[NBLUG/talk] Digital cameras

S. Saunders sms at sonic.net
Fri Jan 20 12:41:06 PST 2006


On Fri, January 20, 2006 09:22, Eric Eisenhart wrote:

> And, of course, Canon and Nikon are the two companies you
> really want to go with if you want a Digital SLR.

Errrr... why?

Maybe Canon & Nikon's top-of-the-line are REALLY the best ones on the
market (tho IMHO that's open to debate), but comparing their mid-range and
entry level models... are (e.g.) Nikon's D50 and the D70 really any better
(either in absolute terms, "better cameras," or relative terms, "better
values") than, say, the Olympus Evolt series (specially the 500, which you
can get in a 2-lens kit for sub-$1K) or the KonicaMinolta's 5D or 7D, with
antishake in the body (and thus reliably 2-3 stops faster than competitors
without antishake (and those with all antishake in-lens = re-buying
antishake with every lens))?

I mean, this is a linux list, so relative merit of cameras is veering OT a
bit... but I'd really like to know if you can cite any reason for
low-to-mid dSLR buyers to only consider Canon & Nikon...  And, of course,
RAW files and other Linux interoperability issues are on-topic, so...  ;-)


> If you're interested in photography where RAW format actually makes
> sense (high-quality images that you can adjust the whitebalance on

Whitebalance, sharpening edges, etc etc etc.  There's a fair bit of lossy
in-camera processing other than whitebalance...


> at home instead of before taking the picture), Adobe "Digital Negative"
> (DNG) format seems to be where things are headed. Still proprietary,
> but "open proprietary" like PDF.

Hopefully!  Too early to tell, IMHO.


> Hasselblad, Leica, Ricoh and Samsung appear to be the 4
> manufacturers with some kind of native DNG format.  If you can afford
> a Hasselblad, please bring it to a meeting and let us all drool near it.

<drooling>
I'll even promise to wear a bib... and latex gloves.  ;-)


> Maybe even push some buttons; they've got some 39-megapixel units
> now...

?:-)

Can you make a case for me, for 39MP's?  99% of even pro work, afaict,
needs no more than about 10-15MP, really.  That gets you an 11x17(ish)
image as crisp as ASA25 can get...  Barring some scientific work, some
military work, and a few other applications, I really don't see 39MP's as
all that desirable a feature, other than for bragging rights.  It's like
the 250mph+ supercars (Maclaren F1, Bugatti Veyron) -- where ya gonna
drive those suckers* at anything over half-speed???  And you spent a cool
million, or more, for those bragging rights.


- Steve S.
  * Apologies if anyone reading the list is one of the
     more-money-than-brains owners of such a car --
     nothing personal meant, I (enviously) assure you!





More information about the talk mailing list