A&P why is a lower mp SLR camera better than an higher mp non-slr

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by smell my finger, Oct 9, 2003.

  1. smell my finger

    smell my finger strive nonetheless towards beauty and truth,

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2001
    Messages:
    74,519
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    nyc
    im thinking specifically of hte new sony 8mp camera, why would the image quality be better from a 5 or 6 mp SLR camera ?
     
  2. Valence

    Valence Gustav Refugee

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    12,878
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Focus, depth of field, zoom to name a few
     
  3. Davan

    Davan Guest

    i think it all comes down to what you are doing with the camera. what will you be using it for.
     
  4. smell my finger

    smell my finger strive nonetheless towards beauty and truth,

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2001
    Messages:
    74,519
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    nyc
    a variety of things, but all amature. defintally looking for a camera that you can blow the prints up to a larger size, pictures from vactions and such. something that will work well outside, various lighting conditions, good detail.

    will a higher mp count, or a lower mp but SLR be able to print out with more detail in large picture format ?


    the focus will be sharper? im guessing the depth of field will be greater.. how will it affect zoom?

    will a DSLR camera have less 'junk' in the picture (artifacts, chromatic aberation..ect) even though the detail may not be as good?
     
  5. redna

    redna New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    2,614
    Likes Received:
    0
    The ability to controll focus, ISO, f stop, shutter speed, etc. It takes a little more work to know what those things do but they are well worth learning as you can get some really cool effects with them if you know how to use them right that you could never get from a P&S camera.

    The Zoom will be dependant upon the lense you use but that is the great thing about SLr, you can use any lense that fits enabling you to get something with a HUGE zoom as opposed to the 3X-8X optical that most P&S cameras have.
     
  6. smell my finger

    smell my finger strive nonetheless towards beauty and truth,

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2001
    Messages:
    74,519
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    nyc

    i can do all that with my coolpix 5000 and it isn't a slr :dunno: i know the differences between point and shoot and more advanced ones, but im asking about a 'regular' higher end digital camera at 8mp (that has the features you mentioned) and an DSLR at 5 or 6 mp
     
  7. 67olds442

    67olds442 uhhhh

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Messages:
    954
    Likes Received:
    0
  8. smell my finger

    smell my finger strive nonetheless towards beauty and truth,

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2001
    Messages:
    74,519
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    nyc
    :cool:

    so do DSLR camera's generally have larger sensors in them ?

    would that be one of the main differences ?
     
  9. 67olds442

    67olds442 uhhhh

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Messages:
    954
    Likes Received:
    0

    ya that would be my gusses as most DSLR's are more for high end ameature/prof (usually). Believe the D30, and the 10D (and the 300D) all have around the same size sensor, which is a good amount bigger then a other digitial cameras..

    Also have to consider optics, you could have a 15MB (of decent size, not a small one) sensor behind a shity lens and it would look like crap, put that same sensor behind a good lens and it could look fantastic.

    And with an DSLR you can get some REALLY nice glass, with other digitials your stuck.
     
  10. desert mist

    desert mist Guest

    Basically, its apples and oranges although its not common knowledge.

    As I understand it, most digicams use ccd sensors to capture the light from the lenses. These sensors are smaller and generally a great compromise of size and quality.

    Most DSLR cameras however use a CMOS sensor. These sensors are larger and without dispute, capture more light leading to sharper images. If you look at some of the images from the Canon 10D vs. F717/G5 you will see that the differences are greater than the 1MP difference. The CMOS sensor is incredibly sharp. Even D30/D60 images look better than most digicams and they are several years old.

    The largest benefit is the amount light needed for comparable shots. I believe I read that there is a 4 stop difference between cameras using similar lenses. I don't have the link readily available but the topic has been discussed ad nosum at DPReview.com. This is a huge difference not to be understated. If all other factors were even, this alone would lead to better pictures.

    In addition to more available light, DSLR's have more lense choices and faster ISO speeds available to them than digicams. These benefits just make the difference even greater.

    If you want to compare the results yourself, check out good photography sites like DPreview.com or photosig.com. They have some amazing photogs there.

