Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nikon D50 - review

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
April 20, 2005 2:51:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

here a mini review with sample images:
http://www.photocameramag.com/news/NikonD50.html

hi

More about : nikon d50 review

Anonymous
April 20, 2005 2:51:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

_.-:-._ wrote:
> here a mini review with sample images:
> http://www.photocameramag.com/news/NikonD50.html
>

A lot will depend on the pricing but this looks like a lemon to me.
Check this from the dpreview.com's preview:
"A key advantage and one source of the fun associated with Nikon
digital SLR photography is the ability to take advantage of the
creative possibilities offered by interchangeable lenses."

Eh? So other camera makers don't let you change lenses? Hmmm ....
Interesting.

Anyways, lets see how they've crippled it vis-a-vis the much nicer D70.
- Uses SD card instead of CF.
- No control over AF modes
- No DoF button
- No white balance fine tuning

And we are still at 6MP including the much hyped D70s. I think Nikon
bought a trillion of those 6MP sensors from Sony so isn't going to 8 or
10MP.

And the review talks of the D50 competing with the Rebel XT. I just
love the way these marketing droids play this *competes-against* game.

- Siddhartha
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 2:51:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Steve wrote:
> "we are still at 6MP"
>
> Why so hung up about how many megapixels we have? You don't need
more
> than 6MP unless you need very large prints or want to crop the hell
> out of everything you shoot.
>

I am not hung up on megapixels. I probably won't move up from my 6MP
Canon 300D until I can get atleast 12/16MP for the same price that I
paid for the 300D. But as a customer, I would like to see newer
products come out with more to offer for the same price. Its been two
years since Canon came out with the 6MP 300D. And in two years the
camera manufacturers have come up with only 8MP for the sub-$1000
category? Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
up processor speeds in the last one decade?

- Siddhartha
Related resources
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 2:51:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JR wrote:
> In article <1113997121.446907.9570@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > And we are still at 6MP including the much hyped D70s. I think
Nikon
> > bought a trillion of those 6MP sensors from Sony so isn't going to
8 or
> > 10MP.
>
>
>
> Mych hyped D70s? THEY BARELY ANNOUNCED IT! It's not a replacement,
> it's an update to an already awesome camera...I shoot professionally
and
> NO magazine has turned down my 6mp D70 image and said it was
> inadequate...Quite the opposite actually, I was told that my images
are
> so nice, I can actually downsize them if I wanted to....

Where did I say its a replacement or that the D70 isn't a nice camera
or that D70's image quality isn't good?

As for the hype, maybe you haven't been following the forums and
message boards but news of the D70s has been out for a while and people
took it for granted that the sensor would be atleast 8MP to compete
with the Canon 20D. Also, check the spec differences at dpreview
between the D70 and the D70s, nothing to drool at exactly.

- Siddhartha
April 20, 2005 2:51:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <1113997121.446907.9570@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote:

> And we are still at 6MP including the much hyped D70s. I think Nikon
> bought a trillion of those 6MP sensors from Sony so isn't going to 8 or
> 10MP.



Mych hyped D70s? THEY BARELY ANNOUNCED IT! It's not a replacement,
it's an update to an already awesome camera...I shoot professionally and
NO magazine has turned down my 6mp D70 image and said it was
inadequate...Quite the opposite actually, I was told that my images are
so nice, I can actually downsize them if I wanted to....

JR
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 4:08:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JR wrote:

> Mych hyped D70s? THEY BARELY ANNOUNCED IT! It's not a replacement,

The hype is coming from the Nikonian fan base.

> it's an update to an already awesome camera...

See what I mean?

I shoot professionally and
> NO magazine has turned down my 6mp D70 image and said it was
> inadequate...Quite the opposite actually, I was told that my images are
> so nice, I can actually downsize them if I wanted to....

6 MP SLR's are more than enough quality for most magazines. I remember
a poster on rpe35mm linking to a Japanese friend who was doing a story
on London for the Japanese ed. of Nat Geo. ... with a Canon G3 ... JPG's
only.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 4:13:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> writes:

> Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
> up processor speeds in the last one decade?

