wdross
Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado
Urnst wrote:
I have a 16mp camera and am considering buying an updated version with 20mp. The new camera would cost $700. Is it worth it? I mostly look at my images on my computer but sometimes make prints.
Compare what features your camera has now to what features you will gain for the $700. If those features are worth the $700 for what is needed or wanted, break out your wallet. Otherwise, keep your wallet closed.
I bought my Olympus/OMDS E-M1 mkIII just before they announced the release date for the OM-1. Se la vive. It will be about two years before I can justify spending money for the OM-1 (if even then). The best advice I can give you was that of my photography teacher. He told me that one decides how much money they want to spend, one compares what is available for that amount of money, and then puts one's money down if that is what one wants. The next "day", after one puts their money down, the next new camera, for the same amount of money, with even more "bells and whistles" one would want, will be released.
And it is true. That is why I have an Olympus/OMDS E-M1 mkIIl instead of an Olympus/OMDS OM-1.
Urnst
Loc: Brownsville, Texas
wdross wrote:
Compare what features your camera has now to what features you will gain for the $700. If those features are worth the $700 for what is needed or wanted, break out your wallet. Otherwise, keep your wallet closed.
I bought my Olympus/OMDS E-M1 mkIII just before they announced the release date for the OM-1. Se la vive. It will be about two years before I can justify spending money for the OM-1 (if even then). The best advice I can give you was that of my photography teacher. He told me that one decides how much money they want to spend, one compares what is available for that amount of money, and then put one's money down if that is what one wants. The next "day", after one puts their money down, the next new camera, for the same amount of money, with even more "bells and whistles" one would want, will be released.
And it is true. That is why I have an Olympus/OMDS E-M1 mkIIl instead of an Olympus/OMDS OM-1.
Compare what features your camera has now to what ... (
show quote)
Thanks for your thoughts. I'm not really interested in bells and whistles, just image quality.
wdross wrote:
Compare what features your camera has now to what features you will gain for the $700. If those features are worth the $700 for what is needed or wanted, break out your wallet. Otherwise, keep your wallet closed.
I bought my Olympus/OMDS E-M1 mkIII just before they announced the release date for the OM-1. Se la vive. It will be about two years before I can justify spending money for the OM-1 (if even then). The best advice I can give you was that of my photography teacher. He told me that one decides how much money they want to spend, one compares what is available for that amount of money, and then puts one's money down if that is what one wants. The next "day", after one puts their money down, the next new camera, for the same amount of money, with even more "bells and whistles" one would want, will be released.
And it is true. That is why I have an Olympus/OMDS E-M1 mkIIl instead of an Olympus/OMDS OM-1.
Compare what features your camera has now to what ... (
show quote)
Well, at least camera manufacturers have slowed down their release cycles from 12-18 months to 3-4 years in most cases! Computer and phone companies tend to be on one year cycles.
I like to wait for the early adopters to take the "revision one arrows" in their backs, and buy from the second or third boatload that arrives in the USA. By then, the software and firmware are updated, and the hardware might also have been updated. I've also read and watched lots of reviews and know why I'm buying will be a good thing!
Longshadow wrote:
G.A.S.?
I get nice prints (up to 11x14 so far) from my <old> 15Mp camera.
Yup, Me too! Actually, I think they were 11-12X17. My photo competition has strange requirements!
wdross
Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado
Urnst wrote:
Thanks for your thoughts. I'm not really interested in bells and whistles, just image quality.
In that case, you must go to sites that will compare the sensors. 16mp is a good number for most prints that are no bigger than 20 X 24. Dynamic range and ISO may be a factor. For example, the new OM-1 sensor has a two stop ISO advantage over the previous 16mp and 20mp sensors. The dynamic range is a little bit larger than those previous sensors. And if you crop your images heavily, extra megapixels are an advantage too. These are the kind of things you will be looking at to compare whether or not the new camera is worth the $700 to you. Hopefully it will not be that hard for you to get your answer.
Urnst wrote:
My present camera is an Olympus OMD Mark one and the new one would be an OMD Mark Two. I'm only conderned about image quality and not additional features other image quality.
I would say no. Mega pixels do not mean better quality. There is almost no advantage to go from 16mp to 20mp. I would say wait till the technology gets better/cheaper unless the new camera does something you absolutly need or some feature you want and can easily afford the upgrade.
Successful photographers do the one thing the unsuccessful are unwilling to do: they always buy the camera with the most pixels.
Yes you shouldπππ
pmorin
Loc: Huntington Beach, Palm Springs
Urnst wrote:
I have a 16mp camera and am considering buying an updated version with 20mp. The new camera would cost $700. Is it worth it? I mostly look at my images on my computer but sometimes make prints.
You donβt mention how you capture and process your photos. Jpeg? RAW? These are also things to consider in getting better final results.
Urnst wrote:
I have a 16mp camera and am considering buying an updated version with 20mp. The new camera would cost $700. Is it worth it? I mostly look at my images on my computer but sometimes make prints.
GAS? If you have the budget, money is not an issue and you want a little better technology, go for it....afterall, its only TWO tanks of gas in today's market...ππ
You won't notice any difference between 16mp and 20mp; it would be a sideways move at best, especially if the sensor is the same size. I went from my 6mp D40 to a 16mp D5100, a significant jump. From the D5100, went to the 24mp D750, a jump in sensor size, more numerous mp, but pixel size roughly the same as the D5100 pixels. If I ever move from the D750, it will be to some version of a Z Nikon, mainly for its IBIS and lenses & other advantages of mirrorless. More pixels does not necessarily better "quality" images, just possibly improved crop-ability.
Given the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV is the current model, why isn't an upgrade discussion focused on this model?
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.