TeamSpeed wrote in post #18563500Studio shots
are less demanding than many other kinds of photography, it would seem. When you have total control over subject movement, timing, and lighting, any camera with good glass can get the shot provided the photographer knows what they are doing.
That isn't the differentiator many are looking for when comparing models. It is more about demanding situations like high DR scenes, low light/high ISO, low light AF, AF speed and modes, sports, wildlife, erratic kids, drama presentations, etc.
Wouldn't you agree? I have always tried to understand why studio shots (sometimes even post processed and airbrushed) are used as examples of how good old or new camera models are. I feel I am missing something or am not appreciative about the complications of studio shooting?
I completely agree with your point, Cary.
But I realize the difficulty in using non-studio images for camara IQ comparisons.
Why is it difficult?
Because the sample shot taken by one camera has to be precisely repeatable when taking the same shot with the other camera. . The images used to compare cameras must be taken in scientifically controlled conditions in order to utterly and entirely eliminate any variable other than the camera and lens used.
When one is outside, the ambient light can change by tiny little increments without a human even being able to notice the change. Hence, even on clear days, shots taken a minute or two apart may have very slight variance, which would deem the comparison to be "tainted".
With playing kids, sports, or moving wildlife, the subject will move so that one cannot exactly repeat the shot with different cameras.
And so we see that the photos that most of us take in real life are those that cannot be exactly replicated a moment or two later. There is bound to be some minute, almost imperceptible change, which makes the comparison invalid, if judging it on a scientific basis.
So, while such comparisons as you suggest would be very useful to us on a practical, "real life" basis, we must also recognize that on a purely scientific basis they would largely be deemed inviable. . And most of the highly regarded review sites base their tests on the proper employment of the scientific method, in which variables are not supposed to be tolerated.
"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".