12-megapixel pictures as sharp when enlarged as 18-meg pictures?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012.

  1. I came across a Web site that implies that a 12-megapixel camera (such as the Canon Power Shot SX260 HS) can take pictures that are as sharp as cameras with higher resolutions.

    Is this true?

    On the Pocketlint.com Web site (http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/5864/canon-powershot-sx260-hs-travel-zoom-compact-camera-review) in the "Mega Megapixels?" section, it says:

    "With the megapixel race reaching new heights in recent releases, it’s interesting to see Canon pop a 12.1-megapixel sensor into the SX260 HS. And if that doesn’t sound particularly high in resolution then, well, that’s‘cos it’s not.

    "But for good reason: the more conservative number of pixels on the sensor surface means that more light can reach each of those pixel and, in turn, you ought to get better image quality thanks to a better source signal. Add to this that the sensor’s wiring is to the back of the construction - known as "back-illuminated" - and there’s an extra brownie point on the imaging front."

    And then in the "Verdict" section, the review again implies that the Canon camera' 12-megapixel resolution gives pictures as sharp as cameras with higher resolutions:

    "But image quality is among the best you’ll find in such a camera. The decision to use a lower resolution 12.1-megapixel sensor pays in bucket loads: shots are sharp and the conservative ISO 100-3200 range is useable throughout. There’s some chromatic aberration in shots, but otherwise the punchy colours and decent exposures are tip top and are the camera's biggest attraction."

    I'm considering buying the 18-megapixel Sony Cyber Shot HX20V to get pictures that are sharper than the 12-megapixel Canon Power Shot A1200 that I nowuse, and I don't see the benefit of trading one 12-megapixel camera to buyanother 12-megapixel camera.

    It seems to me that an 18-megapixel camera should give sharper pictures when the pictures are enlarged than either my current Canon A1200 or the CanonPower Shot SXs60 HS who's review I quoted from above.

    I plan to use Photoshop filters on my photos and enlarge them considerably,so I need the images to be sharp. I have a limited budget of $400.)

    Robert Montgomery
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert Montgomery

    Bruce Guest

    Robert Montgomery <> wrote:
    >And then in the "Verdict" section, the review again implies that the Canon =
    >camera' 12-megapixel resolution gives pictures as sharp as cameras with hig=
    >her resolutions:
    >
    >"But image quality is among the best you=92ll find in such a camera. The de=
    >cision to use a lower resolution 12.1-megapixel sensor pays in bucket loads=
    >: shots are sharp and the conservative ISO 100-3200 range is useable throug=
    >hout. There=92s some chromatic aberration in shots, but otherwise the punch=
    >y colours and decent exposures are tip top and are the camera's biggest att=
    >raction."



    The reviewer talks about "image quality" but it appears that you take
    that term to mean "sharpness".

    Apparent sharpness - a function of both resolution and contrast - is
    just one aspect of image quality. Others include colour depth and
    dynamic range.

    The term "image quality" is subjective and can mean very different
    things to different people. You have taken it to mean sharpness,
    which is just one part of the mix.

    You should try reading the review as the reviewer wrote it, rather
    than try to bend it to suit your own limited understanding of the term
    "image quality". Reading other reviews of the same camera might help,
    but only you were prepared to be open-minded and understand what the
    reviewers were actually trying to say.
     
    Bruce, Jun 16, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Thanks, Alan and Bruce.

    On digitalversus.com (http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/face-off/12889-12945-versus-table.html)

    The Sony 18-megapixle (Cyber-shot HX20V got a five-star rating.

    The Canon 12-megapixel (Powershot SX260 HS) got a four-star rating.

    And the Canon Powershot A1200 that I use now got a two-star rating.

    I want a compact, lightweight digital camera with at least ten times optical zoom and that gives sharper pictures because some of my customers complain that some of my enlargements that I made with my Canon A1200 are too fuzzy.

    Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #3
  4. On Saturday, June 16, 2012 10:51:00 AM UTC-7, Robert Montgomery wrote:
    > Thanks, Alan and Bruce.
    >
    > On digitalversus.com (http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/face-off/12889-12945-versus-table.html)
    >
    > The Sony 18-megapixle (Cyber-shot HX20V got a five-star rating.
    >
    > The Canon 12-megapixel (Powershot SX260 HS) got a four-star rating.
    >
    > And the Canon Powershot A1200 that I use now got a two-star rating.
    >
    > I want a compact, lightweight digital camera with at least ten times optical zoom and that gives sharper pictures because some of my customers complain that some of my enlargements that I made with my Canon A1200 are too fuzzy.
    >
    > Robert


    I forgot to mention that the Canon Powershot A1200 that I use now is a 12-megapixel camera (the same number of megapixels as the Canon SX260 HS I listed here..

    Would either of the two other cameras I listed give sharper enlargements?

    Thanks.

    Robert Montgomersy
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #4
  5. On Saturday, June 16, 2012 10:51:00 AM UTC-7, Robert Montgomery wrote:
    > Thanks, Alan and Bruce.
    >
    > On digitalversus.com (http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/face-off/12889-12945-versus-table.html)
    >
    > The Sony 18-megapixle (Cyber-shot HX20V got a five-star rating and costs about $100 more than the Canon that I list in the next paragraph. (I can't decide which of these two cameras to buy.)
    >
    > The Canon 12-megapixel (Powershot SX260 HS) got a four-star rating.
    >
    > And the Canon Powershot A1200 that I use now got a two-star rating.
    >
    > I want a compact, lightweight digital camera with at least ten times optical zoom and that gives sharper pictures because some of my customers complain that some of my enlargements that I made with my Canon A1200 are too fuzzy.
    >
    > Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #5
  6. On Saturday, June 16, 2012 11:10:59 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2012-06-16 13:51 , Robert Montgomery wrote:
    > > Thanks, Alan and Bruce.
    > >
    > > On digitalversus.com
    > > (http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/face-off/12889-12945-versus-table.html)
    > >
    > > The Sony 18-megapixle (Cyber-shot HX20V got a five-star rating.
    > >
    > > The Canon 12-megapixel (Powershot SX260 HS) got a four-star rating.


    >
    > That's not a site I know - I'd rather use dpreview - it may be biased
    > but at least the bias is relatively clear.


    DP Review doesn't mention the sensor size when I compare side-by-side. (http://www.dpreview.com/products/co...chx20v&products=canon_a1200&sortDir=ascending).

    > Consider even a DSLR with an APS-C sensor. Even with a "cheap" 10:1
    > zoom it should outshine any of the cameras you mention.


    Such as? Remember, I'm looking for a compact, lightweight camera that gives pictures much sharper than the Canon A1200 camera I have now, has at least ten times optical zoom and costs no more than $400.

    (I have a Canon Powershot SXis20, but the camera is it's so big and heavy I'm too lazy to carry it around with me and therefore I keep on losing photoops, so the size and lightness are priorities for me (as well as ease of use 'cause I'm not good at technical things).

    Thanks for the reference page about sensors. I printed the page for reference.

    Robert Montgomery
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #6
  7. What? The sensor sizes of all three cameras I'm comparing are the same!

    (ensor size: 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm)).

    I'm still confused. How can I tell which camera will make clearer, sharper, less fuzzy enlargements?

    Robert Montgomery
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #7
  8. On Saturday, June 16, 2012 11:47:50 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2012-06-16 14:36 , Robert Montgomery wrote:
    > > On Saturday, June 16, 2012 11:10:59 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:

    >
    >
    > It certainly does give sensor sizes in the side-by-side. It's near the
    > bottom of the "Sensor" section on a line called "Sensor Size".
    >
    > All three of those cameras are ' 1/2.3" ' (6.17 x 4.55 mm)


    Thanks, Alan. I see it now.

    > >> Consider even a DSLR with an APS-C sensor. Even with a "cheap"
    > >> 10:1 zoom it should outshine any of the cameras you mention.

    > >
    > > Such as? Remember, I'm looking for a compact, lightweight camera
    > > that gives pictures much sharper than the Canon A1200 camera I have
    > > now, has at least ten times optical zoom and costs no more than
    > > $400.

    >
    > Understood - however you said your customers complained about your fuzzy
    > images. That could be technique and it could be camera performance.
    >

    I try to hold the A1200 steady, but there's no image stabilization.

    Also, some pictures I crop and then blow them up in Photoshop and print those, so that makes those pictures fuzzy.

