bfitzgerald wrote:I'd like to see a taxi driver run for next election (never will happen and no not the De Niro film type either!)
classiccameras wrote:All things considered, you won't go far wrong with Canon, inferior sensor or not, although I would like to know how inferior as Canon has a huge fan base world wide and I see no one complaining on their chat forums and I don't hold much credence with reviews especially from DP. As one Nikon pro user said about Sony, great sensor, pity they can't get the colour right or make it work better on their own cameras, although you can argue the point.
I personally much prefer Canon colours to Sony. With Canon lenses, you get what you pay for, but that's virtually the same right across most manufactures, just some are worse than others. I was at a country fair/show this weekend gone, with all sorts shows/live music, horse and birds of prey demos going on and lots of sunshine and guess which camera I wished I had, a Bridge super zoom rather than my kit bag with several lenses and 2 bodies. Its going to be my next market research, but it may not be a Sony
classiccameras wrote: Yes, on one review of colours ( Jpeg shoot out () it was mentioned that women see colour differently to men not to mention the variations within the gender.
peterottaway wrote:Colour is pretty much all in the mind and what is "correct" can also be affected by cultural preferences even before colour photography ever existed.
peterottaway wrote:All in all, Sony is probably more technically correct in its colour representations, just not what Fuji, Canon, Nikon et al present. Contrast and hue can vary considerably in that it is enough to be detected even on low end uncorrected screens.
peterottaway wrote:I have been shooting quite a bit of colour transparency in both 120 and 135 format over the last few months and this reinforced my views. At the present time you have a choice between the Fuji / Agfa films ...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests