Sony A350: Full-Time Live View at 14.2MP
by Wesley Fink on April 3, 2008 3:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Digital Camera
Resolution and Sensitivity Tests - Sony A350 vs. Canon 5D
Since the Canon 5D is a full-size sensor the coverage of the 50mm is greater on the 5D than the two 1.5X multiplier sensors. Therefore two sets of crops and full images are included. One set is taken from the same location using the 50mm lens. In that configuration the full-size sensor provides a greater field of view on the 5D than on the 1.5X multiplier cameras.
The second set of 5D images were shot with the camera moved closer to the image to try to maintain the same point of view. Despite the different fields of view, all Canon 5D cropped images are still maintained at 230x300 pixels.
Links to the full JPEG images are also available on each camera sensitivity crop by clicking on the crop image. These files are huge, but they can be downloaded for those who wish to view the actual images or explore EXIF data embedded in each image.
Same Shooting Position
Like the K20D, color on the full-frame Canon 5D is somewhat warm at the Tungsten preset compared to the cooler and more accurate rendition of the Sony A350. Whites are also somewhat warmer on the 5D under Tungsten than the K20D. The Canon 5D would also likely benefit from custom white balance under Tungsten lighting.
| ISO Comparison - Sony vs. Canon (Same Shooting Position) | ||
| ISO | Sony A350 | Canon 5D |
| 100 |  |
 |
| 200 |  |
 |
| 400 |  |
 |
| 800 |  |
 |
| 1600 |  |
 |
| 3200 |  |
 |
Click on any of the above image crops for the full image. Note: Full size images are between 3.5MB and 11.4MB! |
||
Like the K20D, color on the full-frame Canon 5D is somewhat warm at the Tungsten preset compared to the cooler and more accurate rendition of the Sony A350. Whites are also somewhat warmer on the 5D under Tungsten than the K20D. The Canon 5D would also likely benefit from custom white balance under Tungsten lighting.
Noise in the A350 images is controlled well up to ISO 800, and the images compare very well to the Canon 5D images. At ISO 1600 the full-frame Canon 5D exhibits lower noise, but the A350 image is still very usable. At ISO 3200, the 5D still produced usable low-noise images, but quality is lower than ISO 1600 on the 5D. At ISO 3200, the images from the A350 would still be usable for web posting or small prints as color remains accurate, but larger prints are not really an option at the highest ISO speed. Noise is also becoming more obvious in the Canon 5D images, but noise from the full-frame 5D at ISO 3200 (H setting) is much lower than we see in the A350 at 3200. This is as expected given the larger photosites of the Canon 5D.
Equivalent Field of View
| ISO Comparison - Sony vs. Canon (Same Field of View) | ||
| ISO | Sony A350 | Canon 5D |
| 100 | |
 |
| 200 | |
 |
| 400 | |
 |
| 800 | |
 |
| 1600 | |
 |
| 3200 | |
 |
Click on any of the above image crops for the full image. Note: Full size images are between 3.5MB and 11.4MB! |
||
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Log in
Don't have an account? Sign up now
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
113 Comments
View All Comments
Wesley Fink - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
I have been a Senior Editor at AnandTech for over five years. In fact I have been here longer than anyone except our CEO, Anand Shimpi. I have started or expanded many review areas for AnandTech, brought on-board other AT Editors you will recognize, and handed off new sections to others after getting them up and going. I am NOT quaking in my boots at your threats.What I cannot figure out is why you are so determined to discredit me and my work. It certainly won't work, but I cannot figure out your motivation. I can only assume you must be from a photography web site as we have been attacked before by other web sites who were threatened by the success of AT in other areas. If my work is so mediocre and laughable who bother worrying about my camera reviews enough to threaten me? Something is not right with your vehemence and threats.
Deadtrees - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link
What are you talking about? The question was about your being "PRO" photographer, not about your resume on Anandtech.Are you implying that your reviews are bound to be decent because you've been here for some years, did this and that for Anandtech?
Who cares expect you and your ego? Reader don't care whether you're the founder of Anandtech or the creator of Internet when your camera reviews show too many problems.