    > > (I have a Canon Powershot SXis20, but the camera is it's so big and
    > > heavy I'm too lazy to carry it around with me and therefore I keep on
    > > losing photo ops, so the size and lightness are priorities for me (as
    > > well as ease of use 'cause I'm not good at technical things).

    >
    > Those are good enough reasons - unless your customers keep complaining.


    > > Thanks for the reference page about sensors. I printed the page for
    > > reference.


    > Why print it? Just bookmark it.


    I made two bookmarks as well (Under Cameras and Photography) but I have so many bookmarks it may be easier to find the printed page that I put into one of my binders.

    Can you suggest a camera with a bigger sensor?

    Robert Montgomery
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #8
  9. Thanks, Alan.

    What size of sensor should I look for that would give much sharper picturesthan the ones we've discussed, which are "Sensor size: 1/2.3” (6.17 x 4..55 mm)".

    > My advice is you get to dpreview and hunt.


    Okay.

    And what's an example of a desirable zoom ratio to get sharp photos?

    A 7.1 times zoom is not enough for me, and $800 is double the maximum I'm prepared to pay.

    I hvae a five times zoom now in the Canon A1200, so it would be a downgradeto buy a Sony DSC-RX100 with its puny 3.6 times zoom.

    Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #9
  10. Robert Montgomery

    ray Guest

    Re: 12-megapixel pictures as sharp when enlarged as 18-megpictures?

    On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 11:59:16 -0700, Robert Montgomery wrote:

    > On Saturday, June 16, 2012 11:47:50 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:
    >> On 2012-06-16 14:36 , Robert Montgomery wrote:
    >> > On Saturday, June 16, 2012 11:10:59 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:

    >>
    >>
    >> It certainly does give sensor sizes in the side-by-side. It's near the
    >> bottom of the "Sensor" section on a line called "Sensor Size".
    >>
    >> All three of those cameras are ' 1/2.3" ' (6.17 x 4.55 mm)

    >
    > Thanks, Alan. I see it now.
    >
    >> >> Consider even a DSLR with an APS-C sensor. Even with a "cheap" 10:1
    >> >> zoom it should outshine any of the cameras you mention.
    >> >
    >> > Such as? Remember, I'm looking for a compact, lightweight camera
    >> > that gives pictures much sharper than the Canon A1200 camera I have
    >> > now, has at least ten times optical zoom and costs no more than $400.

    >>
    >> Understood - however you said your customers complained about your
    >> fuzzy images. That could be technique and it could be camera
    >> performance.
    >>

    > I try to hold the A1200 steady, but there's no image stabilization.
    >
    > Also, some pictures I crop and then blow them up in Photoshop and print
    > those, so that makes those pictures fuzzy.
    >
    >> > (I have a Canon Powershot SXis20, but the camera is it's so big and
    >> > heavy I'm too lazy to carry it around with me and therefore I keep on
    >> > losing photo ops, so the size and lightness are priorities for me (as
    >> > well as ease of use 'cause I'm not good at technical things).

    >>
    >> Those are good enough reasons - unless your customers keep complaining.

    >
    >> > Thanks for the reference page about sensors. I printed the page for
    >> > reference.

    >
    >> Why print it? Just bookmark it.

    >
    > I made two bookmarks as well (Under Cameras and Photography) but I have
    > so many bookmarks it may be easier to find the printed page that I put
    > into one of my binders.
    >
    > Can you suggest a camera with a bigger sensor?
    >
    > Robert Montgomery


    Have you considered or looked at the Panasonic G3 - it's micro 4/3 and
    has gotten good reviews though it's a bit more than you had indicated.
     
    ray, Jun 16, 2012
    #10
  11. On Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:40:54 PM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:
    > On 2012-06-16 14:59 , Robert Montgomery wrote:
    >
    > > Can you suggest a camera with a bigger sensor?


    Also, I've been wondering: if it's sensor size that affects image quality, why do advertisers advertise the number of megapixels of cameras in their camera summaries, instead of sensor size?

    Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #11
  12. Robert Montgomery

    nospam Guest

    In article <>,
    Robert Montgomery <> wrote:

    > > > Can you suggest a camera with a bigger sensor?

