sony a100 vs nikon d80 - hwz article

[dr34mc4st3r]

http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles...34&cid=15&pg=1

interesting


this photo even more interesting


(c) hwz

[antacid]

wow, i must say it has to be one of the worst written articles i've ever read.

thanks for sharing anyway

[sulhan]

Hahahah...

Its one of those reviews that you already know the ending...before even you read it...
And the price list...Good Heaven!!!!!!Where did they get the price list from

[tao]

Unbelieveable that anyone here will bother with a so called photography related review by HWZ. Same goes for Computer Times and what's not.

[yokechye]

why is it that nikon's CCD is made by sony but they produces different color tones compared to @100?

[tokrot]

Originally Posted by yokechye why is it that nikon's CCD is made by sony but they produces different color tones compared to @100?

Nikon's white balance is always poorer than the competition. They need to buck up on that part.

[yokechye]

Originally Posted by tokrot Nikon's white balance is always poorer than the competition. They need to buck up on that part.

hmm... but their day shoot the blue sky looks bluer than @100

[tokrot]

Originally Posted by yokechye hmm... but their day shoot the blue sky looks bluer than @100

I am actually referring to overall color quality. The poor white balance may result in grey cast in some Nikon DSLR pictures.

[yokechye]

Originally Posted by tokrot I am actually referring to overall color quality. The poor white balance may result in grey cast in some Nikon DSLR pictures.

the grey cast does not have anything to do with the CCD hor?

[sulhan]

Hmm...

As far as I normally see, the grey cast is a sign of underexposure of a metering system...

[satay16]

however, there is something we can use from this review. remember how other users critisise about in body-AS being much more inferior lousy attrocious useless incompetent ineffective unworkable spastic at longer focal lengths as compared to lens-based IS? i think this review shows in-body AS is still useful at long ranges.

[yokechye]

Originally Posted by satay16 however, there is something we can use from this review. remember how other users critisise about in body-AS being much more inferior lousy attrocious useless incompetent ineffective unworkable spastic at longer focal lengths as compared to lens-based IS? i think this review shows in-body AS is still useful at long ranges.

i received a comment about what he see thru the viewfinder when A/S is switched on, the image goes shaking while the A/S is working i wonder if its his hand or its a faulty body

[tankm]

It's good that they list out the lens price......show how un-competitive SONY lens is against Nikon. Hope SONY read that article.

[tokrot]

Originally Posted by yokechye the grey cast does not have anything to do with the CCD hor?

I dun think so.. More likely the color tone as I mentioned for white balance as I observed.

Originally Posted by sulhan Hmm... As far as I normally see, the grey cast is a sign of underexposure of a metering system...

You are right too. Nikon white balance has tendency to display green as yellowish green too as observed.

[pai]

Originally Posted by yokechye i received a comment about what he see thru the viewfinder when A/S is switched on, the image goes shaking while the A/S is working i wonder if its his hand or its a faulty body

this is correct... cos A/S is in the chip, behind the mirror. so when the hand/camera shakes, the sensor moves to compensate, but you don't see it in the viewfinder.

but with in-lens IS/VR/OS, the optical elements move, so what you see in the viewfinder is also stabilised.

[yokechye]

Originally Posted by pai this is correct... cos A/S is in the chip, behind the mirror. so when the hand/camera shakes, the sensor moves to compensate, but you don't see it in the viewfinder. but with in-lens IS/VR/OS, the optical elements move, so what you see in the viewfinder is also stabilised.

ya.. that is what i thought so.. but someone told me he sees the whole image shake thru viewfinder