If you look at the speed of Intel CPUs in the last year or so, you will
notice that Moore's law has come to an end. CPU manufacturers are now
trying to bypass it by incorporating more cores (e.g. HT) per CPU or by
going to 64 bit (or both).

Dragan

--
Dragan Cvetkovic,

To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

!!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 4:29:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114013502.950695.169100@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> As for the hype, maybe you haven't been following the forums and
> message boards but news of the D70s has been out for a while and people
> took it for granted that the sensor would be atleast 8MP to compete
> with the Canon 20D. Also, check the spec differences at dpreview
> between the D70 and the D70s, nothing to drool at exactly.
>
> - Siddhartha
>

How about this stat:

Nikon D70s - MSRP $899.95 body only
Canon 20D - BH Price after rebate $1265 body only

A $365 difference might not matter to some, but I am having a hard time
justifying it for me, especially since the same trend exists in lenses and
accessories.

Yes, the Canon has 2 MP extra - but do I need it? No, I don't.
Yes, at high ISO settings the Canon produces less noise - but do I need to
shoot at high ISO? Rarely.
The D-20 is just too small for my arthritic hands to manipulate, and with
the D-70s I am disappointed that there is still no vertical shutter release.
Why can't someone make an affordable camera with everything I need? <selfish
grin here>

I do agree that the D-50 is a dud. That tiny RGB sensor will really play
havoc with image quality. That's a $300 difference I'll spend.

Walt
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 4:37:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Dragan Cvetkovic wrote:
> If you look at the speed of Intel CPUs in the last year or so, you
will
> notice that Moore's law has come to an end. CPU manufacturers are now
> trying to bypass it by incorporating more cores (e.g. HT) per CPU or
by
> going to 64 bit (or both).
>

Right, but that was after the processing speeds went from 33MHz to 3GHz
in the last ten years (as far as I remember). Thats a hundred-fold
speedup. CCD/CMOS chips - in the last five years, I remember them going
from 1MP to 8MP. I'll say 8MP because a 3GHz processor is bought by
huge number of people whereas the 8MP+ cameras are bought only by pros.
So thats just 8x improvement. Even if you took the 16MP Canon 1Ds-II,
its still just 16x improvement.

- Siddhartha
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 5:06:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Dragan Cvetkovic wrote:
> "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> writes:
>
>
>>Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
>>up processor speeds in the last one decade?
>
>
> If you look at the speed of Intel CPUs in the last year or so, you will
> notice that Moore's law has come to an end. CPU manufacturers are now
> trying to bypass it by incorporating more cores (e.g. HT) per CPU or by
> going to 64 bit (or both).

Moore's law is "how many transisitors" per CPU, not clock speed. So a
dual core CPU or a 64 bit CPU would accomplish quite a leap.

http://www.physics.udel.edu/wwwusers/watson/scen103/int...
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=1229

Beyond that, given that "CPU's" do so much more than what a CPU did 0
years ago, the "law" may still hold w/o being as obvious. Much of what
is on a "CPU" chip is not what traditionally went there.

Look for more clustering as well. So chip densities might not grow but
processing power can increase dramatically at low cost.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 5:07:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"_.-:-._" <nonromperelafava@tin.it> wrote in message
news:xKo9e.11297$Bn.10491@tornado.fastwebnet.it...
| here a mini review with sample images:
| http://www.photocameramag.com/news/NikonD50.html
|
| hi

Is there a similar review written somewhere in non-pidgin English?
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 5:10:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> writes:

> Dragan Cvetkovic wrote:
>> "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
>>>up processor speeds in the last one decade?

>> If you look at the speed of Intel CPUs in the last year or so, you will
>> notice that Moore's law has come to an end.

[snip]

> Moore's law is "how many transisitors" per CPU, not clock speed.

[snip]

My mistake. Sorry 'bout that.

Dragan

--
Dragan Cvetkovic,

To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

!!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 5:15:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Dragan Cvetkovic wrote:
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> writes:
>
>
>>Dragan Cvetkovic wrote:

>>Moore's law is "how many transisitors" per CPU, not clock speed.

> My mistake. Sorry 'bout that.

No sweat.

