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
|
|||
|
|||
slr vs compact - inherrent image quality?
Hi all, I use a D1X at work and we are hoping to upgrade before long, but it is hard work convincing people..... anyway, I have still been using film at home, 35 mm and medium format, but decided that as I no longer have the ability to print and process my stuff (at work) I would get a digital for home use. A question then. Assuming you put a D1X and a similar resolution digital compact next to each other, on tripods, and photograph the same view at the same time, in light conditions which are generally favourable, is there an inherrent reason why the D1X with the larger piece of glass, is going to produce a better result? Assuming both cameras are in tip-top condition etc etc and the compact allows you to fine tune the exposure. In point of fact with the D1X having less than 5 megapixel and many compacts having 7 plus, is the average compact going to outperform the D1X? I appreciate that in many applications the slr is going to win hands down through its flexibility and range of controls. All the best, Angus Manwaring. (for e-mail remove ANTISPEM) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
slr vs compact - inherrent image quality?
Angus Manwaring wrote: Hi all, I use a D1X at work and we are hoping to upgrade before long, but it is hard work convincing people..... anyway, I have still been using film at home, 35 mm and medium format, but decided that as I no longer have the ability to print and process my stuff (at work) I would get a digital for home use. A question then. Assuming you put a D1X and a similar resolution digital compact next to each other, on tripods, and photograph the same view at the same time, in light conditions which are generally favourable, is there an inherrent reason why the D1X with the larger piece of glass, is going to produce a better result? Yes. In short, there's practical (including cost) limitations to the precision with which you can fabricate a physical object. In most general terms, the larger something is, when it is made to the same approximate [performance] tolerances, the ratio of the base dimension to the tolerance control is effectively a Signal:Noise ratio, where bigger is always better. In point of fact with the D1X having less than 5 megapixel and many compacts having 7 plus, is the average compact going to outperform the D1X? That's a potential example of where "all other factors being equal" may no longer apply, so all bets are off for what the results may be. -hh |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
slr vs compact - inherrent image quality?
"Angus Manwaring" writes:
Hi all, I use a D1X at work and we are hoping to upgrade before long, but it is hard work convincing people..... anyway, I have still been using film at home, 35 mm and medium format, but decided that as I no longer have the ability to print and process my stuff (at work) I would get a digital for home use. A question then. Assuming you put a D1X and a similar resolution digital compact next to each other, on tripods, and photograph the same view at the same time, in light conditions which are generally favourable, is there an inherrent reason why the D1X with the larger piece of glass, is going to produce a better result? Yes. Three, in fact. 1. The imaging sensor is better. It's larger, giving inherently lower noise, and it isn't compromised by having to provide live video readout in addition to still image capture. 2. The glass is better. At least, if you don't put better glass on your DSLR, you're wasting your money. The wide-ratio zooms on P&Ss are not going to give your best performances. 3. The rest of the image processing circuitry is more optimized for quality (and control) and less for convenience and cheapness. Assuming both cameras are in tip-top condition etc etc and the compact allows you to fine tune the exposure. In point of fact with the D1X having less than 5 megapixel and many compacts having 7 plus, is the average compact going to outperform the D1X? Not a snowball's chance in hell. I appreciate that in many applications the slr is going to win hands down through its flexibility and range of controls. You're quite right that that's a separate set of questions and comparisons, and they do too often get confused. -- David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/ Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/ Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
slr vs compact - inherrent image quality?
Assuming both cameras are in tip-top condition etc etc and the compact allows you to fine tune the exposure. In point of fact with the D1X having less than 5 megapixel and many compacts having 7 plus, is the average compact going to outperform the D1X? I appreciate that in many applications the slr is going to win hands down through its flexibility and range of controls. when sensors crossed over 5mp in the smaller sized chips the noise and fringing became a problem. tell them they can get a kodak slr/n for about $2,500 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
slr vs compact - inherrent image quality?
I agree that the SLR result will be probably better, but I doubt that you
can see it. :-) Your main point here is "in light conditions which are generally favourable". The larger SLR sensor has a higher S/N ratio. This is today the main advatange of SLR, better high ISO. At good light, the images are probably identical. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
slr vs compact - inherrent image quality?
Bernd Steyer wrote:
I agree that the SLR result will be probably better, but I doubt that you can see it. :-) Your main point here is "in light conditions which are generally favourable". The larger SLR sensor has a higher S/N ratio. This is today the main advatange of SLR, better high ISO. At good light, the images are probably identical. The lower noise is one aspect. The other huge advantage is the shutter lag is almost non-existent on the SLR. Oh, and don't forget the ability to use different lenses. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
slr vs compact - inherrent image quality?
"SMS" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... The lower noise is one aspect. The other huge advantage is the shutter lag is almost non-existent on the SLR. You mean the faster autofocus of the SLR? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
slr vs compact - inherrent image quality?
"Bernd Steyer" wrote in message ... "SMS" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... The lower noise is one aspect. The other huge advantage is the shutter lag is almost non-existent on the SLR. You mean the faster autofocus of the SLR? Have to agree, my D-SLR is fast to focus but my Sony V1 is almost as fast to take the shot once it has focused. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
slr vs compact - inherrent image quality?
In article n.co.uk,
"Angus Manwaring" wrote: Hi all, I use a D1X at work and we are hoping to upgrade before long, but it is hard work convincing people..... anyway, I have still been using film at home, 35 mm and medium format, but decided that as I no longer have the ability to print and process my stuff (at work) I would get a digital for home use. A question then. Assuming you put a D1X and a similar resolution digital compact next to each other, on tripods, and photograph the same view at the same time, in light conditions which are generally favourable, is there an inherrent reason why the D1X with the larger piece of glass, is going to produce a better result? of course the real world never throws you the ideal situation and that's were the versatility of an SLR will win hands down. one thing no one mentioned is that compacts have such a depth of field, even when zoomed in, that throwing a subject in to relief against a pleasantly blurred back/fore-ground is pretty hard even under ideal conditions. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Image re-sizing | Eos | Digital Photography | 0 | April 1st 05 02:02 PM |
DSLR v Consumer Image quality | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 303 | March 3rd 05 12:56 AM |
8Mp Digital The Theoretical 35mm Quality Equivelant | Matt | Digital Photography | 1144 | December 17th 04 09:48 PM |
Papers for the Epson 2200 - Best image quality | hassy_user | Digital Photography | 7 | September 20th 04 02:07 AM |
Image intensifiers | Richard Knoppow | In The Darkroom | 8 | July 31st 04 04:38 AM |