Can the Exif info be modified?


Status
Not open for further replies.

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#4

As above, anybody knows? Coz got a photo by a friend, says he took the picture, but it look suspicious...
I wonder if your friend is in the plane beside the plane in the picture, that quite precision flying... EXIF says it's shot with an 18mm lens, 1/50s exposure, ISO100. Possible? The plane your friend is in has to be very close. And if Sony produces such noisy ISO100 image, there is no chance they can ever compete with Nikon and Canon.

And from the perspective of the plane's geometry, it's probably shot with a focal length of around 400mm.
 

Last edited:
Jun 27, 2008
707
0
0
Hougang
#5
Focal length is 18 mm sia :bsmilie:

Your friend is superman can fly in air while taking pic?
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#14
And if Sony produces such noisy ISO100 image, there is no chance they can ever compete with Nikon and Canon.
Then Nikon wouldn't compete either since Sony manufactures their sensors. :p

Highly suspicious, unless he took it with a small H-series, where the real rather than equivalent focal range was indicated, then did heavy tonal adjustments and sharpening in post. That's the only way to get noise like that at ISO 100.
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#15
Then Nikon wouldn't compete either since Sony manufactures their sensors. :p

Highly suspicious, unless he took it with a small H-series, where the real rather than equivalent focal range was indicated, then did heavy tonal adjustments and sharpening in post. That's the only way to get noise like that at ISO 100.
No.. it says 27mm 135-equivalent focal length. So it's a 1.5x multiplier. ;p The EXIF was from a A350. If he took it with a H series, there is no need to alter the EXIF. ;p
 

Last edited:

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#17
No.. it says 27mm 135-equivalent focal length. So it's a 1.5x multiplier. ;p The EXIF was from a A350. If he took it with a H series, there is no need to alter the EXIF. ;p
27mm equivalent?? So he shot it with the kit lens at 18mm wide-angle? Would then be 24mm equiv, not 27.

Very suspicious, unless he was sitting in another jet flying next to it.

And the ISO noise looks more like 1600, or very very very heavy PP.
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#18
27mm equivalent?? So he shot it with the kit lens at 18mm wide-angle? Would then be 24mm equiv, not 27.

Very suspicious, unless he was sitting in another jet flying next to it.

And the ISO noise looks more like 1600, or very very very heavy PP.
27mm is correct for a 1.5x crop lah.. ;p

Yah.. I think he took someone else's picture and pasted on his existing image.

Anyway, the EXIF time is 6:42am on 9 Aug, I guess the sun is not even out yet.. ;p
 

Jun 25, 2008
696
0
0
Pasir Ris
#19
27mm is correct for a 1.5x crop lah.. ;p

Yah.. I think he took someone else's picture and pasted on his existing image.

Anyway, the EXIF time is 6:42am on 9 Aug, I guess the sun is not even out yet.. ;p
LOL!


But why on earth did his friend do it? kenna torn apart by the CSI team here. heh
 

armadillo

New Member
Jan 30, 2006
1,381
2
0
Pinnacle@Duxton
#20
Also if you notice the time, 6.42am, I think the sky still quite dark.
Unless the time, in the camera set wrongly.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom