Originally Posted by markr041
A poster who claims acute abilities to discern differences across videos claims there is no difference in red in these two shots, taken by two different camcorders (these are frame grabs).
Ten people out of ten I have asked to look, from experienced photographers to a random person from the street, finds one rendition of red accurate and the other not (they were asked do you see a difference; if so, which do you think is closer to the real sign color?).
Are you, like the person who took this videos, also unable to see any difference in the reds? Which do you think is correct, and which a muddy version of real red (you know what a stop sign looks like)?
And, after looking at the reds, look at the colors of the playground equipment in the left background. See a difference in color? Dull?
Can you guess which camcorder took each shot?
Can you show me where I said there were NO differences in the red? If you are going to quote me Mark, at least be accurate. What I DID say was that on my ISF'd Pioneer Kuro the red stop sign DID look red. It still does. Did you look at building in the background? On the Canon it's more saturated and closer to how it looked. How about the grass? Check, Canon. As for the playground equipment, some pieces are more saturated on the Canon and some more on the Panasoinc. So? The streets? Closer to reality on the Canon, but both a bit off. So? The general tendency of Panasonic video is toward the green and the general tendency of Canon video is toward the red. Pick your poison. But I will tell you this, the general saturation levels of the entire overall video were closer to reality with the Canon.
More importantly, as I'm sure you're aware, since I specifically stated both cams were used with their AWB engaged, results in overall color balance can and will change from scene to scene since any cam's AWB is so variable in its results. In fact most people that have done video for any amount of time are well aware that you can get two different AWB color renditions by simply turning the camera off and back on again. So to generalize about cam A's color vs cam B's color from one frame grab from one video, has little to no value IMO other than that one frame grab
of that one vide
o. Knock your socks off.
But since you asked '10 people' about that one frame grab (BTW, I'm sure you carried a calibrated monitor out to the street to ask that guy), did you also ask those 10 people about the other A/B videos
, I posted...you know, the ones you haven't commented on (I guess because you can't find anything better in the 900 version). Specifically, did you ask these 10 folks:
Which VIDEO is generally sharper?
Which VIDEO generally holds detail better with movement?
Which VIDEO has better exposure latitude?
Which VIDEO has significantly better low light?
Which VIDEO tends to show a punchier picture?
Forget about the camera itself and the myriad of manual controls on the XA10 that the 900 doesn't have.
Mark, I could go on, but it seems to me that YOU said this (and I will accurately quote you): "Ken, let's both stop this". Now I did, but you've now ventured into this thread to continue this pissing match.
The fact is, as I've stated often, both are great cameras. For my needs, I find the Canon simply puts out an overall better picture with low light video that the 900 can only dream of and a good light picture that's at least a match for the 900 and often better. This is my opinion and I didn't show my A/Bs to 10 people (not counting the folks here on AVS who generally seem to pick the Canon), just two besides myself and on a 60" ISF'd Pioneer. But those two agreed with me, one is now on the waiting list for his XA10, the other is my wife who although agreeing that the Canon looked better, doesn't really give a rat's ***.