Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Evaluating Beginner DSLRs, and concern over their rumored demise
Page <<first <prev 10 of 12 next> last>>
Jul 15, 2019 12:30:06   #
Retina Loc: Near Charleston,SC
 
nikonnate wrote:
I wanna see your professor's math:


1976 to 2019: 43 years

365 days per year

10 photos per day

(43 x 365 x 10) + (4 x 11 leap years x 10) = about 157,000.

By that, my D850 is gonna last me a LONG time. I'm just about to its 1 yr old point and it's only at 3500 actuations.

(21 million photos in those years is around 500,000 a year, or about 1350 photos per day. That's 100/ hour for most folks' normal waking hours sans eating and shower breaks.)
Maybe the professor said 21 bazillion which would have been correct. After all, memory can play tricks after the first few million.

Reply
Jul 15, 2019 13:16:55   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
rcarol wrote:
The short answer without going through all of the math is that going from 12MP to 24MP is a 1.4 increase in resolution.


I see! … Okay, thanks, R …

Reply
Jul 15, 2019 13:26:09   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
rcarol wrote:
When you went from 12MP to 24MP you double the number of pixels but you did not double your resolution. You increased your resolution by 1.4 times.


Okay, R … I knew I DOUBLED something!!!!

Reply
 
 
Jul 15, 2019 17:29:33   #
ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio
 
foggypreacher wrote:
My budget when considering my first DSLR and first camera in over 30 years was a Nikon D3400. It has been just enough of a challenge for me to learn more than I knew before. I will upgrade in a few years, but will probably stay with the DX as I am in it most for the fun of it.

If the new middle of the road DX cameras are gone, I'll just buy a refurbished or used as I have for most of my lenses. The only reason I would need a "better" quality camera is if I came into a windfall or started to make good money from my photos.
My budget when considering my first DSLR and first... (show quote)


My D3400 is also enough to keep me challenged. Busy learning everything it can do. I also have no problem purchasing used or refurb if no new DX comes to market that interests me and I have a desire to add yet another DSLR to my learning curve.

Reply
Jul 15, 2019 17:37:05   #
ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio
 
rcarol wrote:
When you went from 12MP to 24MP you double the number of pixels but you did not double your resolution. You increased your resolution by 1.4 times.


I guess we should “resolve” to not count pixels and instead concentrate on image quality. Is there a commonly accepted measurement for IQ for entry and advanced level cameras?

Reply
Jul 15, 2019 17:48:07   #
Bill P
 
Chris T wrote:
So, then, R … what would you consider going from a camera with a 12MP sensor to one with a 24MP sensor?



can't speak for R, but I at one time had a D3, 12MP, and an M9, 18MP. Guess what one I still have.

Reply
Jul 15, 2019 23:21:43   #
DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA
 
I'll be more inclined to believe the demise of the D500 when the price drops.

Reply
 
 
Jul 15, 2019 23:28:50   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
DaveyDitzer wrote:
I'll be more inclined to believe the demise of the D500 when the price drops.


They are down to $1,500.

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/1559/d500.html

--

Reply
Jul 16, 2019 00:42:57   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
Bill P wrote:
can't speak for R, but I at one time had a D3, 12MP, and an M9, 18MP. Guess what one I still have.


The D3, Bill …

Reply
Jul 19, 2019 16:06:17   #
topcat Loc: Alameda, CA
 
Bill P wrote:
I have a friend that shoots a Canon Rebel and his work sells in the thousands, and is shown at museums all over Europe. He's perfectly happy with what he gets, both the photos and the amount they sell for. So someone here who states that they need to upgrade makes me laugh. For many of us the entry level cameras are sufficient, but the camera companies and their paid stooges have convinced others that that's wrong.


It is a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

Reply
Jul 19, 2019 16:14:13   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
ronpier wrote:
I guess we should “resolve” to not count pixels and instead concentrate on image quality. Is there a commonly accepted measurement for IQ for entry and advanced level cameras?
There are two different issues here: what the hardware can do and what the user does with that hardware. Even the first issue is multi-dimensional, and there is no way of combining resulting detail, noise, color depth, dynamic range, and ISO behavior into a single ‘scalar’ number.

Reply
 
 
Jul 19, 2019 16:29:22   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
rehess wrote:
There are two different issues here: what the hardware can do and what the user does with that hardware. Even the first issue is multi-dimensional, and there is no way of combining resulting detail, noise, color depth, dynamic range, and ISO behavior into a single ‘scalar’ number.


I don't see how one can come up with a minimum IQ level for a beginner camera …

My most minimal DSLR is my Canon EOS Rebel T3 - with just 12MP - and it produces some damned fine images. So does my Nikon D3200. And, my Sony alpha a58 - with just 20MP ….

I have upgraded all of these to more advanced models, with more features - but none of the upgrades were to try and acquire better IQ!!! … They ALL produce pretty consistent results!!!!

Reply
Jul 19, 2019 18:44:12   #
RichardTaylor Loc: Sydney, Australia
 
Chris T wrote:
I don't see how one can come up with a minimum IQ level for a beginner camera …

My most minimal DSLR is my Canon EOS Rebel T3 - with just 12MP - and it produces some damned fine images. So does my Nikon D3200. And, my Sony alpha a58 - with just 20MP ….

I have upgraded all of these to more advanced models, with more features - but none of the upgrades were to try and acquire better IQ!!! … They ALL produce pretty consistent results!!!!
I don't see how one can come up with a minimum IQ ... (show quote)


Even my 8MP Canon 350D IQ was ok at the lower ISO values.
My latter camera purchases had much better IQ at higher ISO values, better erganomics, and in some cases better focussing.

Reply
Jul 19, 2019 18:49:22   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
RichardTaylor wrote:
Even my 8MP Canon 350D IQ was ok at the lower ISO values.
My latter camera purchases had much better IQ at higher ISO values, better erganomics, and in some cases better focussing.
I had one also - actually I had two - each eventually had terminal processor issues, but even before they died, the resulting images gave me less detail than the newer cameras {harder to read print, for example}, and gave me less freedom to crop that did the Pentax K-30 which replaced the second one.

Reply
Jul 21, 2019 14:30:01   #
Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England
 
rehess wrote:
I had one also - actually I had two - each eventually had terminal processor issues, but even before they died, the resulting images gave me less detail than the newer cameras {harder to read print, for example}, and gave me less freedom to crop that did the Pentax K-30 which replaced the second one.


That K-30 is a fine camera, RE (as is my K-50) … they both produce pretty consistent results, and both have many features not found in basic Beginner cameras (like the K-S1) - although - that particular model - had its own set of somewhat desirable features - some of which - made their way into the K-70 - which - like the K-30 and K-50 before it - has an equally desirable feature set. It's a clever design, with many, many fans.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 10 of 12 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.