    >
    > Also, I've been wondering: if it's sensor size that affects image quality,
    > why do advertisers advertise the number of megapixels of cameras in their
    > camera summaries, instead of sensor size?


    because most consumers look at the number of megapixels as the sole
    metric of quality, not the size of the sensor or anything else about
    the camera, such as noise, colour accuracy, lens quality, etc.
     
    nospam, Jun 16, 2012
    #12
  13. On 6/16/2012 5:52 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > Robert Montgomery <> wrote:
    >
    >>>> Can you suggest a camera with a bigger sensor?

    >>
    >> Also, I've been wondering: if it's sensor size that affects image quality,
    >> why do advertisers advertise the number of megapixels of cameras in their
    >> camera summaries, instead of sensor size?

    >
    > because most consumers look at the number of megapixels as the sole
    > metric of quality, not the size of the sensor or anything else about
    > the camera, such as noise, colour accuracy, lens quality, etc.
    >

    Is there any evidence that larger sensors produce less noise than small
    ones with the same number of pixels? I think it should be easier to
    design a lens for a smaller image.
    --
    Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

    Extraneous "not" in Reply To.
     
    James Silverton, Jun 16, 2012
    #13
  14. Robert Montgomery

    nospam Guest

    In article <jrj063$32d$>, James Silverton
    <> wrote:

    > Is there any evidence that larger sensors produce less noise than small
    > ones with the same number of pixels? I think it should be easier to
    > design a lens for a smaller image.


    yes, shitloads of evidence. bigger sensors with the same number of
    pixels have larger pixels, so each pixel captures more photons,
    lowering the noise and raising the dynamic range. it's basic physics.

    start here:
    <http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summa
    ry/>
     
    nospam, Jun 16, 2012
    #14
  15. On Saturday, June 16, 2012 3:00:17 PM UTC-7, Savageduck wrote:
    >
    >
    > The questions remain;
    > What are you shooting that needs this long zoom range?
    > Are you producing images for web, or print?
    > If print what is the largest size print you intent to make, and on what
    > printer?


    > Regards,
    >
    > Savageduck


    Thanks, Savageduck.

    I'm photographing landscapes and cityscapes and sometimes I want to zoom into capture a small segment of the scene and I can't do that with a lens with a short focal length, and if I shoot the whole scene and crop it in Photoshop, there's not enough data to make a sharp image.


    It looks like I'll have to compromise because I think the camera I'm looking for doesn't exist yet.

    I'm leaning leaning toward the Nikon Coolpix 7100 that Alan recommended.

    It's got only a 7.1 times zoom, but it's better than the four times zoom inthe Canon A1200 that I've been using.

    It has a bigger sensor (1/1.7" (7.44 x 5.58 mm) than the other cameras I mentioned ( 1/2.3” (6.17 x 4.55 mm) so the Nikon sensor is about 50 percentbigger.

    Robert

    I found it for $370 at Amazon, so it just barely fits into my tight budget.
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 16, 2012
    #15
  16. Robert Montgomery

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 14:22:06 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2012-06-16 14:00:22 -0700, Robert Montgomery <> said:
    >
    >> Thanks, Alan.
    >>
    >> What size of sensor should I look for that would give much sharper pictures
    >> than the ones we've discussed, which are "Sensor size: 1/2.3” (6.17 x 4
    >> .55 mm)".
    >>
    >>> My advice is you get to dpreview and hunt.

    >>
    >> Okay.
    >>
    >> And what's an example of a desirable zoom ratio to get sharp photos?

    >
    >Zoom ratio is not going to get you sharp images. Good technique, a
    >larger sensor, and good glass will do it. What you really need is to
    >step up and buy the tools you need. A DSLR, entry level, about 10-12
    >MP, new or used and some decent glass. If you are going to limit
    >yourself to $400, you are not going to get the job done without making
    >some compromises.


    How can anyone make a recommendation when we have no idea what this
    guy is trying to take photographs of? Without knowing what he's
    photographing, and under what conditions, how can you recommend a
    camera?

    What if he does industrial photography and photographs the upper
    reaches of oil rigs for stress fractures? Or underground cables in
    subway lines? Would you recommend a DSLR for that?

    He *does* need the tools for the job, but we don't know what the job
    is.

    Sharp images require a combination of f/stop and speed. If he works
    in low light on static subjects, recommending a tripod may solve his
    problem better than a different camera.

    Personally, I'm not going to bother with someone who asks "What's the
    best camera for me?" and doesn't understand that he needs to provide
    the necessary information about the conditions and subjects to get a
    good answer.

    Why does he need zoom? He hasn't told us why he can't zoom with his
    feet.

    He hasn't told us anything useful.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
     
    tony cooper, Jun 16, 2012
    #16
  17. Robert Montgomery

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 18:21:52 -0400, nospam <> wrote:
    : In article <jrj063$32d$>, James Silverton
    : <> wrote:
    :
    : > Is there any evidence that larger sensors produce less noise than small
    : > ones with the same number of pixels? I think it should be easier to
    : > design a lens for a smaller image.
    :
    : yes, shitloads of evidence. bigger sensors with the same number of
    : pixels have larger pixels, so each pixel captures more photons,
    : lowering the noise and raising the dynamic range. it's basic physics.
    :
    : start here:
    : <http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summa
    : ry/>

    And yes, it is easier (and cheaper) to design a lens for a smaller image.
    Which is the main reason that the APS-C sensor size survives at all in
    high-quality cameras.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jun 17, 2012
    #17
  18. On Saturday, June 16, 2012 1:45:54 PM UTC-7, Savageduck wrote:

    > If you want a reasonable compact to get good reasonably sharp results
    > going to a high MP sensor is not your answer. I would suggest looking
    > for a used Canon G11/G12, the Canon S100, the new G1X with a larger
    > sensor is going to be twice your price limit.
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g11 >
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g12 >
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_s100 >
    >
    > A used G11, or used or new G12 is going to give you quality images with
    > 10MP which you will be able to get nice 13x19 prints for less than your
    > $400 limit.



    I looked at a G11 at a store and on the Net last year, but I didn't buy itbecause of the size and weight.

    > > (I have a Canon Powershot SXis20, but the camera is it's so big and heavy I
    > > 'm too lazy to carry it around with me and therefore I keep on losing photo
    > > ops, so the size and lightness are priorities for me (as well as ease of u
    > > se 'cause I'm not good at technical things).

    >
    > Lazy seems to be your problem here. ;-)


    Yes. I'm a photographer who hates carrying around bulky, heavy cameras formy everyday excursion close to home because 95 percent of my trips close to home I don't get good photos anyway. It's only about one in 20 trips close to home that I might get a lucky good shot, so I want something small and light for those casual, close-to-home trips.

    I'll only take my girlfriend's big, heavy Canon Powershot SX20 I.S. if I plan to go farther afield, like a day trip outside of the city, when the weather's favorable, because then I'm much more likely to get some good shots.

    By the way I don't even know if that Canon SX20 is gives sharp photos. Thesensor is described as "1/2.3” Type CCD".

    Regards,

    Robert Montgomery



    On Saturday, June 16, 2012 1:45:54 PM UTC-7, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2012-06-16 11:36:14 -0700, Robert Montgomery <> said:
    >
    > > On Saturday, June 16, 2012 11:10:59 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:
    > >> On 2012-06-16 13:51 , Robert Montgomery wrote:
    > >>> Thanks, Alan and Bruce.
    > >>>
    > >>> On digitalversus.com
    > >>> (http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/face-off/12889-12945-versu

    > > s-table.html)
    > >>>
    > >>> The Sony 18-megapixle (Cyber-shot HX20V got a five-star rating.
    > >>>
    > >>> The Canon 12-megapixel (Powershot SX260 HS) got a four-star rating.

    > >
    > >>
    > >> That's not a site I know - I'd rather use dpreview - it may be biased
    > >> but at least the bias is relatively clear.

    > >
    > > DP Review doesn't mention the sensor size when I compare side-by-side. (htt
    > > p://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_sx260hs
    > > &products=sony_dschx20v&products=canon_a1200&sortDir=ascending).
    > >
    > >> Consider even a DSLR with an APS-C sensor. Even with a "cheap" 10:1
    > >> zoom it should outshine any of the cameras you mention.

    > >
    > > Such as? Remember, I'm looking for a compact, lightweight camera that give
    > > s pictures much sharper than the Canon A1200 camera I have now, has at leas
    > > t ten times optical zoom and costs no more than $400.

