as some of you know, i've just bought a new last generation click and shoot camera and now also consider buying a SRL big companion, a 3 year old used nikon d70.
to compare what these two completely different cams can do, i've made pictures of the same motif with both of them, using their automatic programs (standard configuration) and not altering the pics with any editor. both pics have been saved in highest resolution available and finest jpeg compression (not RAW files, which would probably show a different picture, but produced too big files for every day amateur use).
here are the pics for comparison. some info about the different cams:
Some cameras, like Nikon and Casio, save JPGs with almost identical file size. These camera's quality will vary with the complexity of the image while the files sizes stay constant. I dislike this.
Other cameras, like Canon and Sony, keep the quality constant and let the file size vary to suit each shot. I prefer this as it makes the best use of my data storage and saves me from wanting to twiddle the quality settings shot-to-shot.
ok von den fotos geh ich mal aus das du deutsch verstehst ;)
mal von den fotos zu sprechen sieht man ja das dir die bei canon meist besser gelingen...ich glaube..(ich hab ne neue d80 und merke das es nich so einfach is wie ne kleine kompakt kamera)
ich würd einfach sagen das du wissen musst wofür du es brauchst...die canon macht sozusagen automatisch gute bilder wobei man mit der nikon eben nich einfach automatisch einfach alles machen sollte da muss man eben viel rumprobieren....wenn du dich hier umguckst kannst du aufjedenfall sehr gute bilder finden von der d70 und ich bi ndavon überzeugt das die super is aber vllt ist es auch nich das was du suchst..also solltest du vllt erstmal einfach überlegen wasdu machen willst ;) solange man sich mit der kamera auseinander setzt kriegt man auch super bilder hin....hoffe konnte dir helfen
????? · 2008-03-14: 00:16
@?????? sorry, i don't understand your comment, but since you left in anonymously, i won't take it serious anyhow.
@inkalein: danke für den ausführlichen komentar - ich gebe dir in allen punkten recht! interessant finde ich die (zugegebenermassen völlig belanglosen) bilder von meinem vergleich mit dem statement von ken rockwell (siehe mein eigener, erste kommentar oben.
die unterschiedliche schärfe der bilder von der canon und nikon scheint mir nicht nur auf die verschiedenen auflösungen (12mpix canon vs. 6mpix nikon) bzw. die software-nachschärfung der canon zurückzuführen, sondern auch auf diese technisch unterschiedlichen prinzipien, mit welchen die beiden kameras aus den RAW-daten jpegs produzieren. da hat canon offenbar klar die nase vorn - mich würde interessieren, ob das bei canon SLRs auch so ist?
If all I had to go by were these pictures, I'd say don't bother with the nikon, since the canon photos are obviously better every time. HOWEVER, a point and shoot is designed for automatic settings, while an slr is designed to be strongest when the settings are adjusted by the photographer. so using the automatic settings might not do the nikon justice.
My camera takes good pictures set on automatic and using the flash, but if that was how I wanted to shoot, I would just have bought a good quality point and shoot. So ... I guess it depends on what you want to develop as a photographer.
As far as memory use shooting raw ...
I have a big memory card for my camera, and so I don't find shooting raw to be a problem. I tend to go through the photos as soon as I download, and i delete the mediocre ones. so storage isn't such a big deal. you can burn a dvd or cd or use an external hard drive to keep computer space free.
@bexxa: LOL, don't worry - i do take her serious and i perfectly understand her german... it's my own mother tongue. :-)
@julia: once again, profound and to the point knowledge from your side, thanks a lot. i've commented most of what you mentioned in english in german above already, so thanks another time for the "translation" of my thoughts.
i've tried the two cameras this week end at a sport event (badminton suisse open) and of course, the nikon delivered far better results then the canon - i'm still working on all the pictures and probably post some here later.
just one remark to the RAW vs. jpg topic: i don't care for RAW data; as long as the camera's hardware is able to condense it into high quality jpgs - which they both do. the differences in the pictures, colors, sharpmess etc. are clearly visible. but the difference is: the canon can't be manipulated to NOT manipulate the RAW data before saving into jpg, while the nikon can. with other words, the canon fixed lens cam does all kinds of software/hardware tricks to make the better picture; which the nikon would, too, if i'd allow her to (and configure manually).
overall, the biggest disadvantage of the nikon is its small back screen - too big to be ignored, to small to really tell you something about the picture that you just shot.
@robertB (who doesn't even have an account here): contrary to you i already tried knitting (it's quite fun) and my success rate has been as poor as in photography. unfortunately, also my knitted socks and caps were horrible, so i had to start photographing, but after your profound remarks i'll probably take up cooking soon. now do me a favor and take up a language class.
Nikon D70 shouldn't be that bad as shown by your pictures (I'm not a Nikon user & have not owned any Nikon camera).
I won't suggest to buy a 2nd hand digital camera these day coz 1. new ones are getting better and cheaper, 2. the shutter may have already been used over ten thousands times in the old cam coz people using digital cameras today shooting crazily.