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
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR v Consumer Image quality
I am in the category of having changed from film slr to consumer
digital for the last 3 years. I am dithering over purchasing a dslr, because image quality is my thing. However, I have been pretty pleased with Nikon and Panasonic Lumix FZ consumer cameras, especially the latter. Considering only image quality, up to A4 prints. DSLR users talk about their superior image quality, but when I go to say, Steves Digicams, and compare on-screen a 200% enlargement of the same image, far greater than real life, I see very little difference in quality between a D70 and a FZ20. Giving up the portability of a consumer camera for a far more expensive DSLR system (my film lenses are Olympus and I'm not impressed with the E300).......is the image quality worth the difference? Or better to wait a year or two yet? DonB |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Its got me wondering...What the replacement will be from Sony..In regards to
the-F828....If they can harness the noise...Should be a great camera...So I'd wait...And the Canon-350...Could be a winner... -- _________________- BOCH ________________ A+TECH _________ wrote in message oups.com... I am in the category of having changed from film slr to consumer digital for the last 3 years. I am dithering over purchasing a dslr, because image quality is my thing. However, I have been pretty pleased with Nikon and Panasonic Lumix FZ consumer cameras, especially the latter. Considering only image quality, up to A4 prints. DSLR users talk about their superior image quality, but when I go to say, Steves Digicams, and compare on-screen a 200% enlargement of the same image, far greater than real life, I see very little difference in quality between a D70 and a FZ20. Giving up the portability of a consumer camera for a far more expensive DSLR system (my film lenses are Olympus and I'm not impressed with the E300).......is the image quality worth the difference? Or better to wait a year or two yet? DonB |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... I am in the category of having changed from film slr to consumer digital for the last 3 years. I am dithering over purchasing a dslr, because image quality is my thing. However, I have been pretty pleased with Nikon and Panasonic Lumix FZ consumer cameras, especially the latter. Considering only image quality, up to A4 prints. DSLR users talk about their superior image quality, but when I go to say, Steves Digicams, and compare on-screen a 200% enlargement of the same image, far greater than real life, I see very little difference in quality between a D70 and a FZ20. Giving up the portability of a consumer camera for a far more expensive DSLR system (my film lenses are Olympus and I'm not impressed with the E300).......is the image quality worth the difference? Or better to wait a year or two yet? DonB If you can't see the difference, or consider it not worthwhile, then I would keep waiting.... For me DSLR offers more than just the quality difference there's also the flexibility of the system, just like SLR's in the film world, but if you don't need it then save your money etc... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On 22 Feb 2005 11:40:49 -0800, wrote:
I am in the category of having changed from film slr to consumer digital for the last 3 years. I am dithering over purchasing a dslr, because image quality is my thing. However, I have been pretty pleased with Nikon and Panasonic Lumix FZ consumer cameras, especially the latter. Considering only image quality, up to A4 prints. DSLR users talk about their superior image quality, but when I go to say, Steves Digicams, and compare on-screen a 200% enlargement of the same image, far greater than real life, I see very little difference in quality between a D70 and a FZ20. Giving up the portability of a consumer camera for a far more expensive DSLR system (my film lenses are Olympus and I'm not impressed with the E300).......is the image quality worth the difference? Or better to wait a year or two yet? You've answered your own question about image quality. If you can't tell the difference, then what's the issue? I disagree with you on quality, even at ISO-80 that thing is much more noisy than a DSLR. See the noise in the blue sky: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_...s/p1010069.jpg Compare to a Canon DSLR, the 10D at ISO-100: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...s/IMG_0082.JPG The other big difference between the DLSR and FZ20 is interchangeable lenses, so ask yourself, are you going to ever need this? I love my 300 on the D70 (it becomes a 450mm) which isn't much further than the FZ20's 35mm eq. effective 432mm. On the other end, you'll be limited to effective 36mm. Problem for some, not for others. -- Owamanga! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Under most conditions you would have a hard time telling an 8 x 10
print from one form the other. How ever there is much more to it then just that, there are lighting conditions that just drive the F828 nuts and it is hard to get a really great photos, I have not had this problem with the 20D. But then you have to think about what kind of photos you are going to be taking and when. If you need a long lens then you need a DSLR, if you are going to be shooting in low light then you need a DSLR. The 20D produces a lot more detail then the F828 and both are 8 MP, so I can make larger prints from the 20D before they will start to look soft. Finally there is the fun factor, it is a lot more fun to take photos with a camera that shoots with no delay, just push the button and you have the photos. Scott |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Scott W" wrote in message oups.com... Under most conditions you would have a hard time telling an 8 x 10 print from one form the other. How ever there is much more to it then just that, there are lighting conditions that just drive the F828 nuts and it is hard to get a really great photos, I have not had this problem with the 20D. But then you have to think about what kind of photos you are going to be taking and when. If you need a long lens then you need a DSLR, if you are going to be shooting in low light then you need a DSLR. The 20D produces a lot more detail then the F828 and both are 8 MP, so I can make larger prints from the 20D before they will start to look soft. Finally there is the fun factor, it is a lot more fun to take photos with a camera that shoots with no delay, just push the button and you have the photos. There's something to be said for this. While I'm still learning the ins and outs of my D70, I'm thrilled with the lack of shutter delay. It feels and acts just like my 35mm cameras. With my point and shoot digital I could go out and have lunch while it focused and "finally" tripped the shutter. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... is the image quality worth the difference? Ken Rockwell, on his website, has an informative article about this. He maintains that the non-interchangeable-lens cameras are essentially ported over from the manufacturers' video lineup, and that if one were to spend an equal amount on a consumer digicam vs. a DSLR, the DSLR would give better performance. He writes, "Even the most expensive and exotic camera that is not a true SLR is going to be slow and a pain to use. Many expensive digital cameras are still just very complex point-and-shoot cameras that take way too long to do anything." I personally use a consumer digicam and it meets my needs. I still use 35mm and MF when I require focal length lenses that are outside of my digicam's zoom range, or when I want the higher resolution of film. Here is the URL for the full article: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/2dig.htm |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Epson R800 versus 2200 image quality | Ben Kaufman | Digital Photography | 0 | December 31st 04 05:26 AM |
Digicam Video Quality vs. Camcorders, Camcorder Image Quality vs Digicams | Richard Lee | Digital Photography | 21 | August 23rd 04 07:04 PM |
Sigma wins image quality challenge. Bayer user in disbelief. | Georgette Preddy | Digital Photography | 3 | August 7th 04 01:48 PM |
digital cameras and flash = poor image quality?? | michaelb | Digital Photography | 25 | July 3rd 04 08:35 AM |
still image quality | paul flynn | Digital Photography | 1 | June 28th 04 11:07 PM |