A squeaking sound in the suspension of a minivan might be ignored by most owners while a similar sound might cause an owner of a Porsche to make four trips back to the dealer to get it fixed. While I applaud Consumer Reports for gathering larger sample sets, even those are fraught with problems due to consumer expectations and the self-selecting nature of the participants. Many have no idea that their VW Routan was a re-badged Dodge Caravan or their Saab 9-2X was a Subaru Impreza. They don't have a statistically significant sample set on which to base a conclusion. There's something suspicious about that I know about statistics, which is why I scoff at the idea of a consumer who might own a dozen cars in his lifetime coming to a conclusion about the reliability of a brand or model. Weird thing is that Apple people and Fuji people are often the same people :). So it doesn't really matter, because different people prefer different color profiles. IMHO, Canon has better color and tones by default, but I think it is possible to calibrate whatever camera to produce what you want. Only the CORRECT color has any value, while most of it is about the amount of correct information in the image. Nicer color (or the color you prefer) has nothing to do with image quality. Which is why there is so much nonsense, confusion, superstitions and pseudo-science floating around. Most people do not understand what the "image quality" actually means. Canon has less data in the shadows, but larger sensors will always have some advantages over the smaller ones. Dynamic range and sensor size are like entirely different dimensions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |