$230 12MP camera?

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Travis, Nov 25, 2007.

  1. Travis

    Travis Guest

    I was looking in a London Drugs flyer and saw a 12 megapixel Kodak
    Z1275 camera (easyshare) for $230. I thought it was a misprint and
    checked Kodak, but it really is 12 MP.

    I guess I'm slow on times, since weren't 12 MP camera $1200 + before?
    What are the high end cameras costing now? Do they have 30MP cameras
    that are the NEW 12 MP?

    Plus, there was an Olympus Evolt-510 Digital SLR for $659 .... but it
    was only 10 MP , what's with the huge price difference, I mean, it IS
    an SLR ... thinking about it ... is it the 12 MP SLR's that are in the
    $1200 price range?

    Btw, what company is the best for Digital SLRs with the 8+ MP range, I
    might need one for a trip soon. (Would it be worth it to buy a camera
    in Japan, would cameras that are not released in North America be
    cheaper there?)
     
    Travis, Nov 25, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Travis wrote:
    []
    Visit your local shop and hold the Canon and Nikon models in your hands.
    See which suits you better. Perhaps also try the Pentax and Sony. What
    camera feels best to you? I would suggest not getting a 4/3 camera
    (Olympus, Panasonic?), as these are almost as big and heavy as a
    conventional DSLR, but have a smaller sensor which means more noise or a
    lower ISO. My choice was the 6MP Nikon D40 - a very cost-effective camera
    which meets my modest needs. Good images even at ISO 1600. Excellent,
    low-cost lenses as well.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 25, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Travis

    RichA Guest

    "B-b-but it only has SIX megapixels!!!"

    "I NEED all TWELVE megapixels, and they HAVE to come from a 1/2.5"
    sensor!!!"""
     
    RichA, Nov 25, 2007
    #3
  4. Travis

    Scubabix Guest

    The smaller, cheaper camera can image 12Mp, but, it's usually through a
    cheaper, lower quality lens and a MUCH slower processor. If you don't mind
    cycle times measured in seconds instead of fractions of a second, they're
    ok.
    You must be trying to start a brand war with that question, just kidding.
    Read David's post about how to choose the SLR that's right for you. As far
    as cameras purchase outside the US, service and warranty questions pop up.
    If it's a model not sold in the US, you would very possibly be required to
    send it to a location that it was sold for service.
    One last thing, don't get caught up in MegaPixel envy. Unless you are
    intending to print large posters of your images, 8Mp is more than enough.
    You can find last years 8-10Mp cameras quite reasonably priced compared to
    the new 12Mp models.
    Rob
     
    Scubabix, Nov 25, 2007
    #4
  5. Travis

    ASAAR Guest

    Are you really sure that you need them? This was about megapixels
    after all, not meganeurons, which would be another matter entirely.
     
    ASAAR, Nov 25, 2007
    #5
  6. Travis

    Doug Jewell Guest

    And if it's a non-slr camera (which at $230 it would have to
    be), the tiny sensors don't really resolve at the full 12MP
    anyway. Very likely that there'll be no discernable
    difference between a similar 6MP and the 12MP models. On
    compact cameras, Megapixels is now just a marketing wank,
    and no real indication of image quality.
     
    Doug Jewell, Nov 25, 2007
    #6
  7. Travis

    frederick Guest


    The camera model referenced has a sensel size of 1.9
    microns. The airy disk diameter at widest aperture (f2.8 at
    minimum focal length) is double that at 3.8 microns.
    It only goes downhill as focal length is increased or
    aperture size is reduced.

    That's even before noise and the effect of noise reduction
    on resolution is considered.
     
    frederick, Nov 25, 2007
    #7
  8. Which does mean that the need for an anti-alias filter is reduced....

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 26, 2007
    #8
  9. Travis

    John Adams Guest

    John Adams, Nov 27, 2007
    #9
  10. Look at the Nikon D40x, the Canon 40D, and the Canon EOS400D (xTI).
    Probably no cheaper in Japan.

    Stay away from the Olympus digital SLRs because they use a smaller
    sensor and are noisier.
     
    SMS 斯蒂文• å¤, Nov 27, 2007
    #10
  11. I'm sorry, but I think the Olympus dSLR's and other Four-Thirds cameras
    are excelent. Read the reviews and look at images. I'm very happy with
    my 6Mp Olympus e-330. (BTW, I'm also very happy with my Nikon and my
    accumulated-over-the-years Nikkor glass.)

