View Single Post
Posts: 78 | Thanked: 84 times | Joined on Aug 2012
#863
Originally Posted by caveman View Post
get your eyes ready for some work ;-)

spring is coming, and i took roughly the same picture with different cameras for comparison. None of the pictures have been manipulated.

N900 w/ fcamera: http://wstaw.org/m/2012/08/24/photo2...6.43.87_v1.jpg

N9 w/ stock camera: http://wstaw.org/m/2012/08/24/12080024.jpg

canon SX120IS w/ CHDK: http://wstaw.org/m/2012/08/24/IMG_1775.JPG

i'm no pictures expert, but in this case i happen to like the n900 colors better. very striking is the difference in 2nd-plane textures between the cameras.
Thank you for that comparison. The problem I have with the built-in camera application is the amount noise-reduction in the photos with the stock camera (hardware jpeg conversion versus the better software libraries?). Excessive noise reduction appears similar to something like watercolour filter over the entire image. I really can't see it in your stock camera photo

>> EDIT: I see now the second photo is the n9 with stock camera. It is far better than n900 stock camera. Very nice indeed

However, what is noticeable is that both of the n900 photos (I mean n900 and n9 photos ) have less flare. That will happen as a Tessar design (a very old, respected lens design) is a four element 3 group lens and a zoom (on the other camera) will have many more elements--each of which will contribute to flare.

Last edited by independent; 2012-08-30 at 20:43. Reason: I mistook the n9 with stock camera for n900 with stock camera
 

The Following User Says Thank You to independent For This Useful Post: