Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 17, 2005, 10:28 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

The Kodak Pro DCS620x
Price
US$10,000 <-
Type
Professional Digital SLR
Body
Based on Nikon F5
Image size
1,728 x 1,152
Image ratio w:h
3:2
CCD pixels
2.0 megapixels (1.99 effective)
__________________________________________________ ___

Came out in 2000. Boasted "excellent resolution and image quality" (... and it better for $10,000!) Begs the question, how much do megapixels matter? As long as you can maintain 250 pixels per inch, you have (depending on who you read...) 35mm equivalent image quality on whatever size print. Over 300 ppi is a waste because your eye isn't good enough to discern the difference. 250-300 is very difficult to discern. Larger prints? 8X10's say? You can get away with 150 ppi (according to some...) because they're intended - generally, to be viewed from several feet away, where your eye is less able to tell differences in detail due to visual acquity. In prints of larger sizes, color and composition play a bigger factor and "fine detail" is virtually a non-factor.

The FZ-1 - 2.1 megapixels (100,000 more megapixels than the $10,000 "professional" Kodak DSLR mentioned above) is going for $200 to $250 NIB. The high-end professional Nikon D2H DSLR due out on March 25 - with an MSRP of about $4000, has ("only") 4.1 megapixels...
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 17, 2005, 10:54 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Austintatious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 187
Default

FZ1's are the cat's MEOW !!
Austintatious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2005, 11:17 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
boyzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,544
Default

Good point's Nick.
Fact is a lot of people and from what I read on the net wan't more and more megapixals for what ever reason, or they go from a prosumer to a DSLR you know like "I am a PRO". with multi lenses.

One guy in a forum NOT this one got the new canon rebel 350D had it for 3 days took it back ... he said images were flat not as good out of the camera as his FZ20 which he is now keeping.
the one 12x / macro lens is hard to beat.
A Column writer for http://www.luminous-landscape.com/ predicts that DSLR's will not exist long term.
He predicts the small CCD high ASA noise will be solved.
This means light compact higher quality Prosumer cameras if his prediction is true.
Who knows..
Now if they can improve the EVF in the FZxx series and even have one model with removable bayonet lenses why bother with a DSLR.

bit of ramble in there need to post something else.

boyzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2005, 11:21 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
boyzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,544
Default

Austintatious wrote:
[quote]FZ1's are the cat's MEOW !!
[quote]

hey that's a cute Kitty darn nice pic to btw

boyzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:00 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default

I'm sure you realize that pixel count isn't the only consideration. You can tell the difference in a photo from a good DSLR with its better dynamic range and lower noise compared to a small prosumer sensor.

You can do a lot of good stuff in Photoshop to improve a prosumer image, but it still isn't as good as starting with a DSLR shot.

I like my FZ10 with its stabilized 12X lens that maintains f2.8. You have to lug a lot of stuff and pay big bucks to get the same capability in a DSLR. But you do get better results if you are willing and able to foot the bill and schlep the equipment.

They are making strides in sensor design, but nowhere near what the pros require for quality photography. It will be a while before National Geographic photographers go on assignment with a FZ.


slipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:00 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
boyzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,544
Default

Nikon D2H DSLR
4.1 megapixels
Had a look its true Odd when new DSLR's are like 8 mp

The Nikon D2H DSLR may have very low high ASA noise and also
higher dynamic range like more than 5 stops being typical for most DigiCams.


boyzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:06 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

John, I know I went on a bit of a rant, and it sounds like I'm patting myself on the back BUT... I printed out some 5X7's from this lil 2 mgpxl cam. I used a free PS plug-in called "InterpolateThis" (similar to Fred Miranda's StairInterpolation, 'cept it's free) and upped the pixel density 10% to 250 ppi for printing. Maybe I have no basis for comparison, but I simply can't see where they would look any better if they were taken with a camera with more megapixels. Again, I allude to the $10,000 two megapixel "professional" Kodak DSLR from a few years back.

When I "went digital" I approached it as finding an "integrated digital imaging system that maximized capabilities and minimized cost" (it's the project manager/linear programing guy in me...) of which the camera was but one (albeit key) component, and getting the most bang for the buck. I budgeted around $500-$600. I might have gone a tad overbudget (don't we always...) but not by too much. I got the FZ-1 + a macro lens, two WA converters (think I'm gonna sell one...) 2 printers (R200 open box buy; C86 on "used" NIB on eBay), the Oly C210, a digital slave flash, and Lumiquest promax diffuser (...and that seems to have a bigger impact on image quality than adding pixels...)

So, I can print color, CDs (R200), have a dedicated black and white printer (C86 w/ MIS inks Ultratone inks...which produces outstanding results btw that last 100+ years), solved the "weak flash" issue, macro capabilities, can shoot at 23mm WA focal lengths or (approx) 800 mm (which is crazy), can take remarkable indoor shots with the flash/diffuser, can do ir beautifully...

I got a versitile system and HUGE bang for the buck for around the average cost of just a camera with 4,5,6,7,8 (what have you) megapixels. I'm hard-pressed to see what I gave up in terms of image quality other than cropping (which I never do...) or Godzilla-sized prints (which I have no interest in...)
_____________________________________________

PS, Austintatious - beautiful cats, very smart but man, can they be noisey. Nice kitty pic btw.
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:31 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

slipe wrote:
Quote:
I'm sure you realize that pixel count isn't the only consideration...
Oh, absolutely. In fact, my next camera will be a DSLR, now that decent ones are being made for somewhat sensible dollars. Looking at the Nikon D70 or the Pentaz *st DS. (Got a little envelope in my drawer, where I tuck away "found money" for its purchase over the next 18mos). By then, who knows what will be out. And - as Boyzo points out, I've heard questionable stuff about the longevity of the DSLR technology, which seems kind of a "hybrid" technology to me. (I would prefer a digital rangefinder, and they exist - Epson [of all people] makes one, to the tune of $3000)

Although I was dead-set against DSLRs, I like their low-light capabilites, low DOF, dynamic range - and I'm toying with the idea of maybe doing some side-line stuff so I'll need upgrade the gear for that.

Yeah, call me hooked, but I like my toys and cameras are a lot less expensive than sports cars. :G
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:37 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

So Nick................how do you really feel:?:

I'm on the verge of dslr-land too. Probably keep the FZ1 though.
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:38 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

boyzo wrote:
Quote:
Nikon D2H DSLR
4.1 megapixels
Had a look its true Odd when new DSLR's are like 8 mp

The Nikon D2H DSLR may have very low high ASA noise and also
higher dynamic range like more than 5 stops being typical for most DigiCams.

Found it odd too. Guess they're reacting to the market, and the Pros don't weigh megapixels as much as consumers?
NickTrop 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 12:13 AM.