Path: ccsf.homeunix.org!ccsf.homeunix.org!news1.wakwak.com!nf1.xephion.ne.jp!onion.ish.org!onodera-news!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!cyclone.bc.net!news.uunet.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Smoothy" Newsgroups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras,fj.comp.dev.digital-camera,rec.photo.digital References: Subject: Re: Canon vs. Nikon ---> Picture quality Lines: 61 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <_USHa.344$%91.78907@news20.bellglobal.com> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 01:38:01 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.95.61.163 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1055914682 65.95.61.163 (Wed, 18 Jun 2003 01:38:02 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 01:38:02 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico Xref: ccsf.homeunix.org fj.comp.dev.digital-camera:224 Tesselator, how can I get uncompressed images out of these cameras? My CP2100 doesn't have an uncopressed mode, and I think this is the case with A60/A70 too. And if there is no way, so why at all should we be talking about uncompressed images of these cameras? -- "Tesselator" wrote in message news:bcop9u$i9s$1@catv02.starcat.ne.jp... > > > http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/a40/samples/IMG_0139.JPG > > http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/nikon2100/samples/DSCN0014.JPG > > > http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/a40/samples/IMG_0161.JPG > > http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/nikon2100/samples/DSCN0001.JPG > > > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A70/FULLRES/A70INFP1.HTM > > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/CP3100/FULLRES/CP31INFFP3.HTM > > JPegs... ;) You're trying to compare the imaging quality of two > cameras using jepegged images? Hehehehe... > > Ummm... > > Actually I think there are no online resources for you to compare for > yourself. You would need someone (who knew what they were doing) to > set up the cameras with the "as same as possible" settings and fire > off at almost exactly the same time at exactly the same subject and > then post clippings of the two resulting images. I say clippings cuz > uncompressed images as you know, are huge. > > Anyway, you really won't be able to tell anything from jpegs. Well, > other than how badly the compression messed up the image. There might > be a difference in how well a manufacturer implemented the codec but > I doubt it. JPEG has been around for a long long time. It's very well > known. > > As fas as which of those cameras produce "clearer, crisper" images I'm > willing to bet that it's so close the human eye will have trouble detecting > the differences. Color sat. and bal. etc. are a different story tho. > > Given that the/any two cameras have a similar CCD size I would think > that you would be able learn more by looking at thier respective lens > designs. > > This is one reason reviewers spend most of thier time on the feature set, > CCD type and size, Lens construction, and then just point out any > shortcommings or advantages. It's really difficult to compare the > "sharpness" (if there is such a thing) between any two similar cammera > models. > > Online JPEGs aren't the answer for sure!