If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How many pixels???? Help!! SLR versus Digital
I once owned a SLR camera - an olympus OM10 - which took really good
shots but was heavy! I now have a nikon coolpix 3100. My old camera took better pictures and I was wondering how many pixels did the old SLR camera's have?? my coolpix is 3.2 effective megapixels I am wondering if I invested in a 4 or 5 megapixels would it be up to the same quality as my old camera? thanks! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
dmcd wrote:
I once owned a SLR camera - an olympus OM10 - which took really good shots but was heavy! I now have a nikon coolpix 3100. My old camera took better pictures and I was wondering how many pixels did the old SLR camera's have?? my coolpix is 3.2 effective megapixels I am wondering if I invested in a 4 or 5 megapixels would it be up to the same quality as my old camera? thanks! This is quite a topic....I used to believe that a full 35mm film frame was about 20 Mp, However Chemical and digital photographies use different mechanisms for producing prints, and the camera lens is probably the most important factor above around 6 Mp, followed by the printer. What are "better" pictures, are we talking sharpness, saturation, colour accuracy, or what?. I have found that digital can use longer exposure times if left in point & shoot mode, so a good shooting stance is more important. Sharpness you can't do much about, other than using best pixel count and a steady hand, the others can be addressed in any competent photo edit program. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
dmcd wrote:
I once owned a SLR camera - an olympus OM10 - which took really good shots but was heavy! I now have a nikon coolpix 3100. My old camera took better pictures and I was wondering how many pixels did the old SLR camera's have?? my coolpix is 3.2 effective megapixels I am wondering if I invested in a 4 or 5 megapixels would it be up to the same quality as my old camera? thanks! The OM10 had 0 mega pixels! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"dmcd" schreef in bericht om... I once owned a SLR camera - an olympus OM10 - which took really good shots but was heavy! I now have a nikon coolpix 3100. My old camera took better pictures and I was wondering how many pixels did the old SLR camera's have?? my coolpix is 3.2 effective megapixels I am wondering if I invested in a 4 or 5 megapixels would it be up to the same quality as my old camera? thanks! I think you have to handle your new digital camera better. It's less weight, then possible you shake the camera when shooting. Also it's a compact-camera and no reflex. I don't know the Coolpix, I have a Canon A75 with 3,2 Mp, also a compact , but with al lot possibilities of manual attitudes. I am very satisfied of this camera, but I could use more optical zoom then 3x optical zoom I have now. Also there's a Stitch or Panorama-function on my camera, and with this I can make photo's with many more than 3 Mp ! The Mp only says something about how big you can print your photo, not about the quality. It takes some more time between shooting and the photo with a lot of digitals, so you need a quiet hand or with less light a tripod. ( Some other digitals have solved this problem now). And trie out al the posibilities from your camera, you can see immediately the result and it cost you nothing ! I also use a nice program for optimalize my photo's on the computer, I got this with my Canon scanner : ArcSoft PhotoStudio 5 (it looks like PaintShoppro) . In fact this is a doca on the computer. To see your digital photo on paper you have the choose between a printer or a digital photoshop. A good photo-printer is expensive, so I sent my photo's to a shop, these photo's have often a better protection for light. Before I look with a cheaper printer how it looks on paper, because colours can look different (lighter)on the monitor then on paper. I also have a Minolta reflex, and I find it also too heavy to carry on my long walks. But often I had made even better photo's with a good compact analoge camera (very pity that it was stolen), that I used before my digital, then with my reflex ! Succes ! Thank you..........that is really good advice. Dorothy |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to Buy a Digital Camera | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 0 | January 18th 05 03:39 PM |
Digital quality (vs 35mm): Any real answers? | Toralf | Digital Photography | 213 | July 28th 04 06:30 PM |
Digital Video | Dave Haynie | Digital Photography | 1 | July 1st 04 03:18 AM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? | Michael Weinstein, M.D. | In The Darkroom | 13 | January 24th 04 09:51 PM |
Lost Your Digital Pictures? Recover Them - Are you a professional photographer w corrupt digital images, an end user with missing photos? | eProvided.com | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | September 5th 03 06:47 PM |