    >
    > You are looking for a $1 tool to do a $100 job.
    > A budget entry level DSLR is going to do the job for you, but you are
    > "Big" averse.
    >
    > If you want a reasonable compact to get good reasonably sharp results
    > going to a high MP sensor is not your answer. I would suggest looking
    > for a used Canon G11/G12, the Canon S100, the new G1X with a larger
    > sensor is going to be twice your price limit.
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g11 >
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g12 >
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_s100 >
    >
    > A used G11, or used or new G12 is going to give you quality images with
    > 10MP which you will be able to get nice 13x19 prints for less than your
    > $400 limit.
    > <
    > http://www.keh.com/search?store=cam...de=Class&grade=Grade&sprice=0&eprice=0&r=SE&e
    > >

    > or
    > < http://tinyurl.com/6sw8g8c >
    >
    > Here are some of my 10MP G11 images the first is full size and the rest
    > are resized for web viewing.
    > #1 is 4500x3375 and reduced to 3.3 MB
    > < http://db.tt/vEhAO8o9 >
    > #2 is the same image resized for web at 352 KB 1280x960
    > < http://db.tt/8HXhPs7A >
    > #3 is a tough low light shot 1280x867 @ 281 KB
    > < http://db.tt/aZmJ7702 >
    > #4 is just a shot I like 1280x867 @370 KB
    > < http://db.tt/Tyil3Frx >
    > #5 shot with in camera flash 1280x968 @ 275 KB
    > < http://db.tt/gqax6Ero >
    >
    >
    > >
    > > (I have a Canon Powershot SXis20, but the camera is it's so big and heavy I
    > > 'm too lazy to carry it around with me and therefore I keep on losing photo
    > > ops, so the size and lightness are priorities for me (as well as ease of u
    > > se 'cause I'm not good at technical things).

    >
    > Lazy seems to be your problem here. ;-)
    >
    > >
    > > Thanks for the reference page about sensors. I printed the page for refere
    > > nce.
    > >
    > > Robert Montgomery

    >
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Savageduck




    On Saturday, June 16, 2012 1:45:54 PM UTC-7, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2012-06-16 11:36:14 -0700, Robert Montgomery <> said:
    >
    > > On Saturday, June 16, 2012 11:10:59 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:
    > >> On 2012-06-16 13:51 , Robert Montgomery wrote:
    > >>> Thanks, Alan and Bruce.
    > >>>
    > >>> On digitalversus.com
    > >>> (http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/face-off/12889-12945-versu

    > > s-table.html)
    > >>>
    > >>> The Sony 18-megapixle (Cyber-shot HX20V got a five-star rating.
    > >>>
    > >>> The Canon 12-megapixel (Powershot SX260 HS) got a four-star rating.

    > >
    > >>
    > >> That's not a site I know - I'd rather use dpreview - it may be biased
    > >> but at least the bias is relatively clear.

    > >
    > > DP Review doesn't mention the sensor size when I compare side-by-side. (htt
    > > p://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_sx260hs
    > > &products=sony_dschx20v&products=canon_a1200&sortDir=ascending).
    > >
    > >> Consider even a DSLR with an APS-C sensor. Even with a "cheap" 10:1
    > >> zoom it should outshine any of the cameras you mention.

    > >
    > > Such as? Remember, I'm looking for a compact, lightweight camera that give
    > > s pictures much sharper than the Canon A1200 camera I have now, has at leas
    > > t ten times optical zoom and costs no more than $400.

    >
    > You are looking for a $1 tool to do a $100 job.
    > A budget entry level DSLR is going to do the job for you, but you are
    > "Big" averse.
    >
    > If you want a reasonable compact to get good reasonably sharp results
    > going to a high MP sensor is not your answer. I would suggest looking
    > for a used Canon G11/G12, the Canon S100, the new G1X with a larger
    > sensor is going to be twice your price limit.
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g11 >
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g12 >
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_s100 >
    >
    > A used G11, or used or new G12 is going to give you quality images with
    > 10MP which you will be able to get nice 13x19 prints for less than your
    > $400 limit.
    > <
    > http://www.keh.com/search?store=cam...de=Class&grade=Grade&sprice=0&eprice=0&r=SE&e
    > >

