Nikon D40 Review is up !!!

Started Dec 20, 2006 | Discussions thread
Dave Lewis Forum Pro • Posts: 10,425
Re: I wonder

I think we all miss the megapixel point. It is a simple quantitative system for attracting customers more than anything else. Folks need to appraise their camera usage before springing for the next step in the ladder to nowhere. My displays are large. I routinely use a 23" Cinema display and a 20" imac. The difference at full screen views of my Canon 5D images and my Pentax *istD images is nill. When I print images from both those cameras to 8x10 or even A3 size, both produce pretty much equal results. I've looked at output from the 10 megapixel Sony sensors from four different cameras, two Nikons, one Sony and one Pentax and, other than increased high ISO noise, I can see little or no advantage. Surely there is the potential for an advantage with extensive crops, but if we buy a camera only for its cropping ability we are not doing a very good job in our every day shooting.

I have been wanting to get one more Pentax body with SR to complement my Pentax collection. I have been tossing the K100D and the K10D around for some time. The additional size of the K10D is pretty much a game breaker, but the feature set and weather sealing is quite attractive. The additional megapizels, from what I've seen, would give me nothing, but additional high ISO noise and occasional banding, so I made a decision two days ago. The K100D is on its way from Beach Camera right now. I may get the K10D in the future some time, but when I do it surely won't be because of its greater pixel count. In fact that additional pixel count is one of the reasons I didn't get it this time around.

dave

ohyva wrote:
if in practice no difference between 6 and 8 MP cameras and in
practice no difference between 8 and 10MP cameras, so 6 and 10MP
cameras must deliver about the same. Sound odd and not quite
according what I have seen.

Also I wonder why buy top-notch lenses delivering 2000 LPH if the
differences between cameras are not significant. You should do just
fine with good consumer lenses delivering something like 1600 LPH.
But again not quite what I have experienced in my own photography.

I really love those pics where in (U)WA landscapes the foliage is
dranw clearly or when in portraits the hair etc is drawn clearly.
There I see I want even more MPs and even sharper lenses I have
today. I love the situation when I need in RSP to turn the
sharpening a bit lower to get more natural looking images as the
original RAW file is so sharp as itself.

Phil Askey wrote:
I see you've swallowed the megapixel pill whole.

DigitalPowerShot wrote:

"who needs 8MP?" :-))))) Very objective!

...and the ISO comparison: no word about the superior 350D (wich is
discontinued) !!

Phil's reviews are not that objective and honest as they used to be.
Simon is more objective in this respect.

Where is the sentence...?: "the camera is not bad at all, but the
competition had a very good 6MP (entry level) camera years ago. Now
entry level cameras have 10MP!!!)

-- hide signature --

Dave Lewis

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Dan
Dan
Aby
Aby
Aby
Aby
Aby
Aby
Dan
GLP
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow