1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

What Brand Of Camera Shot This?

Discussion in 'Scenic, Architecture, and Travel' started by M4/3, Dec 25, 2012.

  1. M4/3

    M4/3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 24, 2011
    Kind of a crazy question, I know, but I saw this photo on the web and liked the way it rendered blue and green colors and so I wondered if anyone might know what brand of camera might have shot it? Or do you think someone used a polarizer on the lens to achieve that look - that hue of blue sky specifically?
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
  2. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    Unless the EXIF is intact, there is no way to know ... Could have been shot raw and post processed with custom presets.
  3. Any number of cameras of any brand could have rendered that.
  4. pxpaulx

    pxpaulx Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 19, 2010
    Yeah not much in the way of dynamic range in that photo - everything is well lit with mid-day sunlight, the sky and clouds are pretty typical of any decent current digital camera.
  5. Omega

    Omega Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 3, 2012
    Almost like asking what model tire made a skid mark on the road. Sorry bro.
  6. ghetto

    ghetto Mu-43 Regular

    actually... you asked which "brand" not which model so there is a lot we can tell assuming the image hasn't been doctored too much.

    If it was a recent DSLR or mirrorless then nikon or pentax, the encoding is the wrong way for canon/olympus/panasonic/fuji (file is using Big-endian).

    It could have also been almost any mobile phone as almost all phones use big-endian.

    As for point and shoots - best guess would also be to assume the same as dslr i.e. nikon or pentax, a few checks show that it's true for at least some olympus/panasonic/canons, but there's just too many variations in p&s's to be sure.

    now unfortunately the image ratio is 4:3 which would seem to indicate either cropping or that it's a p&s or phone... it's pretty rare to purposely crop to 4:3..

    so, my best guess is, it's from a phone... (It's not from an olympus or panasonic m43 which is the only 4:3 ratio non-point&shoot that I'm aware of)

    Also look at the water, unless it's a 100% crop from a dslr/mirrorless camera... the water details are very soft, seems to indicate a phone or a p&s.

    As a matter of fact... if some one looked at the second mast on the left (and the morring post on the walk way), if they knew enough about boats to know if that should be vertical or not, they might be able to even calculate the curvature caused by the lens and tell you which lens was used or possibly which phone has a lens with that curvature. If it were a jpeg oly/panny image that would have been corrected (although admittedly it could be a raw uncorrected image too..)
  7. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    I'd venture it has been made with a camera with a relatively big sensor, µ4/3 or bigger. I'm saying that because the background behind the boat is clearly blurred, a P&S wouldn't do that. That's as far as I have come with my forensic research, EXIF is empty as others have noted :smile:.
  8. pxpaulx

    pxpaulx Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 19, 2010
    Highly doubt it - the background isn't so much blurred as smeared...along with most of the image, which doesn't retain a whole lot of detail overall - and even a P&S would slightly blur the far background at that distance. Unless it was severely down-scaled there is no way this is from an m4/3 camera.
  9. This image looked a LOT better when I first saw it on my phone. On my laptop...not so great.
  10. dwig

    dwig Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jun 26, 2010
    Key West FL
    Since the image has very likely been resized and that the metadata is missing it is almost a certainty that the image has been rewritten by an app other than the original camera's firmware. This makes the "evidence" in the file's encoding meaningless for determining the original camera. It merely points to possible editing apps.
  11. TDP

    TDP Guest

    I can tell you the boat is a Hunter 37' Cherubini Cutter.
  12. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Most relevant info so far. :biggrin:
  13. ghetto

    ghetto Mu-43 Regular

    I wasn't going to say this earlier but... what the heck...

    you know you could always just ask the person who took the photo, I'm pretty sure his name/age/email address/location/job/hobbies/car is plastered all over the interweb... I think he's had an olympus uz800sp for a while but not sure if it was the same timeframe as when the picture was taken.
  14. jyc860923

    jyc860923 Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Feb 28, 2012
    Shenyang, China
    I believe that's due to the use of a polarizer if it's not for any PP that may have involved.

    I'd add some exposure when using a polarizer in a scene like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.