Point and Shoot (a Camera Discussion)

[misternikko]

LOL guess ill stick with my Oberons then.

 

[nativeXb12Rbuell]

I loved my Sony A350(DSLR) and Carl Ziess lense it was great took lots of great pics ,i like the body image stabilization it makes the lense just a litle less expense although they still are not cheap by any means,and it meant any lense had image stable. had to sell it to pay a couple of house payments though.
i would like to have another or better the A850 or A900 and a few Carl Ziess & G lenses.
my point n shoot i use is the waterproof/shockproof olympus, its great but, slr is the best way if you want the best pics and i would say to those of you who want or use slr the lense is what makes the biggest difference in my opinion, a pro lense gives the clearest brightest, vivid real pics, you can really see the difference ,
thats my .02


i read an article the other day about the future of piont n shoot cameras , basicly they was trying to say the market for them is dying fast as more people use the phone for taking pics , i think that is so sad, some phones have good cameras but not as good as most of the really great P&S cameras. they had nothing to say about DSLR.

 

[delta one]

the sensor in my PHD camera is close to the size of a pencil eraser, the one in my iphone is probably the size of a pencil lead.

the most important thing for a good image is you, then a good sensor, next comes the lens, and after that comes processing.
a camera phone lacks a good sensor or lens, sad that its becoming the future.

 

[nativeXb12Rbuell]

good point delta one i forgot about the sensor and the person behind it,
i seen some people buy a great camera and then just get the cheapest lense, and they wonder why their pics suck so bad. guess thats the same reason for the dying off of P&S cameras to phone pics. i just dont get some people, those peope probably really just dont care how good their pics are , they want an easier way to fast upload to inernet file sites n FB & MS. but then again i dont get why someone would want to take a pic in there bathroom or to post it somewhere or worse as their FB profile pic????

 

[misternikko]

glass>body.

u put some nice L glass on a old ass 300D with its crappy tiny sensor and it will perform admirably. better so than a crappy kit lens on a 1 series body.


I firmly believe however that good post processing trumps all. some recent stuff.

 

[delta one]

glass>body.

u put some nice L glass on a old ass 300D with its crappy tiny sensor and it will perform admirably. better so than a crappy kit lens on a 1 series body.


I firmly believe however that good post processing trumps all. some recent stuff.

$5,000 lens on a $200 camera is useless, if your sensor makes grainy pictures the lens will not save you
but I said sensor not body, there are some cameras that have very well performing sensors, a body brings features and a housing, because there are expensive cameras that have crap sensors.

if you take a poorly composed overexposed picture all the post in the world will still not save you.

 

[delta one]

In fact some bodies share the sensor with lower cameras from the same company, a $400 camera can have the same sensor as an $800 camera so in the end the image quality will be the same regardless the body you choose.

 

[misternikko]

By body I meant entire package. Every body does in fact come with a sensor.

Yes u are right, my $800 550D shares the same exact sensor as my old $1600 7D which is why I opted for it as a replacement.

With todays software and plug ins i have to disagree. noise ninja is a bad mofo if you are worried about noise and grain. you can compensate for a mediocre sensor very easily if you have the right tools. trying to replicate the colors/contrast/clarity/quality of top glass is far more difficult IMO. but i guess its all subjective.

if you know your way around your favorite software, i would take a better lens over a better sensor any day of the week.

 

[misternikko]

if you take a poorly composed overexposed picture all the post in the world will still not save you.

i have to disagree. everything is salvageable to some degree if you really want to. obv if you overexpose your shot by a few stops then yes you are right, but then im guessing if you are making those kinds of mistakes you probably have no idea how to use any platform of software anyway so what diff does it make.

a great sensor wont save your blown input either. not yours as in you pesonally, just as an example. software however is more flexible to fix those kinds of mistakes

a pro can shoot a wedding with the first digital rebel canon ever produced if he has decent glass and his choice software. give him a 1Ds, a basic entry level kit lens and no software and im sure the latter will fall short.

sorry im not sure, its just my opinion.

 

[delta one]

By body I meant entire package. Every body does in fact come with a sensor.

At our consumer level yes that's true but not across the board

obv if you overexpose your shot by a few stops then yes you are right, but then im guessing if you are making those kinds of mistakes you probably have no idea how to use any platform of software anyway so what diff does it make.

And I know some Photoshop wizards that have never picked up an SLR in their life and know nothing about composition.
Noise reduction is just that, a reduction, there is data lost when you use it.
And if post was the most important than why wouldn't we all use $5 disposables or $100 point ans shoots?

But I was commenting more on this

I firmly believe however that good post processing trumps all.

I still think the shooter is always the most important ingredient

don't get me wrong post is important just not the most important, you can still have stunning photographs without it.
yes a digital latitude is lacking and that can always be improved (film was better for this) but beyond some basics post is not always necessary.

