View allAll Photos Tagged Comparison
Autocar UK compares the new BMW X4 against the Porsche Macan.
Derived from the Indonesian word for Tiger, the Macan promises to combine sport car characteristics with the benefits of a sport-ute.
At 4699 mm in length, 1923 mm in width and 1623 mm in height, the Macan is 144 mm shorter, 15.2 mm...
www.autoblogvia.com/bmw/comparison-bmw-x4-vs-porsche-maca...
Nefera's clothes are too much of a bother to get on and off, so HH posed for the body comparison. Mari is still taller, because of those feet! They share the same torso, upper arms and upper legs, while her lower arms and legs have the molded fur.
A comparison between the K-1 with the Pentax 24-70 and the K-5 with the Pentax 18-55.
Both were underexposed by 1 Stop intentionally. The K-1 had no filter attached, the K-5 had a polarizer and an UV-filter attached. The pictures were shot in RAW and I used the defaults of the Camera-Raw Plugin to save them as JPGs - no further edits.
Comparison of the two versions I uploaded, showing that after just a few days I can be totally unsatisfied with the changes I made earlier.
The Technic 1x1 with half-pin and the new modified brick 1x1 with one stud on the side are not technically equivalent. They can kind of function the same way in real life, due to the flexibility of the plastic, but there is a .12mm difference in the distance between the top of the brick and stud.
Jamie Berard gave a presentation at Brickfest '06 about stressing elements, and there is a PDF copy of his Powerpoint file here, if you are interested in more information about legal vs. illegal building techniques.
Return of the Jedi: Tatooine Desert Skiff Comparison
* Galoob - Action Fleet
* Galoob - Micro Machines
* Jazwares - Micro Galaxy Squadron Series 5
Index: Chanel Nouvelle Vague
Middle: Diamond Cosmetics Oh, Tiff!
Ring: Chanel Nouvelle Vague
Pinky: China Glaze For Audrey
2 coats each
I've started a project about facial symmetry, and as far as i can tell, no-one has approached the subject in this way before.
It is the same person in both photos of each pair, the second photo is made using an identical (mirrored) lighting setup. the image is flipped horizontally to make both photos face the same way, allowing a direct comparison of the left and right side of each person's noggin. Other adjustments are kept to a bare minimum to keep things as honest as possible.
i will be adding to the project anytime i get a willing volunteer.
100 mm Lens Comparison, Center
Sample pictures of this group of lenses.
This chart consists of 200x200 px crops of a 7360x4912 px picture by a full frame sensor, taken from the center. The crops of each line were made with one lens, the used f-stop is indicated in the crop. As a reference, the exposure was taken from the Pentax macro lens at f/5.6, so every exposure for each lens was 1/60 s at f/5.6 and 1/125 s at f/4 and so on. Also the white balance was taken from this capture, to compare colors. The photos were taken with ISO 100 in JPG format, highest quality, without any picture "enhancement" like sharpening, saturation, noise reduction or lens correction, the crop was directly taken from the ooc picture.
The focus was set manually with 16x magnification of the live view accurately onto the "COLOR" on the right film cartridge. The electronic shutter was used, the distance sensor to subject was about 3.4 m.
Like in previous comparisons: none of the lenses has real problems to provide a good image, as long the subject is in the center. The Pentax macro is fine already wide open, sharp and contrasty, but is suffers from "purple fringing" in the red area. The border around the "100" is really ugly and it doesn't disappear completely by stopping down. At f22 and f32 the effects of diffraction are clearly visible. At f2.8 the Sigma is less sharp than the Pentax, the contrast from f4 on is very good, but doesn't reach the one of the Pentax. On the other hand, the rendering of the red area is done much better by the Sigma. At f32 the Sigma isn't as bad as the Pentax, but (macro-)photographers should avoid this f-stop anyway.
The Pentax zoom lens is already sharp wide open, but the contrast is low up to f5.6, there is also some glare. The Fujinon turns out well, from f5.6 on it can compete with the macro lenses.
The Pancolar is like expected somewhat soft wide open, quality increases by stopping down, but it doesn't reach a high level. Here the Fujinon is clearly better. At f2 the Jupiter is less contrasty than the Pancolar, otherwise it is similar. However, the longer focal length of the other lenses matters, the writings are about 20% larger and hence better readable.
In the competition of the low-budget lenses the Hanimex is ahead. It is surprisingly good for an 3-element lens. The Steinheil is less contrasty and shows some glare wide open, but is far away from being an optical catastrophy.
The end ones are from the Disney store. The middle ones from Target. I didn't keep the Target ones - they look kind of alien!
Normal skin Limhwa Half Elf (estimated year: 2006-2009) next to tan Supia Rosy (2009). Sorry for the cell phone pics but I'll take better ones at some point.
I have just upgraded my camera from a Fuji S9600 to the new Fuji S100fs and I ran a few comparative tests.
The shot on the left was taken with both cameras set to focal length 300mm, iso 200, hand held at 1/350sec. and I then cropped out the sign on the telegraph pole to compare detail. The sign was 70 yards from my camera.
Conclusion: I have been very pleased with my S9600 over nearly 2 years, I print 16"x12" and have won competitions against the SLR brigade in my local camera club. However the increase in detail and reduction in noise is clearly visible in the image of the sign extreme right and the S100fs wins hands down. The S100 has 11.1m pixels compared with 9m on the S9600, but I guess the increase in quality stems more from the fact that the sensor is physically doubled in size and the lens is better, rather than just the extra 2m pixels.
The Sigma APO 70-210 1:2,8, the Sigma 70-200 1:2,8 HSM-II and the Tamron SP 70-200 1:2,8 (non- USD) on Sony Alpha 58 and 77 MK-II, all images @ 12.800 ISO (yes, it's really dark these days!)
Paprika is a little bit taller than BID but not as big in shoulders, chest and waist.I. LFs clothes looks better on her but she can wear BIDs dresses as well.
Only to compare the betterment of editing a photo with Lightroom! What's your favorite one and why? Thanks for your opinions and advices :-)
Le but ici est uniquement de comparer une photo entre l'original et une retouche avec Lightroom. Suite à cela, je voudrais connaître vos avis sur laquelle des deux versions vous préférez et pour quelle raison. Et merci d'avance pour vos avis et conseils qui peuvent m'aider à m'améliorer :-)