Are old digital cameras good enough?

[photoholiko]

I see a lot of debate about Film vs Digital on DPR forums and how the need for higher MP is required for good pictures.

The sample I'm showing proves (IMO) that even 6MP can match or surpass film and one can still get acceptable results with lower MP cameras. Makes wonder did I need to buy a 24MP camera?

 

[markyboy81]

I see a lot of debate about Film vs Digital on DPR forums and how the need for higher MP is required for good pictures.

The sample I'm showing proves (IMO) that even 6MP can match or surpass film and one can still get acceptable results with lower MP cameras. Makes wonder did I need to buy a 24MP camera?

I get your point, but with macro you don't need as many pixels for the image to look good compared to landscape or other scenarios.

 

[Dennis]

I see a lot of debate about Film vs Digital on DPR forums and how the need for higher MP is required for good pictures.

I haven't seen anyone say higher MP is required for good pictures and I spend a lot of time here.

As for your question, you didn't say good enough for what ?

• Dennis
  --
  Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

 

[Humansvillian]

The newspaper in our little town supplied a new $2,000 Nikon D100 6mp camera to our one local reporter in the year 2002 and switched from film to digital. They went ahead and used the exiting kit lens and generic flash unit off the old Nikon film camera.

In those 15 years there have been 52 issues per year of the local paper, with big color pictures of kids smiling and playing ball and the aftermath of car wrecks and all such as that, and all of those pictures were taken, and are still being taken, by that 6mp Nikon D100 with it's ancient kit lens.

Now, should that D100 ever wear out, there's no way they'll buy another D100 to replace it.

They'll buy a modern 24mp Nikon, because Nikon hasn't made 6mp cameras in about fifteen years.

The 6mp sensors were more than good enough to beat film.

The new 24mp sensors are just a little better is all, but not as good as they'll be in another fifteen years.

The camera body is a lens holder for the lens. It needs a sensor in order to work, and the camera companies use the latest and best ones available at the time they make the camera.

The old cameras are not obsolete.

They are obsolescent.

--
Humansville is a town in the Missouri Ozarks

 

[Mark_A]

I can shoot my old Fuji dslr in 12 or 6 mpx modes. I chose 6 because there is no loss in quality and I never print larger than 10x15 inches.

Nothing wrong with 6mpx if it is enough for your uses. But a 24mpx image will also give you more options for cropping.

Mark_A

Thread for Sunrise & Sunset pictures (part 2!)

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58832936

 

[The Davinator]

The newspaper in our little town supplied a new $2,000 Nikon D100 6mp camera to our one local reporter in the year 2002 and switched from film to digital. They went ahead and used the exiting kit lens and generic flash unit off the old Nikon film camera.

In those 15 years there have been 52 issues per year of the local paper, with big color pictures of kids smiling and playing ball and the aftermath of car wrecks and all such as that, and all of those pictures were taken, and are still being taken, by that 6mp Nikon D100 with it's ancient kit lens.

Now, should that D100 ever wear out, there's no way they'll buy another D100 to replace it.

They'll buy a modern 24mp Nikon, because Nikon hasn't made 6mp cameras in about fifteen years.

The 6mp sensors were more than good enough to beat film.

No, they were more than good enough for a newspaper....but they had very little dynamic range and resolution that lagged 35mm film.

The new 24mp sensors are just a little better is all, but not as good as they'll be in another fifteen years.

100% more horizontal resolution and 4 stops improvement in dynamic range is "a little?"

The camera body is a lens holder for the lens. It needs a sensor in order to work, and the camera companies use the latest and best ones available at the time they make the camera.

The old cameras are not obsolete.

They are obsolescent.

--
Humansville is a town in the Missouri Ozarks

 

[mrgs1]

Judging by how many D700 threads.Old cameras are good enough.

 

[Bobthearch]

Are old digital cameras good enough?

Depends on what the final product is. Cropping a significant amount and then printing for closeup viewing of a 24" print... 6mp isn't really enough. But good enough for Facebook or newspaper print, sure.

I see a lot of debate about Film vs Digital on DPR forums and how the need for higher MP is required for good pictures.

I haven't seen that, not with the word "required" at least. Many people, including myself, do prefer a higher mp count.

The sample I'm showing proves (IMO) that even 6MP can match or surpass film

Depends on the film. Depends on the camera's other characteristics. Depends on the photographer.

Using a 24mp Nikon I can not match the detail level and photo quality of an Ansel Adams print from 1930. Not even close.

and one can still get acceptable results with lower MP cameras. Makes wonder did I need to buy a 24MP camera?

"Need" is a difficult word. How many of really 'need' to buy anything? How many people buy a new camera primarily because they 'need' a higher megapixel count? I never have.

I don't know of any camera that was ever released with the only improvement or change being an increase of resolution.

 

[Mark_A]

Every camera has strengths and weaknesses ..