Just like archery the shooter is the most important because he has the control, if he is off target nothing will fix the shot, he is the first link in the chain, next is his bow, then the arrow because the sharpest fastest arrow is no good if the bow cannot propel it accurately to the target.

The same for photography
Shooter
Bow = camera (further down I would separate the curve and the string as sensor and body)
Arrow = glass

Post being more important than exposure and composition is a recent idea of the digital era, many digital photographers don't even know what the photo will look like until they look at the screen on the back after the shot.

 

[williegoat]

An inexpensive camera: Nikon D60

Free editing software: GIMP

1/125sec, F5.6, 50mm, ISO-160 (a very dark, overcast day)

 

[delta one]

taken on my iphone 4

taken on my iphone 4 with it built in "HDR"

taken on an old sony 4.1MP cybershot (it cheats a lot because it also sees infrared)

taken on a newer 7.2MP cybershot

taken on a nikon D90 with a cheap 50mm lens

multiple exposure on a the same D90 full manual

as I was posting this I realized I should have taken one with the D90 in full auto... oops

so here it is but it was out of sequence

I tried my best to frame the shot the same way in all the photos, my control was this
start with the 50mm because it cant zoom and make the PHD cameras zoom to match it
no flash
tripod for the same distance on all of them ball head locked (I just had to lean the iphone up against the tripod head because I don't have a way to mount it)
the light on the wall is from a small harbor freight led flashlight and obviously the blue is my Christmas tree

here I had it in auto and forgot to turn the flashlight back on... oops again but it looked neat

nothing was touched with any post processing

 

[delta one]

oh and I think your D60 may have the same sensor as my D90[up]
that's a good camera IMO

 

[misternikko]

Post being more important than exposure and composition is a recent idea of the digital era, many digital photographers don't even know what the photo will look like until they look at the screen on the back after the shot.

no offense, but this is digital era. really no offense, like really, but you just sound like one of those old guys lol. I said no offense and meant it. Not trying to flame you. Who cares how you got there as long as you did.




Also, using a iphone4 with its lead size sensor for comparison is just silly lol. Especially if you are shooting in pitch black where it is starved for light.

At least give it a chance with a better attempt in a better situation. It really is a great camera for a phone IMO. But i wouldnt reach for it if i wasnt simply screwing around.

These were all shot and edited on the iphone4. Nothing special but not nearly as bad as the xmas light experiment you did makes it out to be. Even the non edited ones.

 

[misternikko]

There you go Williegoat.

And that was free software probably with minimal input

Good job [up]

 

[delta one]

no offense, but this is digital era. really no offense, like really, but you just sound like one of those old guys lol. I said no offense and meant it. Not trying to flame you. Who cares how you got there as long as you did.

Because is a large Part of your data is just noise why bother?
You can take the same shot properly with that data formed as an image instead of just noise.
I would rather have image data then rely on a program to simulate the data that should have been there in the first place.

Also, using a iphone4 with its lead size sensor for comparison is just silly lol. Especially if you are shooting in pitch black where it is starved for light.

I just craved every imaging device that was readily available to me.
Yes the iphone4 is great for a camera phone but it has it's limits too.

And the sensor was the point

Oh and I'm 26

 

[Alfatango1]

An inexpensive camera: Nikon D60

This is a good camera, it's got a good sensor and even in the 18-55 kit form takes real nice photo's if you know how to use it properly. You're original photo of the Fiero just has no vividness and is flat too, that could have been remedied before the shot was taken. Also lighting and filtration play a big part even before post production. Heck a D50 and D40 have real good sensors at 6.1 MP.

 

[misternikko]

Oh and I'm 26

LOL thats why I said "sound". No harm no foul, photography like any other art is totally subjective. We all have our own means of getting to the end [up]

 

[williegoat]

I'm not saying that the D60 is a bad camera, just an affordable one. I am very happy with it. It does great photos when the conditions are right, I just have to study more.

You're original photo of the Fiero just has no vividness and is flat too, that could have been remedied before the shot was taken

What could I have done on such a dark, overcast day, to bring out more color and contrast? I know I should have used a flash for fill, but what else might I have tried?

 

[delta one]

tripods are a huge help IF you have one, you can also try and bump you ISO a bit, when you push it to the limits too far you get grain, just below that limit and your dynamic range can be reduced further (its already way less than film)
I love to take long exposures because it can help to make up for the loss of range, multiple exposures can make up for it even more. you will see more vivid colors in long shots than you will in short ones, its a side effect of the sensor construction.

a filter can help cut through the haze too, colored filters can make the colors more vivid.

flash is great if you got it, but the nikon pop up flashes are not the best and even at 50mm it may not have helped as much as it hindered, slave strobes/flashes are spectacular but at a heavy price tag.
but what do I know?