Yes, most of the time, I can tell
No, most of the time, I couldn't tell
Canon 7D with 15-85mm
good light, web size, can't tell
bad light - depends.
full size, all the time, assuming all other things equal.
If both are amatures behind the DSLR and Compact... then the answer is "NO"....
once u have the necessary skills and techniques, its possible i assure u that. nowadays compacts also having wider apertures so it is technically possible
If comparing the photos of a DSLR and compact from the same photographer... maybe I guess.
Took these few days back. Can guess using what cam?
Last edited by kwttan; 11th October 2010 at 10:58 PM.
D700 * 70-200 F/2.8 VRII * 24-120 F/4 * 50 F/1.4G * SB900
Kwttan, look like compact camera to me. Others comment?
Canon 7D with 15-85mm
First two pictures are too small so cannot tell
But I believe the third one is taken by DSLR because I have tried to take similar shot with my compact but picture not so good
There are some things a full-auto compact can't do that makes them giveaways even at web size, such as long exposure. (note: I'm referring to compacts as those without M,A,S,P; kay fine actually they all have Program mode but... full auto) At full size, compacts are probably going to give significantly noisier images in bad light due to their small sensors. There is probably more ways to tell...
That said, it doesn't really matter if you can tell if a photo's been taken by a dslr or compact. I've seen many photos taken by DSLRs that look, well, bad, and many photos that have been taken by compacts that look pretty darn good.
it all depends on the picture taken lah....
IF the picture need high DR, then can tell.
If the picture shows good bokeh and is not something small like a flower, example full body portraits, then it is DSLR.
in fact, some PnS is so advance that you really can't tell . . .
As long as the pictures are well taken . . .
Shot more cos digital is FREE !!!
First of all, PnS are meant for very general shoots... that means normal lighting conditions, non extreme conditions (really high ISOs, really long exposures, etc, etc, etc)... If you drop the DSLR to do such easy images, you're bound to get the same similar results. It is like forcing the Ferrari to go at the speed of Honda City.... wow, can't see the difference in speed right?
Hence, this is a odd (I'm bordering on calling it "stupid") comparison if you compare photos taken under normal lighting conditions (call that easy level)...
What you should really compare is... indoor dim lighting conditions, ultra high speed shots (freeze motion yet noise level minimal and still pin-sharp details), portraitures shot at f/1.2 & f/1.4 apertures (AT night)... HANDHELD! Try comparing the shots taken by PnS and DSLR... I double dare you to show that there aren't really any differences at all!
Sure, drive a Ferrari at Honda City's normal speed you're bound to experience the latter's performance... but don't forget that you are still able to leap from 0-100 km/h at 3-4 seconds flat... Try doing that with the Honda City!... Good day...
Edit: You might as well ask: Ferrari versus Honda City, which one is the slowest, most comfortable, and MOST fuel efficient!? Honda City wins!!! YEAH!!!! lols
Double Edit: some of us use DSLRs for normal lighting conditions that already can be handled well by PnS... Well, I don't - love to push towards the limits of what my lenses and DSLRs can deliver..
Last edited by kriegsketten; 12th October 2010 at 09:24 AM.