Through the real photo works observed daily at digitalphotocontest.com and digitalimagecafe.com, it has been clear to me that Canons use some sort of color enhancement techniques at the expense of sharpness,

ztech(technozoom@pbase)

which in my opinion is unjustified.

One another interesting observation: take a picture by a Canon, open in Photoshop, do auto-levels, auto-contrast and auto-color, the picture often looks almost unchanged.

What it tells me, is that, Canon has a photoshop built in. Which is both a good and a bad thing, depending on if it's a casual user or a serious amateur.

Colors can be improved by post-processing (well, not every time), but the furry or rusty textures cannot be recreated in a lab.

My canadian 2 cents :)

(#1600077@0)
Last Updated: 2004-2-11
This post has been archived. It cannot be replied.

个人感觉，在像质方面，相机镜头起到非常关键的作用，背景的虚化和色彩、成像的锐利，以及周边变形情况上，镜头好差有决定性影响。 -fenxiaoxiao(风小小@北美博客); 2004-2-10 {386} (#1599069@0)

在摄影技术运用中，相机本身就有了决定因素，比如，有点测光的相机在反差很大的场景上曝光就能准确快捷，当然还有连拍、快门速度，还有一些需要玩出花样的时候，较差的相机有很大的局限性。

话说回来，这两张照片不能放在一起作为比较，原因是不同时间、不同场景，不同光照，就是同样的镜头和相机也可能拍出这样的照片。当然还有可能是曝光不足、色温偏差等等，也有可能是PS之后的效果。：）个人意见，供你参考。

我觉得第二张和镜头相机都没有关系，是物体移动了或手抖了。糊成那样，随便那个傻瓜机都比她好。 -tuantuan(我爱月饼); 2004-2-10 (#1599095@0)

这两张照片没什么可比性，与相机和镜头的作用比起来，当时的光线、环境更重要 -soaringpig(好奇的猪); 2004-2-11 {744} (#1599693@0)
象第二张那样主题和背景色彩接近，用彩色胶卷很难表现好。
大光圈浅景深焦点很重要（除非要表现一些效果），第二张焦点不知道去哪里了，而且作为北极熊那么大，颜色又单一，焦点如果不在一个明显部位上，很容易模糊，就象当初黑暗在国内的手表微距测试，焦点在倾斜的表盘上，但由于表盘是单一平面，同时景深太浅，造成实际上对焦准确但看起来跑焦（抱歉黑暗，类似的例子一下就想到了你那个测试，所以未经授权就擅自引用）。类似这种情况，可以改变焦点或增大景深。而第二张猫头鹰的眼和耳朵（在眼睛边象脸一样的部位里）都几乎在焦平面上，对焦准确后可以容易的看出；你对比看原始照片右边象耳朵样的羽毛边缘。
另外从拍摄对象的大小和到背景的距离两者的对比来看，第二张背景太近。
所以啤酒不必太为器材操心，除非是器材测试图片，否则在看照片时对所用器材的关注程度应该比较靠后，器材派除外。

本来回啤酒的怎么跑到团团这儿来了？斑竹帮忙挪挪吧 -soaringpig(好奇的猪); 2004-2-11 (#1599695@0)

谢谢上面几位，昨天在看pbase上FZ10的图片，总觉得有些不太畅快，又看300D的，仔细瞧一下，发现好的图片，镜头也好，於是生了疑问，相机技术当然重要，但这镜头是是不是真的那么那么重要？ -rootbear(啤酒加咖啡); 2004-2-11 (#1599781@0)

It can only be as good as the lens. Indeed. -ztech(technozoom@pbase); 2004-2-11 (#1599794@0)

so, you are still saying, lens DO matter? -rootbear(啤酒加咖啡); 2004-2-11 (#1599866@0)

镜头比什么都重要。一个好镜头配最土的机身也比好相机+狗头强得多。 -seyou(生命不息折腾不已); 2004-2-11 (#1599967@0)

That's absolutely true for film cameras. Less true for digital cameras. A digital camera also needs a good sensor (which is essentially your choice of film).I would buy a D70 instead of the 300D. Just my 2 cents -ztech(technozoom@pbase); 2004-2-11 {20} (#1599990@0)
Canadian dollars. :)

dollar is dollar, cent is cent, your 2 cents or or 2 dollars? mind to tell more reasons? you got a nice box anyway, -rootbear(啤酒加咖啡); 2004-2-11 (#1600030@0)

Through the real photo works observed daily at digitalphotocontest.com and digitalimagecafe.com, it has been clear to me that Canons use some sort of color enhancement techniques at the expense of sharpness, -ztech(technozoom@pbase); 2004-2-11 {526} (#1600077@0)
which in my opinion is unjustified.

One another interesting observation: take a picture by a Canon, open in Photoshop, do auto-levels, auto-contrast and auto-color, the picture often looks almost unchanged.

