snubbr.com

Image quality field
Hi All. A silly question. Please point me to the correct thread if this has already been answered. I am seriously looking for a decent DSLR (entry level). Found some with very good ("highly recommended") review. Does anyone know what the "image quality" field in the "conclusion" section of each camera means? How is this field calculated? Is it based on the overall image quality (sharpness, correct colors, good light handling etc) or it is incluenced by the number of pixels? In other words, if I have cameraX with 6mpix producint excellent sharp images and cameraY with 10mpix producing a little soft/blurry images, is cameraY going to have a higher rating in the "image quality" field or not? Just trying to understand what to focus on when I find the best model for me. Thanks a lot in advance!..

Comments (13)

Phil et. al can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the number of pixels enter into it. They've been protesting the megapixel race for as long as I can remember, and I tend to agree with them. More isn't necessarily better, and sometimes it's worse..

This maybe isn't the answer you're looking for, but honestly, all the DSLRs have good image quality now. No one brand is so ahead of everyone else that it makes the decision simple. You're better off picking a brand based on the lens lineup available for that mount, because once you start buying into a particular system, it's very expensive to switch brands...

Comment #1

Thanks! I actually don't think I will be buying too many lenses. Besides, I will get either a Canon or a Nikon so there will definitely be "decent" lenses available:) I was just concerned about my choice because is most reviews "image quality" is "8". This is a little discouraging....Both Canon XTi and Canon SD 700IS have the same image quality?! This makes no sense to me.....

Comment #2

..for thoese who conduct the tests...not anyone here. I would think the rating has nothing to do with lenses when given to Dslrs and a great deal to do with lenses when given to non Dslars. There should be a "guide to ratings" here somewhere on this site that should help. Good luck..

Comment #3

Actually, if you're not intending to buy many lenses or specialised lenses or hugely expensive lenses, I think you might as well have a look at other brands than Nikon and Canon..

Other brands also have a decent basic lens setup, and you might end up getting more bang for your buck - e.g. that's how I ended up buying a pentax K10D instead of a Nikon D80..

Comment #4

Edinuser wrote:[snip].

Both Canon XTi and Canon SD 700IS have thesame image quality?! This makes no sense to me....

The ratings are against other cameras in the same class. Phil is not trying to make a direct comparison between the XTi and the SD 700IS.Chris R..

Comment #5

This makes things even more confusing:) In this case, how can a non-experienced person judge if a camera is good compared to other ones? If an "8" in the DSLR world means a different thing than "8" in the point-and-shoot world, this does not bring too much info for the buyers....

Chris R-UK wrote:.

Edinuser wrote:[snip].

Both Canon XTi and Canon SD 700IS have thesame image quality?! This makes no sense to me....

The ratings are against other cameras in the same class. Phil is nottrying to make a direct comparison between the XTi and the SD 700IS.Chris R..

Comment #6

Well, imho it does. If you would be in he market for say a family-car and the rating for it's speed would be 8 out of ten, how would you relate that to a formula-1 car?.

Different use, different users, different category. A cell-phone can have a decent camera as well. But nobody compares that with the result of a Mamiya or Hasselblad...

Comment #7

Fully agree. This is exactly what my concern was - there is no base to compare the cameras. All of them have reviews that say absolutely the same - "good camera". Some of them are "slightly better", others are "slightly worse". There is nothing to convince you to buy a particular one. All 500$ DSLR models have "some corner softness, occasional overexposure, occasional purple fringing, etc" - same review for 2500$ DSLR cameras.

But if you start from scratch - there is nothing to point you in the right direction. Nothing that says "buy this model and not that one because this one produces much sharper images than the other one". As a new user, should I assume to "buy whichever model you first see because all of them are the same"? I believe that my questions start to become annoying and I apologize for that. The reason is that so far none of the answers actually shed any light - either the other users have no idea what I am asking or there is in fact zero difference between the cameras reviewed in this site....

Debruyne wrote:.

Well, imho it does. If you would be in he market for say a family-carand the rating for it's speed would be 8 out of ten, how would yourelate that to a formula-1 car?Different use, different users, different category. A cell-phone canhave a decent camera as well. But nobody compares that with theresult of a Mamiya or Hasselblad...

