High Resolution Camera Question

[helicopper 1,050]

Has anyone worked with high resolution digital cameras (15+ MP)?

Just curious what model(s) you like/don't like etc.

Thanks,

Chris

[abaduck 123]

I swear by my Nikon D3. The D3X is higher resolution still; you trade more resolution for poorer low light performance. Superb glass, not a bad thing to say about anything to do with them.

[Guest Photounit]

I have two 21.4 MP Canon 5D MK II's and I like them..... Nikon also has similar offerings with similar performance..... Up until recently Canon, has had a significant edge in the low light performance ..... Right now, Nikon seems to have a slight edge on a few of their cameras..... You will always have the Nikon vs Canon battle and personally it becomes a choice on which "system" will do what you want..... By system I mean the combination of bodies, lenses, accessories, etc..... Because when you buy an SLR , you also have to by lenses, flashes, etc that go with it...... And each of these are unique to the brand SLR you go with and when you have a significant amount of equipment like I do, it makes switching brands later a very expensive proposition....... That being said, don't get hung up on the number of mega-pixels....... It is probably of one of the less important specs you should be considering when you buy a camera....... The things you should be more concerned with are dynamic range (The cameras ability to capture detail from the darkest to the brightest lighting conditions) and it's noise level (The cameras ability to capture details under low light conditions with the absence of grain {Noise} in the image...... Give me a an 8MP camera that has great dynamic range and low noise performance and I'll take that any day over a 100 MP camera with average dynamic range and noise performance........... The camera industry has everybody brainwashed that more is better.... It's NOT...... You can do a lot more with a clean noise free 8mp image with good dynamic range than you can do with an image from a camera that has more MP's but lack-luster dynamic range and high noise..... Also, what limits P&S cameras is they generally have high noise and poor dynamic range and their performance falls apart when the sun goes down.... They are getting better, but have a long way to go to come close to the performance of an SLR and will most likely always be limited in performance by their optics as well..... I suggest looking at the reviews on www.DPReview.com of any camera you are thinking of purchasing...... Go right to the conclusion section for each and try to match the performance of each one for what you want to do...... For me, I needed/wanted, good light performance and high DR which my cameras provide....Hope this helps....

Here's a link to the review of Mike's Nikon D3 which is a very good camera : http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3/

Here's a link to what I've been shooting with - The Canon 5D MKII: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/

Edited July 17, 2009 by Photounit

[jack10562 414]

Bill, those are a couple of very $erious cameras, and probably give a good bang for the buck. My target price range would be quite a bit less, say tops around a grand, complete. Can you (or someone) give a recommendation in that class?

Thanks.

[JM15 386]

I just bought the Canon Rebel EOS XS and so far it is great.. I bought it as a "starter" camera and I like the fact that it is easy to use and the price wasn't too bad either ($600)

[helicopper 1,050]

Follow-up questions (thanks for the responses by the way)...

What is the best option for high resolution, low noise, and low light performance that will permit zooming in to pick up fine detail in an image during printing - say making an enlargement from a small section of the original photo.

Do you shoot in raw format or jpeg (or other) and what do you use to process the raw images if that's how you do it?

Thanks again!

[TCD0415 26]

I have two 21.4 MP Canon 5D MK Io's and I like them..... Nikon also has similar offerings with similar performance..... Up until recently Canon, has had a significant edge in the low light performance .....

The things you should be more concerned with are dynamic range (The cameras ability to capture detail from the darkest to the brightest lighting conditions) and it's noise level (The cameras ability to capture details under low light conditions with the absence of grain {Noise} in the image...... Give me a an 8MP camera that has great dynamic range and low noise performance and I'll take that any day over a 100 MP camera with average dynamic range and noise performance............

What did he just say ???

Sounds like this ain't Bill's first rodeo........ heh heh

As a "Non Photographer", it is interesting to learn of all the different aspects (And expenses, "wow") that go into the Photographic Endeavors of Bill and the rest of the guys that make our viewing all of the different photos on this website such a pleasure.

Thanks Guys (& Gals)......... Keep up the good work.

Edited July 17, 2009 by TCD0415

[Guest Photounit]

Bill, those are a couple of very $erious cameras, and probably give a good bang for the buck. My target price range would be quite a bit less, say tops around a grand, complete. Can you (or someone) give a recommendation in that class?

Thanks.

Jack,

If I were going to start over, I would have a really hard time choosing which camera brand to buy...... I can say that it would be a Canon or Nikon though due to the image quality, low noise performance, and the lenses/accessories offered by each.... I have to say though that I really like Canons lenses over Nikon's but I also really like the latest pro Nikon's bodies....... The saying goes that a good camera body lasts a few years (As in keeps its performance value) while a good lens last a lifetime (Will pretty much always maintain it performance) because it will work on the next body you purchase and won't be obsoleted..... And a lens (or lenses) is also important part in your purchase decision too..... In your situation, I would probably get a Nikon D500,D60 or a Canon Rebel XS(1000D) or XSi(500D) and the best zoom lens you can afford preferably one with image stabilization which will help you in low light.........

Here are reviews of each....... Go to the conclusion page and look at the pros and cons of each and use those to help make you decision.... Also read the owner comments and throw out the glowing and extremely negative reviews.....

Nikon D5000 review: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5000/

Nikon D60 Review: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Nikon/nikon_d60.asp

Canon XS Review: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0806/08061002canon1000d.asp

Canon XSi Review: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Cano...non_eos500d.asp

Their is an interesting new camera made by Fuji - the FinePix S200EXR super-zoom and it may also be worth considering..... It's what I call a fixed lens SLR..... It supposedly has good dynamic range and low light performance........ It's not going to best a more expensive SLR camera but it sounds like it may be a good choice for someone who has outgrown their P&S but can't afford or doesn't want to move up to a full SLR....... They claim" The results from the FinePix S200EXR will look as good as those from a DSLR, or better!" If it's true , Canon and Nikon are in trouble and I'll buy one.......