What it tells me, is that, Canon has a photoshop built in. Which is both a good and a bad thing, depending on if it's a casual user or a serious amateur.

Colors can be improved by post-processing (well, not every time), but the furry or rusty textures cannot be recreated in a lab.

My canadian 2 cents :)

据我日常用过8个月D30的经验，“auto-levels, auto-contrast and auto-color”能显著提高图像质量也是我用得最多的PS部分，如果你是说300D的参数1还差不多。 -chiwawa(笑倒江湖); 2004-2-11 (#1600103@0)

Make sure your levels expand the whole spectrum. that'll do. -ztech(technozoom@pbase); 2004-2-11 (#1600129@0)
郁闷，这么大一个热点没有碰上。现在很少用auto level，计算机对色彩比较单调的画面往往判断有问题。auto contrast倒是很不错的。 -heian(黑暗㊣); 2004-2-11 (#1600155@0)

Agreed. Especially a snowy or sunsetting photo. The blue-ish and golden hues would be killed by it. -ztech(technozoom@pbase); 2004-2-11 (#1600160@0)
其实我用这些只是为了省事，一张图几个Click就完事。真正高手花在PS每张照片上的时间应该是拍照时间（几秒钟）的几百倍以上。这几天在学习琢磨数码黑白处理技巧。 -chiwawa(笑倒江湖); 2004-2-11 (#1600167@0)

FYI -pasu(InTheSky); 2004-2-11 (#1600219@0)

Very cool stuff, Pasu. -ztech(technozoom@pbase); 2004-2-11 (#1600336@0)
好东西，晚上试试 -heian(黑暗㊣); 2004-2-11 (#1600349@0)

are you sure 2 cents only? worth much more than that, a cup of coffee or a beer? -rootbear(啤酒加咖啡); 2004-2-11 (#1600113@0)

whichever one is fine. :) -ztech(technozoom@pbase); 2004-2-11 (#1600128@0)

but 如果你花了很多钱买个DSLR却舍不得再投资去买个稍好些的镜头而去买个狗头，效果说实在的还不如去买个717，5700呢。 -seyou(生命不息折腾不已); 2004-2-11 (#1600041@0)

好久不见你的作品，哪里去旅游去了？ -chiwawa(笑倒江湖); 2004-2-11 (#1600037@0)

谢谢关怀。俺对纯摄影不是那么热心，hiking first，摄影是为了留下hiking 美景。 -seyou(生命不息折腾不已); 2004-2-11 (#1600048@0)

好！终于达到摄影的最高境界，那就是 -chiwawa(笑倒江湖); 2004-2-11 {15} (#1600057@0)
只看不拍。：-）

同喜同喜，这样只有欢乐、愉悦，没有烦恼、懊悔、惭愧，何乐不为？ LOL -seyou(生命不息折腾不已); 2004-2-11 (#1600063@0)

其实说实在的，干任何事情过一段时间得歇一会儿，思考沉淀一下，才会有进步。我现在觉得自己也就刚学会一点构图，曝光，能应付日常需要，再提高就比较困难。。。 -chiwawa(笑倒江湖); 2004-2-11 (#1600080@0)
no risk, no fun. LOL -pasu(InTheSky); 2004-2-11 (#1600105@0)

就事论事。对于Canon DSLR 来说，多人指出（本人也有体会）镜头影响显著，L镜头比普通镜头好不少。 -chiwawa(笑倒江湖); 2004-2-11 (#1599886@0)

thank you very much for your input, here is what i found [quote]What is a Canon "L" Series Lens? Good question - and many answers exist, -rootbear(啤酒加咖啡); 2004-2-11 {243} (#1599996@0)
but it is Canon's professional line of EOS 35mm SLR and D-SLR still camera lenses. The "L" is often thought to refer to "Luxury". Others say it stands for "Low Distortion" achieved by the UD lens elements found in these lenses. [/quote]
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-L-Series-Lens-Review.aspx
同意。 -heian(黑暗㊣); 2004-2-11 (#1600164@0)

都重要。钱最重要。 -lazycat(三脚猫); 2004-2-11 (#1599987@0)

one more question : are human eyes are good lens? -rootbear(啤酒加咖啡); 2004-2-11 (#1600045@0)

那得看是不是近视眼，远视眼，散光？ -lazycat(三脚猫); 2004-2-11 (#1600058@0)
sure. these lens are more important than any other lens. -redman(酥油茶); 2004-2-11 (#1600064@0)
not at all. -patpat(侃侃伐坛); 2004-2-11 (#1600098@0)

@San Francisco

Through the real photo works observed daily at digitalphotocontest.com and digitalimagecafe.com, it has been clear to me that Canons use some sort of color enhancement techniques at the expense of sharpness,

Replies, comments and Discussions:

More Topics