The more you use them and investigate their various settings the more you will learn how to get the best from them.

Mark_A

Thread for Sunrise & Sunset pictures (part 2!)

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58832936

 

[Humansvillian]

The newspaper in our little town supplied a new $2,000 Nikon D100 6mp camera to our one local reporter in the year 2002 and switched from film to digital. They went ahead and used the exiting kit lens and generic flash unit off the old Nikon film camera.

In those 15 years there have been 52 issues per year of the local paper, with big color pictures of kids smiling and playing ball and the aftermath of car wrecks and all such as that, and all of those pictures were taken, and are still being taken, by that 6mp Nikon D100 with it's ancient kit lens.

Now, should that D100 ever wear out, there's no way they'll buy another D100 to replace it.

They'll buy a modern 24mp Nikon, because Nikon hasn't made 6mp cameras in about fifteen years.

The 6mp sensors were more than good enough to beat film.

No, they were more than good enough for a newspaper....but they had very little dynamic range and resolution that lagged 35mm film.

The new 24mp sensors are just a little better is all, but not as good as they'll be in another fifteen years.

100% more horizontal resolution and 4 stops improvement in dynamic range is "a little?"

The camera body is a lens holder for the lens. It needs a sensor in order to work, and the camera companies use the latest and best ones available at the time they make the camera.

The old cameras are not obsolete.

They are obsolescent.

 

[Kung Fu]

I enjoy using them. I don't care if anyone else thinks they're good enough or not.

 

[mrgs1]

There have been some once in a lifetime photos captured for newspapers it's the moment and content not just the equipment.

 

[FLruckas]

(nt)

 

[Humansvillian]

Once upon a time, in 2004, Olympus made a fixed lens, DSLR styled bridge camera, using a top notch Sony sensor that made dynamite good looking photographs. Look at what Kung Fu does with his copy, for proof!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusc8080wz/

I looked at one on Ebay, and you can buy all of them you want for about $100.

But even if I had one, I'd still not be able to make those beautiful photographs that Kung Fu did with his obsolescent camera.

It's not the bow that hits the target, it's the archer.

 

[FLruckas]

Once upon a time, in 2004, Olympus made a fixed lens, DSLR styled bridge camera, using a top notch Sony sensor that made dynamite good looking photographs. Look at what Kung Fu does with his copy, for proof!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusc8080wz/

I looked at one on Ebay, and you can buy all of them you want for about $100.

But even if I had one, I'd still not be able to make those beautiful photographs that Kung Fu did with his obsolescent camera.

It's not the bow that hits the target, it's the archer.

 

[Dreamscape Photo]

Yes but only the good ones. I still use a canon 20D and 30D and a Sony R1 they do fine at wedding ect.... i like old cameras as i have a small budget and need a few cameras for back up but i tend to stick with the higher up old cameras. I think an original Canon 5D is now a bargin!

 

[Dreamscape Photo]

Once upon a time, in 2004, Olympus made a fixed lens, DSLR styled bridge camera, using a top notch Sony sensor that made dynamite good looking photographs. Look at what Kung Fu does with his copy, for proof!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusc8080wz/

I looked at one on Ebay, and you can buy all of them you want for about $100.

But even if I had one, I'd still not be able to make those beautiful photographs that Kung Fu did with his obsolescent camera.

It's not the bow that hits the target, it's the archer.

--
Humansville is a town in the Missouri Ozarks

I got one a little while ago for £40 UK and its great! images are nice but can be slow with raw. below is an example. done from a raw.







--
Just go out and shoot photos!!!!

 

[Max Iso]

For me, the difference has never been IQ, it was AF and other features. I have used cameras as old as 2007, a D300. It's 12 MP was just fine, but if the AF wasn't fairly advanced for it's time, it wouldn't be so fine in 2016. Other features are not must haves but make life easier like wifi, NFC, E shutter, photo stacking modes, ect.

Many older cameras won't have this stuff and if you want it, an older body may not be good enough and it will have nothing to do with IQ. I think some people talk about IQ but that's far from the only reason people upgrade to newer stuff.




One of my favorite D300 shots. Plenty of IQ for me, even 9 years later.

 

[RedFox88]

I see a lot of debate about Film vs Digital on DPR forums and how the need for higher MP is required for good pictures.

The sample I'm showing proves (IMO) that even 6MP can match or surpass film

good low ISO film is much more than just 6MP

 

[Kung Fu]

Once upon a time, in 2004, Olympus made a fixed lens, DSLR styled bridge camera, using a top notch Sony sensor that made dynamite good looking photographs. Look at what Kung Fu does with his copy, for proof!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusc8080wz/

I looked at one on Ebay, and you can buy all of them you want for about $100.

But even if I had one, I'd still not be able to make those beautiful photographs that Kung Fu did with his obsolescent camera.

It's not the bow that hits the target, it's the archer.

Thank you for the kind words.