    But I have to say that aunt Jenny and cousin Mark probably won't see any difference when you show them the family photo album. If you are a pro, enter contests or regularly blow up huge shots for your wall you will see the difference.
     
  11. Valence

    Valence Gustav Refugee

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    12,878
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Canon Rebel Digital SLR = :cool:
     
  12. Kronos

    Kronos Guest

    Canon Rebel Digital SLR = LOW END DIGITAL SLR. You might as well save your money and buy a G3 and a Rebel Ti and have two cameras.

    If you MUST go canon, at least go with the 10D. If you must go Nikon go with the D100. I'm guessing since you're asking about the new Sony F828 you're not in the market for a Canon 1D or Nikon D1x.

    But I WOULD definately buy a Digital Rebel BEFORE I'd buy any Sony digital camera if I was serious about the final image.
     
  13. Valence

    Valence Gustav Refugee

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    12,878
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Texas
    Only problem with the 10d is the price. 1500 bucks WITHOUT a lens. Why film slr is better now, because they are cheaper. Drawback is paying for film development, and scanners and the like. I hate point and shoot digital cameras. I looove high quality slr digital. :yum: I just can't afford one :wtc:
     
  14. jinushaun

    jinushaun New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    60,739
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA, USA
    Lense

    That's what it's all about. It really what determines that quality and clarity of a photograph. The lense usually makes the camera.

    Also, dSLRs have better sensors. No shutter lag. Faster response. More accurate colour reproduction. Filters.
     
  15. jinushaun

    jinushaun New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    60,739
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA, USA
    Hahaha! :rofl: Buying a camera based on its price as an indicator of 'quality'. As if low end implies low quality.

    The 300D is basically a crippled 10D for all intents and purposes. And the features that they did removed is probably used by only 10% of the digital photographers. Most of the price savings comes from the plastic body and a cheaper manufacturing process.
     
  16. Kronos

    Kronos Guest

    To me LOW END = LOW QUALITY they mean the same. BUT LOW PRICE does not neccesarily equal LOW QUALITY. See what I mean?

    I didn't say the camera was low end because of it's price. Part of what you said is why I think it's low end "Its a crippled version of the 10D" Also because it is really cheap feeling because of the cheaper manufacturing process.

    I didn't say more $$ always equals a better camera. I'm saying the 10D is a much better camera than the Digital Rebel. LOW END does imply LOW QUALITY. LOW PRICE however DOES NOT imply LOW QUALITY, I think this is what you meant and I 100% agree with you.

    For a list of exactly what features are crippled go here and scroll about half way down : 300D Review 17 Custom settings, 9 frame buffer (vs 4 in digi-rebel) and a magnesium alloy body are not things that only 10% of users will appreciate. If you're serious about photography the extra money is well spent on stepping up to this camera. If you're just a weekender who's going to shoot the occasional family get-together or whatever then yes the 300D is probably enough camera for you and spending >$1500 for a camera probably isn't the smartest way to spend your money.
     
  17. TypeSDragoon

    TypeSDragoon Guest

    Lens

    that's how you spell it

    there is no "e" at the end of it :)
     
  18. Joe

    Joe 2015 :x: OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2002
    Messages:
    116,621
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    nocal
    high price != high quality... kodak's dslr for example...
     
  19. smell my finger

    smell my finger strive nonetheless towards beauty and truth,

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2001
    Messages:
    74,519
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    nyc

    dpreview.com also said the rebel picture quality was basically the same as 10D :dunno:
     
  20. jinushaun

    jinushaun New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    60,739
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA, USA
    Yes. I'm just not very eloquent.

    I was addressing the tone at which you referred to the 300D--as if it was a plague to be avoided.
     
  21. jinushaun

    jinushaun New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    60,739
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Capitol Hill, Seattle, WA, USA
    For some reason, I've always spelled it 'lense'. Kinda of like I've always spelled catalog as catalogue. :dunno: It's valid in Webster, though not Oxford.
     
  22. Kronos

    Kronos Guest

    No, that would be the Sony! ;)
     

Share This Page