-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Best DSLR for large prints 1000-1400$
- Thread starter Szalik
- Start date
spt_gb
Senior Member
Well, with a little shopping about you can get a Canon 7D for about $1400. That's an 18MPixel APS-C format DSLR, which is about as high resolution as you can get in that price bracket.
mostly low light, because I like to play with light and shade and outdor for 60% shots.
I was considering to buy Pentax K-7. Because I also like the very solid build of that camera.
I found also D300s very interesting and the price is lower than 7D
I still have to choose the lens so I would like stick more to the 1000$ than 1400$ unles there is a big difference in Image quality
Prints like poster size. atleast 30 inch
I was considering to buy Pentax K-7. Because I also like the very solid build of that camera.
I found also D300s very interesting and the price is lower than 7D
I still have to choose the lens so I would like stick more to the 1000$ than 1400$ unles there is a big difference in Image quality
Prints like poster size. atleast 30 inch
tex
Veteran Member
all the cameras in that price range are going to be sub FF, which is your best bet at regular printing at that size.... the closest FF camera to that price is going to be the sony 850 i think......
BUT
modern printing gives a person a h#lluva lot more leeway on this than before. i get drop dead beautiful pints of 17" on the short side from 8mp small sensor(although not P&S) camera files, provided there aren't bad exposure problems, etc. i can see (and i have lots of experience printing from the old wet days) that i could go even larger than this without much PP effort on a bunch of files, detail wise. tonality might be another issue, but not a terrible one here. with a 4/3 sensor printing is just fab. so the nikon and canon and pentax and sony apsc offerings will be just fine as well, and maybe just slightly better, although not enough to be any kind of big deal.
also, despite what some people seem to think here, i have never ever ever seen anyone in a gallery, museum, or other presentation situation walk up and slap a loupe on a photo. with a print that big, people will step back a bit (although keen ones will lean in and people won't step back as far as some on these forums maintain). so you have that working for you. you also have working for you that sophisticated viewers are a pretty small part of the population. this may be really difficult for some to believe, but people tend not to be looking at some of these pixel-peep issues when viewing a photo. that is not to say you shouldn't pay attention to them, just that it's healthier intellectually to maintain a sense of balance and perspective in these matters.
really, in the end you have a lot of decent options of relative equivalence. you just may need to study up a bit more on PP and printing. if you can stretch your budget and this size is a regular one for you, then try to go FF, though, or, get a decent MF film rig, an epson V700 scanner, and do that route---it's still cost effective for the next few years, as long as you're shooting low volume.
BUT
modern printing gives a person a h#lluva lot more leeway on this than before. i get drop dead beautiful pints of 17" on the short side from 8mp small sensor(although not P&S) camera files, provided there aren't bad exposure problems, etc. i can see (and i have lots of experience printing from the old wet days) that i could go even larger than this without much PP effort on a bunch of files, detail wise. tonality might be another issue, but not a terrible one here. with a 4/3 sensor printing is just fab. so the nikon and canon and pentax and sony apsc offerings will be just fine as well, and maybe just slightly better, although not enough to be any kind of big deal.
also, despite what some people seem to think here, i have never ever ever seen anyone in a gallery, museum, or other presentation situation walk up and slap a loupe on a photo. with a print that big, people will step back a bit (although keen ones will lean in and people won't step back as far as some on these forums maintain). so you have that working for you. you also have working for you that sophisticated viewers are a pretty small part of the population. this may be really difficult for some to believe, but people tend not to be looking at some of these pixel-peep issues when viewing a photo. that is not to say you shouldn't pay attention to them, just that it's healthier intellectually to maintain a sense of balance and perspective in these matters.
really, in the end you have a lot of decent options of relative equivalence. you just may need to study up a bit more on PP and printing. if you can stretch your budget and this size is a regular one for you, then try to go FF, though, or, get a decent MF film rig, an epson V700 scanner, and do that route---it's still cost effective for the next few years, as long as you're shooting low volume.
M
munro harrap
Guest
Canon 5D
design7
Leading Member
The Davinator
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 24,707
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 37,836
While I am a strong proponent for film use where applicable, an Epson V700 for MF, on prints 30" and up, is simply not a great combo. The Epson is really limited to a max of 16x20 from MF film. Tonality and rez just break down. I've found that the 7D is pretty much on par with MF film at that size when scanned on my Epson. If you want 30" prints from MF, you need a Nikon 9000.