    > or
    > < http://tinyurl.com/6sw8g8c >
    >
    > Here are some of my 10MP G11 images the first is full size and the rest
    > are resized for web viewing.
    > #1 is 4500x3375 and reduced to 3.3 MB
    > < http://db.tt/vEhAO8o9 >
    > #2 is the same image resized for web at 352 KB 1280x960
    > < http://db.tt/8HXhPs7A >
    > #3 is a tough low light shot 1280x867 @ 281 KB
    > < http://db.tt/aZmJ7702 >
    > #4 is just a shot I like 1280x867 @370 KB
    > < http://db.tt/Tyil3Frx >
    > #5 shot with in camera flash 1280x968 @ 275 KB
    > < http://db.tt/gqax6Ero >
    >
    >
    > >
    > > (I have a Canon Powershot SXis20, but the camera is it's so big and heavy I
    > > 'm too lazy to carry it around with me and therefore I keep on losing photo
    > > ops, so the size and lightness are priorities for me (as well as ease of u
    > > se 'cause I'm not good at technical things).

    >
    > Lazy seems to be your problem here. ;-)
    >
    > >
    > > Thanks for the reference page about sensors. I printed the page for refere
    > > nce.
    > >
    > > Robert Montgomery

    >
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Savageduck




    On Saturday, June 16, 2012 1:45:54 PM UTC-7, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2012-06-16 11:36:14 -0700, Robert Montgomery <> said:
    >
    > > On Saturday, June 16, 2012 11:10:59 AM UTC-7, Alan Browne wrote:
    > >> On 2012-06-16 13:51 , Robert Montgomery wrote:
    > >>> Thanks, Alan and Bruce.
    > >>>
    > >>> On digitalversus.com
    > >>> (http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/face-off/12889-12945-versu

    > > s-table.html)
    > >>>
    > >>> The Sony 18-megapixle (Cyber-shot HX20V got a five-star rating.
    > >>>
    > >>> The Canon 12-megapixel (Powershot SX260 HS) got a four-star rating.

    > >
    > >>
    > >> That's not a site I know - I'd rather use dpreview - it may be biased
    > >> but at least the bias is relatively clear.

    > >
    > > DP Review doesn't mention the sensor size when I compare side-by-side. (htt
    > > p://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_sx260hs
    > > &products=sony_dschx20v&products=canon_a1200&sortDir=ascending).
    > >
    > >> Consider even a DSLR with an APS-C sensor. Even with a "cheap" 10:1
    > >> zoom it should outshine any of the cameras you mention.

    > >
    > > Such as? Remember, I'm looking for a compact, lightweight camera that give
    > > s pictures much sharper than the Canon A1200 camera I have now, has at leas
    > > t ten times optical zoom and costs no more than $400.

    >
    > You are looking for a $1 tool to do a $100 job.
    > A budget entry level DSLR is going to do the job for you, but you are
    > "Big" averse.
    >
    > If you want a reasonable compact to get good reasonably sharp results
    > going to a high MP sensor is not your answer. I would suggest looking
    > for a used Canon G11/G12, the Canon S100, the new G1X with a larger
    > sensor is going to be twice your price limit.
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g11 >
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_g12 >
    > < http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/compacts/canon_s100 >
    >
    > A used G11, or used or new G12 is going to give you quality images with
    > 10MP which you will be able to get nice 13x19 prints for less than your
    > $400 limit.
    > <
    > http://www.keh.com/search?store=cam...de=Class&grade=Grade&sprice=0&eprice=0&r=SE&e
    > >

    > or
    > < http://tinyurl.com/6sw8g8c >
    >
    > Here are some of my 10MP G11 images the first is full size and the rest
    > are resized for web viewing.
    > #1 is 4500x3375 and reduced to 3.3 MB
    > < http://db.tt/vEhAO8o9 >
    > #2 is the same image resized for web at 352 KB 1280x960
    > < http://db.tt/8HXhPs7A >
    > #3 is a tough low light shot 1280x867 @ 281 KB
    > < http://db.tt/aZmJ7702 >
    > #4 is just a shot I like 1280x867 @370 KB
    > < http://db.tt/Tyil3Frx >
    > #5 shot with in camera flash 1280x968 @ 275 KB
    > < http://db.tt/gqax6Ero >
    >
    >
    > >
    > > (I have a Canon Powershot SXis20, but the camera is it's so big and heavy I
    > > 'm too lazy to carry it around with me and therefore I keep on losing photo
    > > ops, so the size and lightness are priorities for me (as well as ease of u
    > > se 'cause I'm not good at technical things).

    >
    > Lazy seems to be your problem here. ;-)
    >
    > >
    > > Thanks for the reference page about sensors. I printed the page for refere
    > > nce.
    > >
    > > Robert Montgomery

    >
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Savageduck
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 17, 2012
    #18
  19. On Saturday, June 16, 2012 5:11:10 PM UTC-7, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2012-06-16 15:29:08 -0700, Robert Montgomery <> said:
    >
    > > On Saturday, June 16, 2012 3:00:17 PM UTC-7, Savageduck wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> The questions remain;
    > >> What are you shooting that needs this long zoom range?
    > >> Are you producing images for web, or print?


    Print.

    > >> If print what is the largest size print you intent to make, and on what


    Most of them no bigger than 11 square feet.

    > >> printer?


    Epson 7600.


    > > I'm photographing landscapes and cityscapes and sometimes I want to zoom in
    > > to capture a small segment of the scene and I can't do that with a lens wi
    > > th a short focal length, and if I shoot the whole scene and crop it in Phot
    > > oshop, there's not enough data to make a sharp image.

    >
    > You can crop in PS if you have a quality image to start with, and that
    > isn't going to happen with a compact camera.
    >
    > Here is a little exercise I did on a large scale with a D300s.
    > < http://db.tt/YtvTLWmI >


    Wow!

    > > It looks like I'll have to compromise because I think the camera I'm lookin
    > > g for doesn't exist yet.
    > >
    > > I'm leaning leaning toward the Nikon Coolpix 7100 that Alan recommended.

    >
    > A decent camera.


    Great.

    > > It's got only a 7.1 times zoom, but it's better than the four times zoom in
    > > the Canon A1200 that I've been using.

    >
    > Zoom is is not the answer.
    > It might do some of what you want, but there are always other considerations.


    Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 17, 2012
    #19
  20. On Saturday, June 16, 2012 3:49:08 PM UTC-7, tony cooper wrote:
    > On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 14:22:06 -0700, Savageduck
    > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >


    > How can anyone make a recommendation when we have no idea what this
    > guy is trying to take photographs of? Without knowing what he's
    > photographing, and under what conditions, how can you recommend a
    > camera?
    >
    > What if he does industrial photography and photographs the upper
    > reaches of oil rigs for stress fractures? Or underground cables in
    > subway lines? Would you recommend a DSLR for that?
    >
    > He *does* need the tools for the job, but we don't know what the job
    > is.
    >
    > Sharp images require a combination of f/stop and speed. If he works
    > in low light on static subjects, recommending a tripod may solve his
    > problem better than a different camera.
    >
    > Personally, I'm not going to bother with someone who asks "What's the
    > best camera for me?" and doesn't understand that he needs to provide
    > the necessary information about the conditions and subjects to get a
    > good answer.
    >
    > Why does he need zoom? He hasn't told us why he can't zoom with his
    > feet.
    >
    > He hasn't told us anything useful.


    I'm shooting cityscapes, landscapes, marinas and stuff like that, then editing the images in Photoshop to make giclees.

    Mostly the sizes are a few square feet. Occasionally, I blow up the images up to about 11 square feet.

    Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Jun 17, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Pepper
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    589
    Pepper
    Jul 24, 2003
  2. Brian C. Baird

    The Human Eye: 120 Megapixel Monochrome, 6 Megapixel Color

    Brian C. Baird, Jun 15, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    44
    Views:
    4,189
    Dave Haynie
    Jun 17, 2004
  3. rpaulsen

    Image quality when enlarged to 16x20

    rpaulsen, Oct 27, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    823
  4. Mark

    5 Megapixel VS. 4 Megapixel camera

    Mark, Mar 8, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    682
    Paul H.
    Mar 9, 2005
  5. R.M.R.

    Q,Digital Developing@ Walgreens,Too Enlarged

    R.M.R., Jun 5, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    339
    Ed Ruf
    Jun 7, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page