Side by Side screen comparison: 505 & 700

[tcv]

Originally Posted by Seabound

That does not make much sense to me. The amount of light that reaches the human eye will be the same amount that reaches the camera sensors, [...]

Heheheh. I guess we're just going to all go and see for ourselves considering now that we're debating visual acuity. Nevertheless, I think the quality of the photos (digital or otherwise), could make a difference...

... just not that much of one.

[daffy4u]

Originally Posted by dhbailey

Looking at the third picture, nothing on the 700 is in focus. Even the model name of the 700 is impossible to read. Are you really telling us that even the model name on the 700 is fuzzy? I doubt it.

The camera was focused on the 505, and at that range, of course everything beyond a very narrow depth of field will be out of focus, including the entire world. Are you saying that's Sony's fault?

Perhaps you could simply turn off the camera's flash and take a picture of each one separately, completely in focus, the only thing in the picture and then post those two pictures so that we can see each reader clearly. Taking side-by-side pictures with a point-and-shoot camera isn't really a very good indicator of anything.

Do you feel that's the case with the original pictures that started this thread? The images from both sets seems to agree and the photographers are seeing the same thing with their own eyes.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by daffy4u

Do you feel that's the case with the original pictures that started this thread? The images from both sets seems to agree and the photographers are seeing the same thing with their own eyes.

I am sure from what I've heard and the pics that the 700 has some extra "schmootz" that you have to look through to see the text. It makes sense as it looks like there is a gap between the eInk display glass and the front glass so as to put the lights inside... Sort of like a double-pain window that has argon gas between the pains to raise the R factor.

This said, it also makes sense that side by side the 505 will look a bit brighter. However, for being "fuzzy" I have trouble accepting that. Since display parts are the same the text should be the same and crisp on both.

The question is whether for the features of the touch screen and integrated lights is this ok for the person getting it. I also wonder if you put the 700 next to the 500 which would look better.

BOb

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

I am sure from what I've heard and the pics that the 700 has some extra "schmootz" that you have to look through to see the text.

"schmootz" is the technical term, of course...

as for the rest of your comment, if the extra pane is used to diffuse the light more completely, it might have a texture which would diffuse the display as well, causing it to appear fuzzy and less distinct than an e-ink screen without this additional pane. this is the impression i have.

[astra]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

"schmootz" is the technical term, of course...

as for the rest of your comment, if the extra pane is used to diffuse the light more completely, it might have a texture which would diffuse the display as well, causing it to appear fuzzy and less distinct than an e-ink screen without this additional pane. this is the impression i have.

[FONT=georgia, Times New Roman, Times] Schmootz - [/FONT][FONT=georgia, Times New Roman, Times][/FONT]
[FONT=georgia, Times New Roman, Times]Dirt: It's covered with schmootz.[/FONT]

[zelda_pinwheel]

holy cow, an audio smiley !! hehehe...

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

"schmootz" is the technical term, of course...

Of course. Look it up in Wikitechnica.

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

as for the rest of your comment, if the extra pane is used to diffuse the light more completely, it might have a texture which would diffuse the display as well, causing it to appear fuzzy and less distinct than an e-ink screen without this additional pane. this is the impression i have.

Agreed that is possible. Next time I get to the Mall (not often) with the Sony Store in it I will check it out. I don't think a Target display will be open enough... probably be in a glass display case.

BOb

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

Of course. Look it up in Wikitechnica.

"" yourself...

Agreed that is possible. Next time I get to the Mall (not often) with the Sony Store in it I will check it out. I don't think a Target display will be open enough... probably be in a glass display case.

BOb

oh great, i'll be interested to hear your opinion. bring your 500 to compare in person (do i even need to say that ?).

[astra]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

holy cow, an audio smiley !! hehehe...

Oh my!
I didn't know when I copy&paste

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by astra

Oh my!
I didn't know when I copy&paste

nothing to apologise about, i think it's brilliant ! (and actually funnier now that i know it was inadvertent )

[=X=]

Originally Posted by Seabound

That does not make much sense to me. The amount of light that reaches the human eye will be the same amount that reaches the camera sensors, although eye and camera will have different sensitivities and resolutions.

