SONY or NIKON II?

[Arthur Morris]

This one was created on the San Diego IPT. ISO 800. 1/500 sec. at f/6.3 was a bit of an underexposure.

Again, how would you rate the image quality particularly the fine feather detail.

General comments on the image are welcome as well. Answer on Friday.

with love, artie

[Isaac Grant]

As I have mentioned I like these games and I think this sort of thing is very informative. This one is harder for me than the gull. I am going to guess it is a Sony shot for the following reasons. Fine feather details do not seem great to me, the colors seem different than I am used to out of Nikon shots (although that could be another Capture One conversion throwing things off) and the belly seems like you had to lift the exposure too much and I do not think the image quality held up well. I would expect better from the D850. You can easily lift the exposure 1 stop or more out of that camera and it not look like you did anything. Here the belly just looks kind of smudgy and dingy.

[Arthur Morris]

Well done again. Or not? Here is the same bird photographed minutes apart. This on had a slightly better exposure. SONY or NIKON? How do the breast feathers look on this one; better, worse, the same?

BTW, neither image was sharpened as all.

with love, artie

[Isaac Grant]

I would still say Sony. Exposure is better but I see a blue cast that I am not used to with Nikon. Maybe from that blue pacific which looks very different than the dark blue waters of New York. Belly still does not look great to me. But to I also have very little experience with pacific Brown Pelicans. So hard to be sure though, especially since I have never even held a Sony or looked at any of the files.

[Joseph Przybyla]

My guess would be Sony for both. To my old eyes neither looks like a Nikon file.

[John Mack]

I like the pose on the second one better. They both look more than acceptable to me.

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks Joh.n. I would appreciate a few more opinions.

with love, artie

ps: thanks Isaac. and Joe

[Daniel Cadieux]

The second looks a touch better on the breast, but still has that "lightened up in post" look (not sure how else to describe it). From here the fine feather detail looks good. I especially like the paler gray ones. I don't think I've ever looked at a Sony or Nikon RAW file or how they "behave" in post, so it is difficult for me to gauge which took this, but I too will go with Sony. Not gonna guess a focal length this time though ha ha!

[Juan Tolentino]

Artie, I have never seen a RAW Sony file either, but I'm guessing both of these images were captured with a Sony body. It is something different on the way they look, I don't know exactly what it is. I agree with both Joe and Isaac since I don't think I will see an image looking this way right after I download it from the card. Just my $.02.

[arash_hazeghi]

pretty neat

In terms of colors the image in pane #1 looks closer to a west coast pelican shot in San Diego (or Bolsa) but it is a bit dull on my monitor. Agree with Issac the image in pane #3 has a blue cast. I use Capture One with my Nikon D5/D850 and get great quality but not sure if has issues with this particular Sony or not.

In terms of details it does look a tad coarse to my eye. The breast area looks a bit strange as if the pelican had spilled coffee there :D or if it were muddy. Was it wet or did you do something in post processing there?

in my subjective opinion the IQ here is good but not great like some of your older files, I can't tell which camera you used, could be either... I can only guess the camera/lens if I am looking at RAW at 100% . :S3:

I like the head angle in the 2nd image better BTW.



TFS

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks all. I am still hoping that more folks chime in.

I should have included some additional info in Pane 1. This adapted from today's blog post here: (http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2019/02/14/59706/)

Both of today's featured images were created within minutes of each other. One was made with my new Sony gear, one was made with my Nikon gear. Both were converted in Capture One. There was no selective sharpening, no NIK, and no sharpening at applied to the resulting JPEGs. I used the shadow slider judiciously on both images. I ask that you judge only the fine feather detail on the breast, the folded wings, the back, and the head. Do note that when created Image #1 the sun was a bit brighter than when I created Image #2. Please therefore do not concern yourself with differences in color or contrast. Both of those in large part are more a function of the photographer's personal tastes and their choices both during the RAW conversion and later in Photoshop. Similarly, do not choose the "best" image based on your favorite pose. As above, my only concern here is to see if anyone can note image quality differences in an unsharpened 1200 pixel wide JPEG.

with love, artie


I have tried many times to create identical images with different camera bodies for comparative purposes. I have always failed miserably even when I photographed a sign with the gear on a tripod! With a bird, it is pretty much impossible. But I tried.

[Krishna Prasad kotti]

Interesting Observations. Image quality wise, for me it does not make that much difference.

Love the Water colors and Pelicans.

California sure is the place to be to photograph Beautiful Brown Pelicans

I do agree that second image has Blue cast.

[Joseph Przybyla]

Good Morning Artie, after reading your most recent post I had a go at the two images again. I imported both into Lightroom so I could look at them side be side for comparison. I assume your Nikon gear is your D850 with 47.5 mp, the Sony A9 only has 24.2. So not really a fair comparison. Looking at the images closely and zooming them up I would say the first image is from the Nikon D850, the resolution on the breast and the head is better, color is better IMO. The second image has smudging on the breast noticeable when zoomed up, and there is slightly more blue in the white areas of the bill. That said, I am ready to find out I am wrong.

[Arthur Morris]

Good Morning Artie, after reading your most recent post I had a go at the two images again. I imported both into Lightroom so I could look at them side be side for comparison. I assume your Nikon gear is your D850 with 47.5 mp, the Sony A9 only has 24.2. So not really a fair comparison. Looking at the images closely and zooming them up I would say the first image is from the Nikon D850, the resolution on the breast and the head is better, color is better IMO. The second image has smudging on the breast noticeable when zoomed up, and there is slightly more blue in the white areas of the bill. That said, I am ready to find out I am wrong.

Thanks for revisiting this Joe, for taking the extra time. I agree that the first one is sharper with better fine feather detail all around. Time will tell.

with love, artie

[Joseph Przybyla]

Thanks for revisiting this Joe, for taking the extra time. I agree that the first one is sharper with better fine feather detail all around. Time will tell.

with love, artie

Your killing me with suspense.....

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks to all who commented. The general consensus seems to be that SONY was not as bad as those with pre-conceived notions had thought ... The image in Pane 1, the one that most folks thought was sharper with more fine feather detail on the breast, is the SNOY image. You can read my conclusions in the blog post here. (http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2019/02/18/which-one-was-the-sony-image-which-one-was-the-nikon-image/)

Whatever else, it was a fun and educational exercise.

with love, artoe

[Isaac Grant]

Can not for the life of me figure out what people see. The 2nd image looks far better as far as details and image quality go, despite the blue cast and the under exposure. And yes I read your blog re the camera and lenses.