    I suspect you can't go far wrong with a dSLR today.

    -=- Rick
     
    Richard Karash, Nov 27, 2007
    #11
  12. Travis

    John Adams Guest

    John Adams, Nov 28, 2007
    #12
  13. To me, the Olympus images appear to have more noise than the Nikon. Look
    at the lower left of the big bottle. A poor subject to test noise with,
    though.

    The Olympus images also appear to be either better focussed, to have a
    poorer anti-alias filter, or to have more sharpening applied to them. To
    me, the Olympus image look over-sharpened (which then introduces
    uncertainties into the noise comparison). The Nikon image has noticeably
    more saturation, the red at the bottom of the image.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 28, 2007
    #13
  14. Travis

    Doug Jewell Guest

    Agree that the Olympus looks better in the first shot - but
    the difference could be the lens, or could be differences in
    the level of sharpening.
    Now go to the drop down list and choose "Barbie, detail
    without flash". The Nikon is at ISO 3200, the Olympus is
    only at ISO 800. Despite the ISO on the Nikon being 4x the
    Olympus, they are about the same as far as noise. The Nikon
    colouring looks better too.
     
    Doug Jewell, Nov 28, 2007
    #14
  15. Travis

    Doug Jewell Guest

    Actually, I wouldn't put a lot of faith in that site. Just
    looked at a few other cameras, and it appears they don't
    make much effort to ensure the cameras are shooting in
    consistent settings. I picked a few cameras at random, and
    they all had the main scene rendered at different sizes, and
    the main scene seems to change quite a bit too.
    If they can't maintain consistency in the scene, how are we
    to know if they are using comparable camera settings? Other
    than the barbie without flash, they don't say what ISO, what
    white balance setting, what lens, what aperture, what
    shutter speed etc, they have taken the photo with.
     
    Doug Jewell, Nov 28, 2007
    #15
  16. Travis

    Chris Savage Guest

    I've poked around trying to find some kind of explanation of their test
    rationales. I can't find anything.

    Now I'm no Ken Rockwell^W^W rocket scientist but even I know that tests
    performed without published, repeatable testing methods are no tests at all.
    And whatever result it is you're trying to compare is worthless without
    consistency in the method.
     
    Chris Savage, Nov 28, 2007
    #16
  17. Travis

    John Adams Guest

    Yea, but I don't shoot at high ISO so for my money the E510 is better.
     
    John Adams, Nov 28, 2007
    #17
  18. Travis

    John Adams Guest

    Well, regardless of their testing methods I still agree with their
    bottom line so I don't think the smaller sensor means all that much in
    the end, especially considering it is quite a bit cheaper than what
    Nikon and Canon offers in this range.

    "The E-510 is the most complete general public reflex: stabilization,
    anti-dust, LCD aiming, and 10 MP. With excellent ergonomics and very
    good image quality, this camera rivals and sometimes surpasses the
    current leaders, the Canon 400D and Nikon D40x."
     
    John Adams, Nov 28, 2007
    #18
  19. Travis

    Doug Jewell Guest

    A testing method without consistency, is no test at all. I
    could very easily make a $99 :&S look better than a $10000
    SLR, simply by having a poor combination of shutter,
    aperture, ISO & white balance.
    How do we know that in that first shot, the focus point was
    set the same? How do we know that the softness in the Nikon
    wasn't because it was shot wide open, while the Olympus was
    stopped down? How do we know the softness isn't because for
    whatever reason it didn't focus accurately? As much as
    dpreview is biased, at least with their tests they try to
    ensure consistency in camera settings.
    I have no doubt that most of the above is true, but what is
    also true is that in some circumstances (and ISO above 200
    is one), the Nikon and Canon wipe the floor with the
    Olympus. The testing site that you linked to doesn't provide
    enough information to truly make the comparison. There is
    only one shot where they post information about the camera
    settings, and that is barbie detail without flash. Here the
    Nikon is tested at ISO 3200, the Olympus at ISO 800. I
    noticed the K10D was at ISO 100 - that is no way to make
    comparisons. In a lot of the shots, the image size is
    different - how can you compare sharpness between 2 images
    where the subject is at different sizes? What you say about
    the E510 may be true, but that site doesn't provide proof of
    the matter.
     
    Doug Jewell, Nov 28, 2007
    #19
  20.  
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Nov 30, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.