Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 13, 2004, 10:12 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 394
Default

Which would have the better quality of images, the 5mp Leica Digilux 2 or any of the 8mp cameras? Or would the larger CCD at 5mp be better than the smaller CCD at 8mp?
normc is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 13, 2004, 10:28 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 365
Default

I've always read that a larger CCDproduces better picturesthan ahiger MP small CCD. You'll get overall better quallity and less noise at higher ios on the bigger CCD's. I recently bought a Nikon D70 which has a larger CCD than the digicams and after seeing my pictures, I'm a believer in the larger CCD's.
mdparker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 2004, 11:43 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Everything else being equal, the larger CCD will produce less noise and allow for a more useable higher ISOs.

But everything is rarely equal. Just because they could make the larger CCD better doesn't mean they will. Or that someone won't come up with some amazing system to reduce noise in smaller CCDs one day.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 13, 2004, 11:43 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Double post
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2004, 6:46 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 394
Default

I am not sure of a good answer to my own question either. It just seems that a lot more effort is going into the design of camera features than image quality issues. After all it takes time to process a batch of photos with "purple fringing" and even then the "purple" is typically turned into a grey? The reviews have shown all of us that many of the lower MP cameras can preform very well. I would agree that the overall design of a camera is what counts. I have had nine digital cameras and enjoyed them all. But some of the newer cameras appear to be like a car with a flat tire that can never be repaired.
normc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2004, 1:28 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Ya, unfortunately features are winning out over better picture quality (and better at higher ISOs.)

There are a few cameras out on the market now that have clearly just taken a more dense sensor and stuck it into a camera... not thinking about how the higher noise and other problems won't be recieved well by the consumer. I hope they are punished by lower sales. I want the companies to learn to make better cameras, not one with just a few superficial features added & higher resolution.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2004, 3:14 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 394
Default

I compare it to buying a nice new car with a flat tire and two bad spark plugs. You can fix the tire in photoshop but the plugs are more difficult and on and on....
normc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2004, 4:00 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
CheckSix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 186
Default

To add to this... would a 3.24 MP CMOS sensor of a D30 produce higher quality images of a 3 MP CCD? CMOSs are larger--correct?
CheckSix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2004, 10:10 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Ronnie948's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 721
Default

I just don't understand what all this talk about noise and purple fringing etc, is with the 8mp cameras. I have the Nikon 8700 and the photographs I have been doing for My customers are just perfect in every way. I just photographed A border collie and it was just as good as I was doing when I was using A Hasselblad. Actually it was better because I could see My results before I left the Lady's house. I'm starting to think that most of the people complaining about the 8mp cameras have never ever used one. I had A 990 Nikon before and it was fine for still snapshots but I could not get results like I do with this 8700. It is a great camera and I see the only fault is when shooting in a continouis mode the viewing screen goes black so You have to aim the camera like a rifle. I'm getting pretty good at doing that now so it is not a problem anymore.Nikon needs to put A sight on the coolpix cameras with the digital viewfinders like I had for the old grayflex and I also had one for My Hasselblad. I print with photoshop 7.0.1 and use the Epson 1280 or 2000P Printers and the end results can not be told from 6 X 6 negitive film. I see nothing wrong with the 8mp cameras in the real world photography.
Ronnie948 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 17, 2004, 12:05 PM   #10
Member
 
jmoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 32
Default

Ronnie948:
Good post. I agree. I also have an 8700. I pre-ordered it on my b-day in feb and picked it up after work on March 1, 2004. To date, I've taken about 6800 photos. I LOVE THE CAMERA. I always try to shoot at ISO 50, never higher than 100. I've had NO PROBLEMS at all making prints up to 8 x 10 and the image quality, shadow, contrast and color are Outstanding,. There are way too many "Pixel peepers" out there who to quote someone "Sit on their couch at home and fondle the camera instead of going out and taking photos.
That's the same folks who permeate and perverse other techno-related forums.

Take care.
JM
jmoro is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:12 PM.