Thank for a very detaild information...
But I think I didnt get the point in that sentence above.
From that epson V700 I can make 21x32 inch prints.
So It is a scanner/printer ?
Sorry if it's a stupid question but I have only a basic scanner for 50 $, and I dont know if I understood you exactly
The Davinator
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 24,707
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 37,836
The V700 is a flatbed scanner. As I mentioned in my post above, from MF, the results will be less than steller at the sizes you're after.Thank for a very detaild information...
But I think I didnt get the point in that sentence above.
From that epson V700 I can make 21x32 inch prints.
So It is a scanner/printer ?
Sorry if it's a stupid question but I have only a basic scanner for 50 $, and I dont know if I understood you exactly
tex
Veteran Member
if you want to just forget about his budget, then we can talk about anything.
the cool scan is running just shy of $2K, and that doesn't include the camera. under my scenario, a V700 and some careful used MF purchases, he stays in that under $1,400 range. you more than blew his budget with just the scanner.
are you saying the results he would get using a V700 and an MF film rig is going to be worse than an APSC or 4/3 camera (we're talking enlargement, only)? i think they'd be better, for what he's talking about, although he'd be stuck with the film and processing costs. my 6cm x9cm neg scans don't look as nice as my 4x5's, but they're hardly cr#p. there's no question i can get larger prints with less uprezzing....
of course, this kinda all begs the question of how with a $1,000- $1,400 camera budget one would be affording a lot of 30" prints on a regular basis.....but i was trying to be helpful.
the cool scan is running just shy of $2K, and that doesn't include the camera. under my scenario, a V700 and some careful used MF purchases, he stays in that under $1,400 range. you more than blew his budget with just the scanner.
are you saying the results he would get using a V700 and an MF film rig is going to be worse than an APSC or 4/3 camera (we're talking enlargement, only)? i think they'd be better, for what he's talking about, although he'd be stuck with the film and processing costs. my 6cm x9cm neg scans don't look as nice as my 4x5's, but they're hardly cr#p. there's no question i can get larger prints with less uprezzing....
of course, this kinda all begs the question of how with a $1,000- $1,400 camera budget one would be affording a lot of 30" prints on a regular basis.....but i was trying to be helpful.
tex
Veteran Member
nada
tex
Veteran Member
lots of medium format cameras on the used market for good prices, although some are still relatively expensive.
The Davinator
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 24,707
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 37,836
You've had a number of people offer tips. Currently, the best DSLRs in that range for that size prints are the higher MP sensor cameras....the 50D, the 7D, the Pentax K20D and K7. These are currently your best options for large prints in that price range.
Oh, the MF stands for "Medium Format"...as in the medium format the one poster mentioned. Doesn't really apply to what you're after though.
Thanx everyone for your help.
So I think that I would take the K-7. For the rest a good lens.
It's to bad that there is no relatively cheap printers for a normal customer which could print large image formats.
Does it pays of to buy such a thing or it is better to send your images to other companies and pay for the large printing ?
What is your experience? because I have no idea.
So I think that I would take the K-7. For the rest a good lens.
It's to bad that there is no relatively cheap printers for a normal customer which could print large image formats.
Does it pays of to buy such a thing or it is better to send your images to other companies and pay for the large printing ?
What is your experience? because I have no idea.
tex
Veteran Member
at least in my experience. dealing with labs, no matter how good they are, is expensive per print if you are at all picky about the output, because it means multiple proofs to dial in the final print---and you pay for every one.
BUT, for the size print you want, if it's 30" on the short side, you need to cough up about $6,000.00, or for up to 24" on the short side, about $3,000.00---and of course that's in the U.S., where these things are cheaper. you'll pay a lot more in Poland.
so, if you are not doing this very often, then obviously go with a lab. all the time? you need to figure out how to finance a printer of your own, because prints that are 30" on the long side are going to cost between $35 and $50 a piece with no proofing.
BUT, for the size print you want, if it's 30" on the short side, you need to cough up about $6,000.00, or for up to 24" on the short side, about $3,000.00---and of course that's in the U.S., where these things are cheaper. you'll pay a lot more in Poland.
so, if you are not doing this very often, then obviously go with a lab. all the time? you need to figure out how to finance a printer of your own, because prints that are 30" on the long side are going to cost between $35 and $50 a piece with no proofing.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum