25 Reasons to Choose a P&S Camera Instead Of an Overpriced DSLR (minor typo corrections)

****ingTrolls wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:17:25 -0800, Paul Furman wrote:

See figure 3 he
http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/chromatic.html
That's purple fringing: axial/longitudinal chromatic aberration.
You only see it in super-fast lenses or cheap lenses in high contrast
and in most all P&S with high contrast scenes.


Let me find all the
links that show even worse lateral CA on all DSLR lenses.

That *is* a DSLR lens. A very expensive one.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Ivan_Pransten wrote:

...DSLR lens is only good at one f-stop.

Please explain.

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:28:08 -0600, Seth Thomas
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:06:41 -0800, Paul Furman wrote:

Jesus Rich, no wonder I've got you plonked in most of these groups.
I have never commented like that before but come on...


Dear Resident-Troll,

Your reply is completely off-topic. Here are some topics that befit this
newsgroup. Please consider them for future discussions and posts:


This link puts to rest the nonsense that you keep posting.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng...amera-rankings

Notice how when tested according to real-world conditions, even the
best p&s cameras fall FAR short of even the cheapest dslrs.

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:31:50 -0600, andie-barns
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:22:55 -0500, "RichA" wrote:


"Paul Furman" wrote in message
news
Jesus Rich, no wonder I've got you plonked in most of these groups.
I have never commented like that before but come on...

The one all-encompassing reason for buying a P&S is compactness. Everything
else (including quality) comes second. I've heard it 100x in camera stores.

Quality is second? You've not used many P&S cameras in the last 3 years, have
you.

Here's a quick recent example where the P&S quality far surpasses the DSLR.

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca..._results.shtml

Just one of hundreds that prove the P&S has surpassed the DSLR, long ago. Catch
up.


This link puts to rest the nonsense that you keep posting.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng...amera-rankings

Notice how when tested according to real-world conditions, even the
best p&s cameras fall FAR short of even the cheapest dslrs.

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:33:54 -0600, ****ingTrolls
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:17:25 -0800, Paul Furman wrote:

See figure 3 he
http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/chromatic.html
That's purple fringing: axial/longitudinal chromatic aberration.
You only see it in super-fast lenses or cheap lenses in high contrast
and in most all P&S with high contrast scenes.


Oh dear, an insecure DSLR purchaser proposing a challenge. Let me find all the
links that show even worse lateral CA on all DSLR lenses.

Can you be any more lame? The same CA exists on ALL cameras.


This link puts to rest the nonsense that you keep posting.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng...amera-rankings

Notice how when tested according to real-world conditions, even the
best p&s cameras fall FAR short of even the cheapest dslrs.

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:36:52 -0600, LaramieEvans
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:18:28 -0800, Paul Furman wrote:

Sorry about the title change Stephen. Filter foul-up.

Dear Resident-Troll,

Your reply is completely off-topic. Here are some topics that befit this
newsgroup. Please consider them for future discussions and posts:



This link puts to rest the nonsense that you keep posting.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng...amera-rankings

Notice how when tested according to real-world conditions, even the
best p&s cameras fall FAR short of even the cheapest dslrs.

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Paul Furman wrote:
Stephen Bishop wrote:
Vern, CashTownsend wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:

Although some P&S lenses are quite good, none are f/1.8 or faster,
most have purple fringing CA problems & there are no really wide
recitilear options on P&S.

You failed to read to what you are trying to refute. Already covered and
disputed. Points #1, #2, etc.

Purple fringing is a problem of ALL digital cameras. It is NOT caused by the
lens, but by the sensor (are you actually this stupid?). Some DSLRs are worse in
this regard than the better P&S cameras. Purple fringing is not just in the
realm of P&S cameras. But only a moron would say something like that.

Correction. The purple fringing that plagues most P&S cameras is
rarely seen in dslrs. The problem is partly the sensor, which is
made worse by the small size of the P&S version. The other part of
the problem is the extremely short focal lengths of lenses on P&S
cameras.

It used to be believed that purple fringing was sensor blooming, maybe
it is a part of how tiny pixels emphasize CA in the lens but mostly it
is CA of the sort that you see is super-fast DSLR lenses, or cheap
lenses.

I thought that if the purple fringing was worst at the edges of the
image, and worst at wide apertures, i.e. varied across the image in
amount depending of how much refraction the light rays had gone
through in their path through the lens, then it was refractive
chromatic aberration. But if moving to the image centre and stopping
down didn't reduce it in the appropriate proportion for refractive CA,
then to that extent it was sensor blooming CA.

