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
steveChance - Tuesday, April 29, 2008 - link
[please disregard this post if this topic has been covered already in the readers' comments as I have not read all twelve pages of them]I find it odd that you would test cameras using printed matter as sample subject. Like digital images printed matter (esp. 4-color process) has its own errors that will (IMHO) negatively effect the photographic results.
Use a loupe to view at the actual item shown in the crops...
jcbenten - Friday, April 25, 2008 - link
Nice article. I presume I have come across this with all the corrections. I look forward to comparisons to the XSi, K200, and A300. I am "attempting" to purchase my first (D)SLR and I continue to out think myself. Your A350 crops came out much better than I anticipated. Maybe there is still life in the CCD.punchkin - Tuesday, April 8, 2008 - link
... before performing another "comparison".cputeq - Wednesday, April 9, 2008 - link
You should also consider the text of the review before making snide comments.The review indicated all camera white balance settings were set to Tungsten. If one camera or another has a warmer look than another, that's the "fault" of the camera.
The issue of the image comparisons was noise, not color accuracy.
Zak - Wednesday, April 9, 2008 - link
I'm not saying the review was bad or good, I can't care less for SONY's cameras, and I don't want to put down your efforts, but I think AnandTech is losing focus. Please return to your roots: computer stuff and leave the camera reviews to other established camera review sites that don't do computer stuff review;) When I come here I want to read about about computer stuff. If I want to read about cameras I go to DP Review, Steve's Cams, Digital Camera Resource, Fred Miranda, The Imaging Reource just to name a few. Honestly, I see at least 50% drop in number of interesting articles on AT. Oh, and the same goes for game reviews. XBox game reviews on AT? Please…Zak
MKFAGAN - Monday, April 7, 2008 - link
I was wondering why everyone is down playing the in camera zoom feature this is huge..The way I see it I have a 50mm 1.4 which is actually a 70mm with the 1.6 crop I press the button to get 1.4x zoom this gives me a 98 1.4 lens I press it again I get 2x zoom so I get a 140mm 1.4 thats huge It is like having 3 prime lenses in 1 so what if I lose a few MP This is big could you imagine a 135mm 2.8 with crop factor 216mm 2.8 press the button to 2x zoom I have a 432mm 2.8 this is a huge featureWesley Fink - Tuesday, April 8, 2008 - link
The auto-teleconverter is convenient, but it is really just a crop of the 14.2 megapixel image. You can do that by croppping images from any digital camera. I was also disappointed that the auto teleconverter does not work in Live View mode.In fact, there is no real zoom mode in Live View to assist in focusing, as I learned the hard way in trying to set critical focus for the resolution/noise crops. The tiny viewfinder and no zoom in LV made accurate manual focusing a real chore. While Sony's Live View is the fastest and most convenient LV we have tested, both the Pentax K20D and Olympus E-3 allow you to select an area to enlarge in LV and then magnify it (7X, 10X) for manual focusing - which does work real-time on both cameras. That made manual focusing MUCH easier for the test series on those two cameras.
haplo602 - Thursday, April 10, 2008 - link
Briliant Wesley ... THIS is that kind of information that should have been in the review !!!That's also what I meant in my earlier post. Camera handling and the little quirks that either get in the way or aid in actual shooting.
Maybe I missed the part in the review, but I do not recall you mentioning the auto-teleconverter. Also the LV limitation on focusing (coupled with the horrible viewfinder) are a critical point that should have been in the review.
retired hiker - Monday, April 7, 2008 - link
I have a problem with the title of your review. Tell me how I can Live View at 14.2MP. Certainly the tiny display on the camera can't give me that resolution.krakman - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link
also they sell fer around 30$ on amazon.