Comment #8

Just a quick comment about the example with the cars. The market DOES make a clear statement about which one has what quality. The market does say "buy a minivan if you want to have enough space for 3 kids and a dog and don't care about style and speed" and "buy a BMW if you want style and speed". After a user reads the market's reviews, there is a clear direction where to go. The classification is clear. So far I have never seen a statement "buy a DSLR because it is FAR better than ANY point-and-shoot".

Which makes me believe that the _only_ benefit is the interchangeable lenses and nothing else...Image quality seems completely independent of the type of camera....

Edinuser wrote:.

Fully agree. This is exactly what my concern was - there is no baseto compare the cameras. All of them have reviews that say absolutelythe same - "good camera". Some of them are "slightly better", othersare "slightly worse". There is nothing to convince you to buy aparticular one. All 500$ DSLR models have "some corner softness,occasional overexposure, occasional purple fringing, etc" - samereview for 2500$ DSLR cameras.

But ifyou start from scratch - there is nothing to point you in the rightdirection. Nothing that says "buy this model and not that one becausethis one produces much sharper images than the other one". As a newuser, should I assume to "buy whichever model you first see becauseall of them are the same"? I believe that my questions start tobecome annoying and I apologize for that. The reason is that so farnone of the answers actually shed any light - either the other usershave no idea what I am asking or there is in fact zero differencebetween the cameras reviewed in this site....

Debruyne wrote:.

Well, imho it does. If you would be in he market for say a family-carand the rating for it's speed would be 8 out of ten, how would yourelate that to a formula-1 car?Different use, different users, different category. A cell-phone canhave a decent camera as well. But nobody compares that with theresult of a Mamiya or Hasselblad...

Comment #9

Thanks for giving us an idea what it looks like from your viewpoint. It's easy for some of us to forget what it's like to be completely new to the world of digital cameras..

Here's a simple version: DSLRs are almost always better than compacts. Any DSLR will give you better results faster and more reliably under a wider range of conditions. A DSLR system is much more adaptable and customizable than a compact system. That said, DSLRs are also bigger, heavier, more expensive, and (maybe) more complicated..

The one area where compacts are truly better than SLRs is macro. It's not uncommon for a compact camera to be able to focus on something a mere 1cm from the lens. You have to buy a very weird and expensive lens for an SLR to do that. It has to do with the sensor size..

The reviews on this site are excellent. You won't find more detailed, standardized, reliable examinations of all the minute aspects of a camera anywhere else. But ignore the ratings & recommendation, or at least take them with a grain of salt. The important information is all in the body of the review. The summary is good too, and often gives their overall impression of a camera, something that doesn't come out in pixel-peeping image comparisons. So read the reviews, but ignore the ratings...

Comment #10

In a way, most dslr of the same price-range will do the same thing yes..

But like a car, you will need to handle it and get the feel. Nobody can tel you, you just have to try..

But I get your point. I was in the same predicament over 6 months. I had a clear idea: It had to be a real camera (was used to play around with older nikon, yashika and kodak) and I have a p&s Sony P73 (very good btw); So I knew it's limitations..

In sunny daylight I can make as good a pic with the Sony as with a low-level-entry dslr..

But then the problems begin...... If it's not sunny, or subject is moving or from a great distance, I got nothing worth keeping. Indoors it's difficult without a good flash(es) to avoid ugly shadows. Once things get a little bit more difficult, the dslr begins to shine and will outperform any P&S..

Still, I got confused as well by all the info. In fact, I am still a bit confused. I just might have taken the Samsung(pentax) with in-body IS...........

One could argue that we give points on a sliding scale for IQ: But then a mediocre cell-phone would have a rating of 2 out of ten. This would also show shortcomings though: You would have to rate the dslr 0 out of ten, coz it can't phone..

You are right when you state that at times, there is no IQ difference between a 500$ and a 2500$ model. But the 2500$ model may have made the pic possible, when missing the "great shot" with the 500$ model, because lack of speed/bracketing/iso performance/commander mode for flash/no FF and/or more knobs and possibilities..

Ratings don't tell the whole story. Much more depends on what you are looking for..

Or better, what is of more interest to you. And maybe there lies your problem. What are you looking for? What are you willing to spend? What is important to you?I bought the D40 and I can assure you it's just fine..

If I could rate it, 9 out of ten. Why? Because price-wise, I couldn't get any better and it's given me more then I expected. For the same reason, a very expensive camera could be a disappointment. Price is also a feature that is taken into consideration for ratings..

And last but not least, don't think that the only value of dslr lies in interchangeable.

Lenses. If you are a happy P&S person, you will only need 1/2 lens(es), the kit-lens(es)...

Comment #11

Thanks a lot! This is exactly the statement I was looking for:) It really explains what to expect and what not to expect and this is exactly what I needed!.

Debruyne wrote:.

In a way, most dslr of the same price-range will do the same thing yes.But like a car, you will need to handle it and get the feel. Nobodycan tel you, you just have to try.But I get your point. I was in the same predicament over 6 months. Ihad a clear idea: It had to be a real camera (was used to play aroundwith older nikon, yashika and kodak) and I have a p&s Sony P73 (verygood btw); So I knew it's limitations.In sunny daylight I can make as good a pic with the Sony as with alow-level-entry dslr.But then the problems begin...... If it's not sunny, or subject ismoving or from a great distance, I got nothing worth keeping. Indoorsit's difficult without a good flash(es) to avoid ugly shadows.

In fact, I am still abit confused. I just might have taken the Samsung(pentax) within-body IS..........One could argue that we give points on a sliding scale for IQ: Butthen a mediocre cell-phone would have a rating of 2 out of ten. Thiswould also show shortcomings though: You would have to rate the dslr0 out of ten, coz it can't phone.You are right when you state that at times, there is no IQ differencebetween a 500$ and a 2500$ model. But the 2500$ model may have madethe pic possible, when missing the "great shot" with the 500$ model,because lack of speed/bracketing/iso performance/commander mode forflash/no FF and/or more knobs and possibilities.Ratings don't tell the whole story. Much more depends on what you arelooking for.Or better, what is of more interest to you.

What are you looking for? What are you willing to spend?What is important to you?I bought the D40 and I can assure you it's just fine.If I could rate it, 9 out of ten. Why? Because price-wise, I couldn'tget any better and it's given me more then I expected. For the samereason, a very expensive camera could be a disappointment. Price isalso a feature that is taken into consideration for ratings.And last but not least, don't think that the only value of dslr liesin interchangeablelenses. If you are a happy P&S person, you will only need 1/2lens(es), the kit-lens(es)...

Comment #12

Awesome! I guess I was just not asking the correct questions earlier today:) Now things seem a lot more clear:) Thanks a lot! I fully agree about the quality of the reviews on the site. I visit it almost every day, some days more than once. This is the reason for me to be so surprised that at first I did not get any concrete answers:) Everything seemed so professional here that I expected a simple answer to my simple question:) Thanks again!.

Inspectoreleven wrote:.

Thanks for giving us an idea what it looks like from your viewpoint.It's easy for some of us to forget what it's like to be completelynew to the world of digital cameras..

Here's a simple version: DSLRs are almost always better thancompacts. Any DSLR will give you better results faster and morereliably under a wider range of conditions. A DSLR system is muchmore adaptable and customizable than a compact system. That said,DSLRs are also bigger, heavier, more expensive, and (maybe) morecomplicated..

The one area where compacts are truly better than SLRs is macro.It's not uncommon for a compact camera to be able to focus onsomething a mere 1cm from the lens. You have to buy a very weird andexpensive lens for an SLR to do that. It has to do with the sensorsize..

The reviews on this site are excellent. You won't find moredetailed, standardized, reliable examinations of all the minuteaspects of a camera anywhere else. But ignore the ratings &recommendation, or at least take them with a grain of salt. Theimportant information is all in the body of the review. The summaryis good too, and often gives their overall impression of a camera,something that doesn't come out in pixel-peeping image comparisons.So read the reviews, but ignore the ratings...

Comment #13

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.