Is the best camera 100% sealed ?

DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses. Does it make more
sense to get a fully sealed camera with a good 10X zoom lens instead?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

ArtKramr wrote:
DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses. Does it
make more sense to get a fully sealed camera with a good 10X zoom
lens instead?

To me, yes, but lack of dust problems would not be the most important
reason. Size, weight, portability and cost would be in there (assuming
image quality is not compromised).

Cheers,
David

ArtKramr wrote:
DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses. Does it
make more sense to get a fully sealed camera with a good 10X zoom
lens instead?

To me, yes, but lack of dust problems would not be the most important
reason. Size, weight, portability and cost would be in there (assuming
image quality is not compromised).

Cheers,
David

(ArtKramr) writes:

DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses. Does it
make more sense to get a fully sealed camera with a good 10X zoom
lens instead?

I don't think so; far too limiting. Just shooting casually around the
Renaissance festival Saturday I used lenses from 17mm to 300mm (before
applying crop factor)
http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/2004/09110-Renfest/. If
I could afford it I'd have a wider lens. A couple of weeks earlier I
stacked a 1.5x teleconverter on a 500mm, so 750mm before crop factor
http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/gallery/Familiar%20Places/
(specifically the heron picture). A 10x zoom would be *far* too
limiting; and probably slow, as well. I'm at f2.8 out to 300mm.

Instead, I've learned to clean the sensor (which I probably need to do
again).
--
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/

(ArtKramr) writes:

DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses. Does it
make more sense to get a fully sealed camera with a good 10X zoom
lens instead?

I don't think so; far too limiting. Just shooting casually around the
Renaissance festival Saturday I used lenses from 17mm to 300mm (before
applying crop factor)
http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/2004/09110-Renfest/. If
I could afford it I'd have a wider lens. A couple of weeks earlier I
stacked a 1.5x teleconverter on a 500mm, so 750mm before crop factor
http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/gallery/Familiar%20Places/
(specifically the heron picture). A 10x zoom would be *far* too
limiting; and probably slow, as well. I'm at f2.8 out to 300mm.

Instead, I've learned to clean the sensor (which I probably need to do
again).
--
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/

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses.
Does it make more sense to get a fully sealed camera with a
good 10X zoom lens instead?

Depends on the lens. If it is not constructed well, it will act as a
dust pump.

Bart

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses.
Does it make more sense to get a fully sealed camera with a
good 10X zoom lens instead?

Depends on the lens. If it is not constructed well, it will act as a
dust pump.

Bart

ArtKramr wrote:
DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses. Does it make more
sense to get a fully sealed camera with a good 10X zoom lens instead?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer


I am sure the DSLR fanatics will disagree, but:

The main strength of SLR cameras has alway been that when you focus, and
compose the image, you are seeing exactly what the film will see. Since
the sensor in ALL digital cameras provides the image you see on the LCD,
any digital camera with a display is a DSLR, it just doesn't need a
mirror to redirect the image, since it falls on the analog of the film
in a film camera. Given that I can get that same image, expanded to
about 2 inches in newer compact cameras LCDs, that an SLR will deliver
to the film, I can't see what an SLR has over even a compact digital
camera. That said, I haven't seen any focus mechanisms that work like
those in a film SLR, for those who feel they just HAVE to do that chore
for themselves. Also, DSLR cameras are quite a bit larger than
compacts, and thus can have more bells and whistles added, weigh more,
and take up a LOT more space. Those who need interchangeable lenses,
and those who want to awe everyone with that foot long lens, will feel
much better with the larger camera. I suspect that the pictures will be
much the same.

ArtKramr wrote:
DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses. Does it make more
sense to get a fully sealed camera with a good 10X zoom lens instead?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer


I am sure the DSLR fanatics will disagree, but:

The main strength of SLR cameras has alway been that when you focus, and
compose the image, you are seeing exactly what the film will see. Since
the sensor in ALL digital cameras provides the image you see on the LCD,
any digital camera with a display is a DSLR, it just doesn't need a
mirror to redirect the image, since it falls on the analog of the film
in a film camera. Given that I can get that same image, expanded to
about 2 inches in newer compact cameras LCDs, that an SLR will deliver
to the film, I can't see what an SLR has over even a compact digital
camera. That said, I haven't seen any focus mechanisms that work like
those in a film SLR, for those who feel they just HAVE to do that chore
for themselves. Also, DSLR cameras are quite a bit larger than
compacts, and thus can have more bells and whistles added, weigh more,
and take up a LOT more space. Those who need interchangeable lenses,
and those who want to awe everyone with that foot long lens, will feel
much better with the larger camera. I suspect that the pictures will be
much the same.

David J Taylor wrote:
ArtKramr wrote:

DSLR's usually get dust on the sensor when changing lenses. Does it
make more sense to get a fully sealed camera with a good 10X zoom
lens instead?


To me, yes, but lack of dust problems would not be the most important
reason. Size, weight, portability and cost would be in there (assuming
image quality is not compromised).

Cheers,
David


Unless one is in a really nasty environment, it should be possible to
change a lens without getting dust on the sensor. The same problem
surely plagues film SLRs and their mirrors. I would think that a few
workable solutions have been found to this problem.