--
Chris Malcolm

Chris Malcolm wrote:
In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Paul Furman wrote:
Stephen Bishop wrote:
Vern, CashTownsend wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Although some P&S lenses are quite good, none are f/1.8 or faster,
most have purple fringing CA problems & there are no really wide
recitilear options on P&S.

You failed to read to what you are trying to refute. Already covered and
disputed. Points #1, #2, etc.

Purple fringing is a problem of ALL digital cameras. It is NOT caused by the
lens, but by the sensor (are you actually this stupid?). Some DSLRs are worse in
this regard than the better P&S cameras. Purple fringing is not just in the
realm of P&S cameras. But only a moron would say something like that.
Correction. The purple fringing that plagues most P&S cameras is
rarely seen in dslrs. The problem is partly the sensor, which is
made worse by the small size of the P&S version. The other part of
the problem is the extremely short focal lengths of lenses on P&S
cameras.

It used to be believed that purple fringing was sensor blooming, maybe
it is a part of how tiny pixels emphasize CA in the lens but mostly it
is CA of the sort that you see is super-fast DSLR lenses, or cheap
lenses.

I thought that if the purple fringing was worst at the edges of the
image, and worst at wide apertures, i.e. varied across the image in
amount depending of how much refraction the light rays had gone
through in their path through the lens, then it was refractive
chromatic aberration. But if moving to the image centre and stopping
down didn't reduce it in the appropriate proportion for refractive CA,
then to that extent it was sensor blooming CA.

CA on the edges of an image is caused by lateral CA, a condition caused
by different colors causing different sized images on the film/sensor.
axial, or longitudinal CA is caused by different colors coming to a
different focus, so some colors will be out of focus when others are in
focus. To some extent, lateral CA is correctable by software, as is
pincushion and barrel distortion.

Blooming is really light spill into adjacent pixels, usually happening
only on bright or overexposed areas of the image. It is worse with
small sensors and very small pixel dimensions, a major drawback of
compact or P&S cameras with sensors smaller than your little fingernail.

Colin D.

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 06:15:34 -0500, Stephen Bishop
wrote:

This link puts to rest the nonsense that you keep posting.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng...amera-rankings


That site is furthering my decision that the next camera I get may be
a D90 instead of a D300. I still have more research to do but it's
looking more and more that way.

Steve

Colin.D wrote:
Chris Malcolm wrote:
In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Paul Furman wrote:
Stephen Bishop wrote:
Vern, CashTownsend wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
Although some P&S lenses are quite good, none are f/1.8 or faster,
most have purple fringing CA problems & there are no really wide
recitilear options on P&S.

You failed to read to what you are trying to refute. Already
covered and
disputed. Points #1, #2, etc.

Purple fringing is a problem of ALL digital cameras. It is NOT
caused by the
lens, but by the sensor (are you actually this stupid?). Some DSLRs
are worse in
this regard than the better P&S cameras. Purple fringing is not
just in the
realm of P&S cameras. But only a moron would say something like that.
Correction. The purple fringing that plagues most P&S cameras is
rarely seen in dslrs. The problem is partly the sensor, which is
made worse by the small size of the P&S version. The other part of
the problem is the extremely short focal lengths of lenses on P&S
cameras.

It used to be believed that purple fringing was sensor blooming,
maybe it is a part of how tiny pixels emphasize CA in the lens but
mostly it is CA of the sort that you see is super-fast DSLR lenses,
or cheap lenses.

I thought that if the purple fringing was worst at the edges of the
image, and worst at wide apertures, i.e. varied across the image in
amount depending of how much refraction the light rays had gone
through in their path through the lens, then it was refractive
chromatic aberration. But if moving to the image centre and stopping
down didn't reduce it in the appropriate proportion for refractive CA,
then to that extent it was sensor blooming CA.

CA on the edges of an image is caused by lateral CA, a condition caused
by different colors causing different sized images on the film/sensor.
axial, or longitudinal CA is caused by different colors coming to a
different focus, so some colors will be out of focus when others are in
focus. To some extent, lateral CA is correctable by software, as is
pincushion and barrel distortion.

Blooming is really light spill into adjacent pixels, usually happening
only on bright or overexposed areas of the image. It is worse with
small sensors and very small pixel dimensions, a major drawback of
compact or P&S cameras with sensors smaller than your little fingernail.

My understanding is blooming means overflow and that's really only seen
when pointing at the sun or similar: it results in lines where electrons
run down a row of pixels. Maybe there is some microlens effect to purple
fringing but mostly it is longitudinal CA like you see in super fast
DSLR lenses wide open. P&S lenses *are* super fast for their size. I
don't really know for sure, nobody seems to test P&S lenses because you
have no choice anyways, what's the point? Of course the lens designers
know but they don't want to confuse anyone g.

There are some errors here but:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_...r_explanations

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam