Beyond Megapixels - Part II

TheTechLounge writes "This is Part II of a series of three editorial articles examining current digital photography hardware, as well as my views of what is to come. In this segment I will be focusing on build, size, weight and ergonomics of camera bodies, as well as the size, weight, function and versatility of the glass strapped to the front of it. If you haven't already, you may want to read Part I first."

Comments

There making cam's to "camp"

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not expecting a military spec strength durable camera, but these comtempory cam's seem to fragile.
I remember seeing this store clerk setting the display of new cam's; the clerk was handling them as if they were new born babies.
Then again one those cam's probably cost a months wage for the clerk.

What is this article trying to say?

[B4RSK]

The first article in this series was reasonably well laid out and the information quite good.

But this one? What is he trying to say? It almost seems as though the article is missing several pages...

And a DSLR with a whole new series of lenses, presumably on a different mount? Not likely! In such a scenario anyone who eventually upgrades from a 10D-level camera to a full professional DSLR would be stuck with replacing all lenses as well. From the user-standpoint that obviously sucks, and from the camera maker standpoint there is no "brand lock in". If you have to change all your lenses anyway, then you can easily jump brands at the same time.

What is going to happen is eventually 10D-level cameras will have full-frame 35mm sensors. Canon and Nikon might not like this idea very much, but someone else is going to do it if they don't. If Minolta/Pentax/Sigma etc move in this direction, Canon and Nikon will be forced to follow. As pixel counts increase sensor size will eventually have to follow.

When this happens, prosumer point-and-shoots will move to APS-sized sensors, and the standard point-and-shoot models will increase to something around what the prosumers have now.

Self Advertising Concerns

[Artega VH]

There are going to be three parts to this article on the tech lounge. But really.. is slashdot going to be able to have insightful commentary for all three parts? Or will it be a case of comment rehashing and karma whoring in all three threads..

Surely one slashdot article with links to all three techlounge articles would be more appropriate? But of course 3 separate articles on slashdot generates more advertising revenue than 1 doesnt it?

I have mod points at this current time, but I'm sure as hell not using them in this thread... I don't want to waste my time reading part 1 and part 2 checking that noone is karma whoring...

BAH...

See an earlier Slashdot

[Darth Cider]

Back in October 2002 Slashdot asked Digital Camera Passing Quality of Film? which referenced a field report from Luminous Landscape. Now that was a great article, full of technical info. (The Canon 1DS 11-megapixel camera surpassed 35mm film.) Why is Slashdot calling attention to an informationally empty piece like Beyond Megapixels?

Re:Article is Wrong on Lenses

[ipfwadm]

I don't think either of you are exactly right. Obviously the manufacturer wants you to buy more lenses, because that means more money for them. But they also don't want you to have to throw away all your old lenses, because that would require a huge initial investment on your part (new camera + all new lenses) which would certainly deter a lot of people.

The happy medium? Cameras with an APS sensor size, which allow the use of the old lenses, but with a different effective focal length than when used with 35mm. You don't have to throw out all your old lenses, but because of the different performance characteristics they'll have when used with D-SLRs, you'll probably want to upgrade them in the future. You're happy because you can still use all your old lenses, and the manufacturer is happy because you'll probably buy new ones in the not-so-distant future, not to mention the fact that you also bought the camera.

Do I think this is the primary reason for manufacturers using APS-size sensors vs. 35mm? No, but I'm sure I'm not the first one to think of it.

Re:Article is Wrong on Lenses

[wfberg]

OK, I meant to say a full-frame sensor DSLR, like the Canon 1Ds.. With smaller sensor, apparently the image is cropped relative to 35mm.. Still, both 35mm and smaller sensors are both rectangular..

I wonder why they don't use a built-in lens to undo the ~ 1.5 'magnification'.

How sky-hi-end benefits us...

[Fringe]

The articles seem a bit lightweight, especially do what you could quickly glean from Steve's DigiCams or Imaging Resource or DP Review. I do agree with the little data in the article, specifically that above about 4MP, the average consumer doesn't benefit much. The big problem is that the lenses can't give you more than that, at the price and size range we're seeing.

But there's a huge benefit to this tech-race. More digital cameras. People with them, use them a lot more than they did with film. No cost to take, no cost to view, low cost to print or mail. I wrote an open-source project to make building galleries free-and-easy (primarily for my family initially, see it at Picture Pager on SourceForge) and that too is a benefit of digitals... they gain from the open source world.

So the only downside of 8MP cameras is that they're the Ferraris or Porsches of consumer-land. They push the technology, in a few years us mere mortals will benefit, but serious drivers and photographers benefit, at least slightly, now while bearing the hefty early-adopter price.

Did anyone find this article hard to read?

[redshadow01]

Reading this one over I found it rather hard to keep track of what was being said in a logical manner..the guy is all over the place without a logical structure to the paragraphs... Part one is better written I think, or better edited maybe...any thoughts?