What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

TVSD vs SONYbs DSCV1

Dear Kaisern,

Unfortunately I cannot answer your question directly, but in my case I am having no problem mixing ambient light and fill-in flash on subject for both my N1 and my Canon 10D. But then again, I never deliberately use longer than normal shuttle speed to capture more ambient light. I do occasionally take longer exposure with flash fill-on on my M7 and the effect is quite nice. On most of my setups, I dialed in +1/3 flash compensation on my flash and bounce directly into the ceiling if indoors, and can expect descent results with TTL.

I do have a question for you, though. As you mentioned you are having success with TVSD with flash, do you set it up on a table tripod and capture ambient light with Av plus flash (set to night time auto flash or whatever it is called) to fill in, and was flash compensation dialed in at -1? In my experience, my TVSD flash performance is quite unpredictable. Under the exact same lighting conditions, I have gotten some overexposed and some underexposed pictures randomly. I am still trying to figure out the most effective way to control the flash on the TVSD.

Regards,
Ken
 
Kaisern,
One more thing, with all film cameras when flash is used in my case, I usually shoot negatives so exposure latitude is greater, thus leading to better effects. In the case of 10D, I shoot in RAW and honestly, I do find both over and under exposed digital "negatives" at times which need to be processed by the computer.
Regards,
Ken
 
Dear Kaisern,

I am wondering if the pre-flash on the digicam can cause the difference.

Shu-Hsien
 
>=20 >=20 >=20 > [Thanks, I almost set the flash at =AD1/3 permanently, and it works excelle= nt. > However, as T3, the flash on the TVS-D has effective range within 2-3 met= ers > so I have been shooting everything in the said range. The shadow area is > still weak with TVS-D, noticeable noise, but when the lighting is good, T= VS-D > is no question among the best. Regards. Kasiern] >=20 >=20 >=20
 
>=20 >=20 >=20 > [I am not sure about this point. It seemed to be that flash on Contax MM= /ME > or N never got to the level of Nikon or Canon. Canon sensor=B9s weak point= =AD > personal point of view =AD in shooting poor lighting environment against a > strong point of source of light, is not very good but it does great job i= n > almost any other situation. Regards, Kaisern] >=20 >=20 >=20
 
I have just posted some night shots of TVSD vs. Canon 10D on the following link, http://pbase.com/tvsd/view_from_the_peak. Dirk, I tried to put them onto "test photos" but it has not been accessible for awhile. I notice there were several commments that stated TVSD resolves better shadow details than others such as the S50, but that is contrary to what I have found. I did not have a S50 handy to make a more reasonable comparison, but based on the pictures I took, the shadow details are in no comparison to 10D. I did a comparison with S50 earlier on but I don't have the files with me anymore.

I also agree with Clive's earlier comment that at full resolution, perhaps the S50 would render better details than the TVSD. Undoubtedly though, the TVSD produces much better color rendition, and the pictures are far superior than the flat images taken by the S50. IMHO, the relatively lack of details can be compensated by the richly saturated color rendition. Unless you blow it up real big, I don't think the detail difference really matter that much. Besides, remember this is only a small P&S and it really shouldn't be compared to a large and heavy slr. My only complaint, though, is the lack of RAW. As I recall Marc had mentioned in one of his posts that he can recover most of the TVSD pictures using photoshop 7. I use the same but do not know how to compensate effectively for either over or under exposed shots. Do you just play with levels, curves, brightness and contrast? Or is there anything else that you could use to improve the quality?

Ken
 
Hi Ken,

we installed a couple of months ago a new photogallery. The old testphoto section within the normal galery is not vaailable anymore. Just click in the navigation bar on the top on "testphotos". Images have to be approved by the webmaster before you can see them (after the upload).
 
Ken, Compairing a D10 and TVSD is an Apples and Oranges situation. The sensor of the D-10 is much larger than any P&S digital camera. Picture quality isn't just a matter of meg count, sensor size does matter.

The sensor of the Canon S-50 is the same size as the TVSD. It is a better comparison as the spec's of the 2 cameras are almost identical...except the Canon produces RAW files and the TVSD does not. However, as I've said before, the RAW processing of S-50 (and G2,3,&5) files does NOT include the same level of adjustment you get with D-10 files even when using the same RAW developer program (Canon File Viewer Utility, version 1.3.0.7). You cannot adjust exposure on S-50 RAW files like you can with the D-10 RAW files. The RAW adjustments for the Canon P&Ss are remedial and almost useless because PS does most of the functions better.

Again, you can review the controlled tests performed in studio between the TVSD and the Canon S-50 by clicking on the Test Gallery in the menu at the top of this page. Be sure to compare the TVSD images marked "Fine" as the first ones I uploaded were set on the camera's default "Medium" level resolution setting and had to be redone.
 
Hi Marc,

I'm intrigued by your comment re RAW processing on images from the Powershot G-series cameras. I was thinking of picking up a G3 for the specific purpose of quickly digitising neg images using a copier attachment. These images are purely for cataloguing, not printing, so top-notch quality is not paramount, but I know that this method of capture is likely to be pretty borderline even for this purpose. I have just borrowed a Coolpix 950 and have the Nikon neg copier adapter, and from the results so far have concluded that more bit depth would be preferable. Working from RAW files would also seem like a good idea, as I could then effectively profile the camera for each film type and turn the neg/pos conversion process into a more accurate process that could be automated.

Therefore, I'd selected the G3 as the best choice of camera, on the basis that it has 12-bit converters and offers RAW file support. Can you elaborate on the limitations with the RAW conversion please? If the RAW feature of the G3 is of limited worth, that opens up the field to include other cameras that I might prefer to have for general-purpose P&S use, such as the TVSD.

TIA

-= mike =-
 
Dear Marc,

I was told that some of the functions of the Digic processor was disabled in the lower end digicams.

Shu-Hsien
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top