P&S vs DSLR

[RalphLambrecht]

I did a straight comparison between a 16 Mpx NIKON coolpix and a 36Mpx Nikon D800;the result makes it hard to justify the $3,000 difference if ignoring the flexibility of the system camera:cool2:

 

[ann]

There are some pretty serious p&s cameras these days especially in the high end version

 

[Doyle Thomas]

its not the camera

 

[RalphLambrecht]

its not the camera

Then why do forums like this wxist?

 

[Doyle Thomas]

Then why do forums like this wxist?

for the people

 

[ann]

We are discussing the quaitily of the image not the "power " of the image

Of course a fine photographer can make outstanding images consistently with any camera but the technical quality of that image will vary

 

[Richard Boutwell]

I did a straight comparison between a 16 Mpx NIKON coolpix and a 36Mpx Nikon D800;the result makes it hard to justify the $3,000 difference if ignoring the flexibility of the system camera:cool2:

What was your criteria for this "straight comparison" and do you have actual evidence to back this up?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

What was your criteria for this "straight comparison" and do you have actual evidence to back this up?

same subject,same light, roughly samefocal length equivalent and same ISO; no post manipulation;the evidence is my word.And if that's not good enough for you more evidence won't be either...Dick.

 

[Richard Boutwell]

But did you make prints? At what size did you make these comparisons. An iPhone and a d800 with a similar focal length lens might look the same when you view them on screen at 1200px.

Weren't you the one who said you need evidence so you don't have to rely on subjective evaluations?

And as for your word... You're Hilarious. Really.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[John_M_King]

In fact why do we need all those extra pixels. I still use my D700 and on another day my D90 and at 12mp each I can still print a decent A3. (If I really want extra quality I use my F6) What is more important is the way the processor handles the image.

On a camera with say 24mp the fin(er) detail will be there, but really how many times do we examine a print with a magnifying glass? Photography examining the finest detail is not what it is all about, it is the finished image viewed from a reasonable difference. After all we don't all go up to an oil painting to examine the brush stroke, we stand back to get a better view.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

In fact why do we need all those extra pixels. I still use my D700 and on another day my D90 and at 12mp each I can still print a decent A3. (If I really want extra quality I use my F6) What is more important is the way the processor handles the image.

On a camera with say 24mp the fin(er) detail will be there, but really how many times do we examine a print with a magnifying glass? Photography examining the finest detail is not what it is all about, it is the finished image viewed from a reasonable difference. After all we don't all go up to an oil painting to examine the brush stroke, we stand back to get a better view.

I agree as far as pixel count goes;Infact I have muffled my D800 to 30 Mpx in favor of the 4x5 ratio and also came to the conclusion that 24 Mpx is all we need to make a good A3 print;helps with storage and processind speed as well.

 

[DennyS]

Why someone might need the extra pixels? If you're working in alt processes like platinum, you're printing a digital neg, possibly at 360 dpi for Epson printers. If I've done the math correctly, an 11x14 inch negative at that resolution uses just about 20mp (360 x 11 x 360 x 14). Of course, small cameras don't deliver the proper ratio for 11x14 without some cropping, so more pixels are useful if you'd like to avoid upsizing the image. And if you intend to print larger or crop the image further, more pixels are useful.

Denny

 

[removed account4]

its not hard to make a bigger image as a paper negative to wax through a laser printer or service bureau at a lower dpi.
ive done this with small - depth images, xerox machine to a 8x10 cyanotype on more than 1 occasion.

 

[Chan Tran]

I did a straight comparison between a 16 Mpx NIKON coolpix and a 36Mpx Nikon D800;the result makes it hard to justify the $3,000 difference if ignoring the flexibility of the system camera:cool2:

If you pick a scene that doesn't require the flexibility of the D800 then it's hard to see the difference. If you pick a scene that favor the P&S (for example you need lots of DOF) then it even looks better than from the D800. As you asked for why the price difference? They sell cameras by the pounds. The P&S is much lighter and thus it's cheaper.

 

[Doyle Thomas]

I have seen (and made) full bleed 8.5x11 prints acceptable to most people from as little as 2Mb. I never liked watermarking my posts but I doo that now.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Don't get me wrong guys;I like and keep my D800but was impressed by the coolpix;I guess it's my new travel camera