That is exactly the point I make. The eye has the ability to capture all of that information and register it and compensate without any human awareness. Digital cameras (CCD) have very narrow resolution and low light depth, compared to the human eye.

For instance take a picture of a person standing in front of a window, (on a sunny a day). Prior to taking picture note the individual. Then take a picture. You will see the resulting image have the person look as if they are hidden in a shadow.

Again the same amount of light that enters the human eye enters the camera, but the final image of the camera is far worse than what was seen with the naked eye.
=X=

[ProDigit]

I find Ilike the design of the 700 better, however the screen issue is indeed a bummer.
Add this to the reduced battery life, and the page turn buttons not being large anymore, and I don't really know if I would want a device like this anymore...

One way, the slightly darker screen could actually be beneficial when reading in full sunlight.
I can imagine the pure white on the 505 to hurt your eyes after a while.
However, the fuzzyness so to speak...isn't really nice.

But about the touchscreen, if it really has a sensor above the screen you probably don't need to touch the screen (since it would register a touch a few millimeters above the screen). Can anyone verify this?

The screen issue leads me to believe, that it does use a soft plastic layer (soft touch) on top of the screen.. If it does, that could explain the darker and a slightly 'blurrier' screen; or uses a micro small rasterized glass front(hardtouch).That could explain the darker screen.

That'd be if they meant the extra layer to be used as touchscreen.

On the other hand, the plastic/glass layer could also be a screen protecter,to protect the screen from hard presses done when using the touchscreen.

Also in this case, removing it would not be wise.

whenever anyone gets a chance to play with it,please let us know!

[shopintheusa]

Originally Posted by dhbailey

Looking at the third picture, nothing on the 700 is in focus. Even the model name of the 700 is impossible to read. Are you really telling us that even the model name on the 700 is fuzzy? I doubt it.

The camera was focused on the 505, and at that range, of course everything beyond a very narrow depth of field will be out of focus, including the entire world. Are you saying that's Sony's fault?

Perhaps you could simply turn off the camera's flash and take a picture of each one separately, completely in focus, the only thing in the picture and then post those two pictures so that we can see each reader clearly. Taking side-by-side pictures with a point-and-shoot camera isn't really a very good indicator of anything.

2 of the pictures were just to point out the glare problem.....not the fuzzy problem.

I can see my reflection on the screen of the 700 when I read. This is very annoying. You cannot see your reflection at all on the 505.

[MerLock]

I was wondering if anyone could get a shot of the PRS 700, 505 and 500 side by side. I wonder how the PRS 700 fairs against the 500 in terms of contrast.

[johnnyr]

Originally Posted by dhbailey

Looking at the third picture, nothing on the 700 is in focus. Even the model name of the 700 is impossible to read. Are you really telling us that even the model name on the 700 is fuzzy? I doubt it.

The camera was focused on the 505, and at that range, of course everything beyond a very narrow depth of field will be out of focus, including the entire world. Are you saying that's Sony's fault?

Perhaps you could simply turn off the camera's flash and take a picture of each one separately, completely in focus, the only thing in the picture and then post those two pictures so that we can see each reader clearly. Taking side-by-side pictures with a point-and-shoot camera isn't really a very good indicator of anything.

I was skeptical as well, untilI went to a Sony store and saw it for myself. The difference was instantly noticeable. I would never buy a 700, given that I've seen what the 505 looks like, or even the kindle. The 700's screen is simply not nearly as enjoyable to read.

Also, I'd like to note that I don't own a reader yet, so I had no "bias" going in. They had the 505, and the 700 next to eachother. having only seen the kindle before, I thought the 700 screen was terrible compared to either the 505, or the kindle.

It was dull, fuzzy, and the text was muc harder to read. I could see myself getting eye strain very easily using the 700 screen. The lights and touchsceen are awesome, but the most important thing for me in a "reader" is how easy and enjoyable it is to "read".