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0907/09072208...films200exr.asp

Hope this helps...... I'm sure there are others here who are in your postion too...... Good luck!

Edited July 23, 2009 by Photounit

[Guest Photounit]

Follow-up questions (thanks for the responses by the way)...

What is the best option for high resolution, low noise, and low light performance that will permit zooming in to pick up fine detail in an image during printing - say making an enlargement from a small section of the original photo.

Do you shoot in raw format or jpeg (or other) and what do you use to process the raw images if that's how you do it?

Thanks again!

An SLR is a must......... Basically the more money you spend on a body, the better you will be able to accomplish what you want....... The Nikon D300, D700,D3, D3X or the Canon 5D MKII, 1D MK III, and 1DS MKIII are probably the best you can get.... The cameras I mentioned in my prior post will also give you the ability to do what you want but to a lesser extent. The ability to zoom in and crop an image while maintaining detail is the benefit of having a higher MP camera..... Although if you have a 12 MP camera with a very clean image and crop it to 1/4 of the image and take the same image with a 24 MP camera and the image is noisy and has poor dynamic range, you'll probably be happier with the resulting 3 MP crop image from the 12MP camera than you will be from the 6MP crop of the 24 MP camera as the loss of detail will be more apparent once you magnify the image..... Hope this makes sense......

As far as what I shoot in, I shoot in JPeg/ RAW although I almost never use the camera JPegs...... I process my RAW files in Photoshop which can be time consuming if you shoot a lot of images...... Photoshop is very expensive (I couldn't afford it if I had to but the full version today) but Photoshop Elements is a very good program for ~$100 that will get the job done.... There are plenty of other programs many which are free such as Picasa or Gimp...... I have used both and although they are not as good as Photoshop for heavy duty editing, they are great programs especially for the price.......

[abaduck 123]

Follow-up questions (thanks for the responses by the way)...

What is the best option for high resolution, low noise, and low light performance that will permit zooming in to pick up fine detail in an image during printing - say making an enlargement from a small section of the original photo.

Do you shoot in raw format or jpeg (or other) and what do you use to process the raw images if that's how you do it?

I shoot in both - each shot is recorded as raw and jpg. So I have quick & dirty jpgs to throw on web, and raw images to process and bring out the best. The Nikon D3 comes with pretty decent software called ViewNX which allows a good deal of manipulation of raw images - and up to +- 2EV exposure adjustment. Other than that, software I use includes Photoshop, I also use ACDSee Pro 2.5, which is a great image indexer/browser and has some useful built-in editing functions for quick & dirty adjustments. It also groks Nikon raw format. I keep a copy of Imagenomic NoiseWare Pro around for rescue work with excessively noisy images.

The critical thing for best low light / low noise performance is photosite size - the size of the individual pixels on the sensor chip. That's where & why the Nikon D3 excels in my opinion; it's a full-frame 35mm sensor, but 'only' 12.1MP resolution - which means that the individual photosites are, relatively speaking, huge. It's a tradeoff; if you really want the highest resolution (20MP+), the photosites are inevitably going to be smaller and you're going to lose out on low light / low noise performance - you may be able to get the resolution you want in your tight crops, but find that the noise levels are such as to make it unusable. And of course sensitivity is paramount; you can fix underexposure, to a degree, you can fix noise, to a degree - but you can't fix blur caused by handholding at too slow a shutter speed!

If you want some sample shots, let me know and I'll dig them up.

[helicopper 1,050]

I shoot in both - each shot is recorded as raw and jpg. So I have quick & dirty jpgs to throw on web, and raw images to process and bring out the best. The Nikon D3 comes with pretty decent software called ViewNX which allows a good deal of manipulation of raw images - and up to +- 2EV exposure adjustment. Other than that, software I use includes Photoshop, I also use ACDSee Pro 2.5, which is a great image indexer/browser and has some useful built-in editing functions for quick & dirty adjustments. It also groks Nikon raw format. I keep a copy of Imagenomic NoiseWare Pro around for rescue work with excessively noisy images.

The critical thing for best low light / low noise performance is photosite size - the size of the individual pixels on the sensor chip. That's where & why the Nikon D3 excels in my opinion; it's a full-frame 35mm sensor, but 'only' 12.1MP resolution - which means that the individual photosites are, relatively speaking, huge. It's a tradeoff; if you really want the highest resolution (20MP+), the photosites are inevitably going to be smaller and you're going to lose out on low light / low noise performance - you may be able to get the resolution you want in your tight crops, but find that the noise levels are such as to make it unusable. And of course sensitivity is paramount; you can fix underexposure, to a degree, you can fix noise, to a degree - but you can't fix blur caused by handholding at too slow a shutter speed!

If you want some sample shots, let me know and I'll dig them up.

Great info, thanks!

Is there something in between the Nikon D3 and the other big MP options. I'm looking for a very stable platform that will allow moderate low light use, provide enough clarity for significant enlargement/cropping. Basically I'm looking for the best of both worlds.

I'll look into the models recommended so far. Thanks again, everyone!

[Ex-2114 7]

Great info, thanks!

Is there something in between the Nikon D3 and the other big MP options. I'm looking for a very stable platform that will allow moderate low light use, provide enough clarity for significant enlargement/cropping. Basically I'm looking for the best of both worlds.

I'll look into the models recommended so far. Thanks again, everyone!

I recently bought a Nikon D5000 (replaced my Nikon D50)... it's a 12.3MP DSLR, reviewed well, takes amazing shots...... and is under $1000... Worth a looking at if you ask me.