|
Dave, the Z5 still bests the XR in overall low light image and color retention. It still is amazing to see the Z5 pop on in low light and retain such a high quality image. Yes, there is some noise, but not objectional noise. The XR has that velvety look and the color holds up pretty decently, but it still is not quite up to the Z5...but hey, look at that price difference!
To me the fact that the XR can do as well as it does against the Z5, is nothing short of miraculous.
Tonight I was looking at the Best Buy clips of the XR vs the HS-10, and the difference in in-camera sharpening was very clear (no pun intended). On my Pioneer Kuro I was able to up the sharpness to +8 with still no sign of ringing or edge enhancement. Yet with the Canon, an increase of about +3 began to show definite signs of edge enhancement. I'd still like to get my hands on an HS-10 to do more comprehensive A/B tests in a wider variety of shooting conditions.
So it's pretty clear to me that Sony was conservative in how they set up the XR. I'm not sure I agree with their philosophy, since I think there's plenty of room for them to have added a bit of extra in-camera sharpness without any ill-effects. This might have brought about more favorable comparisons from the media reviewers who don't take the time to look for such things or to determine how much 'headroom' a camera has.
When you bring up the sharpness on your display when viewing XR footage, you really can add some extra 'pop' without any ill-effects whatsoever. With many other cams you can't get away with that at all.
Going back to the CCI review, does anyone else find it incredible that they payed so little attention to the exceptional OIS on the XR??
|