. It's not pathetic. It's being honest. Ok, can we, please, move away from diglloyd bashing ?
This thread is not about diglloyd, is about multishot images vs single shot. The absolute superiority of those was proved not only by diglloyd (with loads of images and solid testing) but by several other reputable sources, mentioned elsewhere in this thread.
Yes, there is no contest in IQ between a 40-50 MP Bayer single shot and a 200 MP true-color multishot. Which we all knew for 10 years now, ever since Sinar and Hasselblad multishot solutions were showing the exact same results. That's why they were used in critical art reproduction and product shots, in studios across the world.
Sony's latest release with the 240 MP pixel shift shows, again, the same thing.
Sorry, but this thread shows that "hysterics" tends to apply a lot more to the Lloyd bashers, themselves with a very vivid and off-topic rethoric, than the character himself.
And, off-topic, about changing one's mind about gear and gear merits ... I wonder how many photographers on this forum have waited feverishly for the pre-order of the next "game-changing" piece of gear, for months, praised it's merits all over the internet once it arrived, made the mandatory brickwall / pussycat shots to show it, and then sold it a few month later, because all of a sudden, with the advent of a new toy, it had become this absolute piece of obsolete junk, for whatever (very legitimate, obviously) reason. Let the non-gear-whores throw the first stone ... I cannot  ) Sorry, this was my own off-topic rant. Back to more meaningful things than internet gear wars.
Looking forward to my own pre-order of the Sony multishot body, hoping that it's real life applicability will be comparable to the Panasonic S1r. There are some signs that already suggest that Sony's implementation will have more limitations (8 shots vs 16, in camera raw with independent raw convertors vs proprietary quirky Sony desktop app only conversion, Mode 2 vs ... ) but until we have a real camera to speak of, there's no point in speculating too much.
Yup, we shall see how this new 16-pic Pixel shift will do. Mainly I'm hoping for actual improvement in details. The time difference to take 8 shot on the S1R (9fps) and 16 shot on the A7RIV (10fps) is not much I assume. I heard that the S1R can do Multi-Shot handheld while the Sony's implementation is best done on a tripod. It would be interesting to see if this will change. If the difference is small, I would prefer shooting handheld.
Let's face it, for most realistic applications like architecture and table top, you would anyway be shooting from a tripod most of / in not all the time.
For landscape, handheld shooting might happen more often than the other two. But the real limitation, there, are moving subjects (plants, water, clouds etc.) - so that is where I want to see the difference. Panasonic did better, on that regard, than any other multishot implementation until now. Far from perfect or flawless, only better. From the paper specs, Sony seems less adapted to compensating for the same moving subjects. But until we actually shoot the camera, we will not really know
|