The very methods you've choson only shows how you're incapable of doing the review on this matter and you know it. Stop the ego trip and find someone who can do the review. If you feel like it's something you gotta do as you're the "PRO" photographer, stop doing silly and nonsense benchmarks as you just can't cut it right.
You see, you're walking down path of Ken Rockwell with this stupid review and ego trip. If you want to do a good review that's not based on benchmarking, www.luminous-landscape.com would be your guide line. Learn from that site instead of Ken Rockwell's.
GTVic - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link
Wow, you should really calm down before you give yourself a heart attack. The same goes for some of the other people posting here. The tone of your comments is extremely angry and your attacks are largely demeaning (eg. "this stupid review") rather than constructive and friendly.Your spelling and grammar are so atrocious and juvenile that I imagine you are writing these comments with steam coming out of your ears due to your intense anger. In short, you have very little credibility in spite of all the technical details that you so venomously spew out.
brian_riendeau - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link
I think the motivation for a lot of people is the fact that they like AT (otherwise why would they be here reading your article?) and this feels like a letdown. I posted some stuff earlier that may not have been in the best tone, however I can assure when I first clicked on the article I was really excited to read it. Then when I finished I was like "Wow.........." A lot of computer enthusiasts are photogs as well, and its frustrating to come to a site we look to for solid information and read this article. Personally I am someone who currently knows more about cameras than PCs, so reading a head scratcher like this article can make me question some of the PC hardware articles and discredit those.Its also frustrating that you do not have the camera anymore. DSLRs can be finicky things and often the best results or feedback comes from second and third looks at the camera. Obviously you are trying to generate some traffic and expand the site user base a bit. Now what I would love to see if for AT to take the feedback from this, and consider that for a revision to this article or at least future articles. I would love to see a good comparison over the current crop of <$1K DSLRs.
Just keep in mind that megapixels really do not matter. Photography is extremely subjective, and when it comes down to it, people want to know what will take the best pictures for them.
kleang - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Well done on the review and all correction you're doing. This type of review is really what's I'm seeking for.Who's care on everything must be perfect or measured right? I just need something easy to understand, some opinion from pro, some compare to guide what's I got if I buy this product.
If I seriously to buy and need in depth information, dpreview and other many sites is my choice.
May be I'm just your target group, and I'm sure this group is large segment from now.
punchkin - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
This is not an opinion from a pro. In addition, if you actually don't care about basing your opinion on wrong information, you can satisfy yourself easily with a random search anywhere on the web. Hell, I'll send you bad advice for free if you give me your email address.kleang - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link
1. You need to build your credibility 1st if you want to give any advice to people. At the moment, your credit is zero for me(sorry to say that).2. Anandtech is one of best information web for a long time, so any advise is good to hear. And I think they response to many comment as a pro, try to correct and very patient to answer.
3. Many comment are very good and helpful but some just try to blame and show off.
4. Like it or haste it, just give polite comment and it's depend on AT if they think it's neccesary or not to correct. No meaning to try to blame to prove you're right. AT must responsible on their review but we (you and me) just reader which didnt provide even realname/email.
5. It's helpful to point the error and give some opinion. But let reader decided if they think this review is helpful or not, you may just not the target group.
Just my 2cent.
punchkin - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link
1. We're not discussing your belief in my credibility, but the credibility of the reviewer and his "review".2. Nope, obviously NOT for camera information. The word is "advice". Bad advice or "advise" is bad to hear.
3. My comment is dead on point. A "review" that puts vastly different lenses on different camera bodies, and "tests" using wide-open apertures to show supposed merits of the sensor in each camera, or the imaging capabilities of each camera system, is UTTERLY WORTHLESS.
4. Like it or not, your half-intelligible posts here do nothing to show that the review has any worth whatsoever. If you want to play "politeness police", go elsewhere.
kleang - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link
"4. Like it or not, your half-intelligible posts here do nothing to show that the review has any worth whatsoever. If you want to play "politeness police", go elsewhere. "Just in case you didn't realize, this post already shown yourself to the public, lol.
punchkin - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link
Let's try to keep this to standard English. :D