By Rob Beschizza at 5:52 am Fri, Aug 7, 2009
At first, I couldn’t tell that the sample was one contiguous, split image, and thought “oh, so this new sensor reveals luxury condos that are hidden to normal CCDs?”
Those do look like nice condos, though ISO 800 with ISO 100 noise levels certainly helps
Convenient that their new sensor gets the building with the bright archetectural external lighting, while the “conventional” sensor gets the buildings that are externally dark.
This picture is driving me nuts.
That’s the San Francisco Mariott, but you shouldn’t be able to see the bay bridge from there, and from that angle, you should see the corner of the Metreon.
Photoshop’d. Am I right?
My question would be: which half of the image is simulated?
After all, the left half could be real, and they just added “typical” noise and darkness of a conventional sensor on the left.
And I can see a lot of people finding good night shot ability very useful.. in clubs, fireworks, sightseeing at night….
But they still get a lot of credit for selecting a this completely unsuitable “comparison shot”.
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Submit a tip
The rules you agree to by using this website.
Who will be eaten first?
Jason Weisberger, Publisher
Ken Snider, Sysadmin