Actually, reviewing the 2nd link there, it's "how many components per
IC". Easy to forget what a law really said/meant.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 5:17:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

John Francis wrote:
> 16x in five years isn't bad. That 100x in 10 years that you quote
> for CPU speeds was around 10x in the first five years, and another
> 10x in the next five years.
>

In 1995, I could buy 286 PCs that ran at 33MHz. In 2000, I could buy
1GHz boxes. How's that 10x in five years? Thats more like 30x. In 1995,
33Mhz was affordable (to me and lots of people around me). In 2000,
1GHz was affordable. Is 16MP affordable for me today? No. So to me, its
still just 8x over the last five years.

- Siddhartha
April 20, 2005 5:22:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <1114013148.300102.217900@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Siddhartha Jain <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote:

> Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
> up processor speeds in the last one decade?

Moore's law does not apply to sensors. Sensors and processors are
different animals.

--
Charles
April 20, 2005 5:28:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Siddhartha Jain wrote:
>
> I am not hung up on megapixels. I probably won't move up from my 6MP
> Canon 300D until I can get atleast 12/16MP for the same price that I
> paid for the 300D. But as a customer, I would like to see newer
> products come out with more to offer for the same price. Its been two
> years since Canon came out with the 6MP 300D. And in two years the
> camera manufacturers have come up with only 8MP for the sub-$1000
> category? Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
> up processor speeds in the last one decade?


Some say we've pretty much maxed out on the resolution of high quality
sensors due to limitations of quantum physics. The better SLR sensors
are actually larger which goes against Moore's law and makes them more
expensive. Smaller sensors simply aren't big enough to capture
sufficient photons for the best quality signal to noise ratio. Moore's
law is based on cost savings through miniaturization but sensors just
can't get any smaller and still look good. I'm sure there are plenty of
other ways to advance the technology but not through miniaturization.

Silicon costs a lot so smaller sensors are much less expensive. You
can't save money by making them smaller.

You can put a bigger sensor in an SLR for more MP but it's going to cost
a bundle. You could use the small sensor technology to put a ridiculous
amount of pixels in an SLR but it would be noisy with poor dynamic range
so nobody wants that. And it would still be expensive.
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 5:37:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Siddhartha Jain wrote:

> category? Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
> up processor speeds in the last one decade?

1) Moore's law is a doubling of components on a chip every 18 months,
not processing speed.

2) Has held pretty true over the last 40 years.

3) If you look at the curve at: http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=1229
you will see that manuf. cost/component has a price 'kick' premium
for the final order of magnitude of density for each given year of
10^1.5 (about 30X)... if a 1 Mpix sensor costs $100, then a 10 Mpix
sensor could cost $3000... [assumes the 1 mpix sensor is in the bottom
of the cost/comp. curve for that year].

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 5:38:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Charles wrote:


> Moore's law does not apply to sensors. Sensors and processors are
> different animals.

Moore's law is "number of components per IC". Whether it holds or not
for imaging sensors, I don't know.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
April 20, 2005 5:50:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 20 Apr 2005 04:38:41 -0700, "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com>
wrote:

>_.-:-._ wrote:
>> here a mini review with sample images:
>> http://www.photocameramag.com/news/NikonD50.html
>>
>
>A lot will depend on the pricing but this looks like a lemon to me.
>Check this from the dpreview.com's preview:
>"A key advantage and one source of the fun associated with Nikon
>digital SLR photography is the ability to take advantage of the
>creative possibilities offered by interchangeable lenses."
>
>Eh? So other camera makers don't let you change lenses? Hmmm ....
>Interesting.
>
>Anyways, lets see how they've crippled it vis-a-vis the much nicer D70.
>- Uses SD card instead of CF.
>- No control over AF modes
>- No DoF button
>- No white balance fine tuning
>
>And we are still at 6MP including the much hyped D70s. I think Nikon
>bought a trillion of those 6MP sensors from Sony so isn't going to 8 or
>10MP.
>
>And the review talks of the D50 competing with the Rebel XT. I just
>love the way these marketing droids play this *competes-against* game.
>
>- Siddhartha

"we are still at 6MP"

Why so hung up about how many megapixels we have? You don't need more
than 6MP unless you need very large prints or want to crop the hell
out of everything you shoot.

Yes it's important to note that 6MP cameras are not the last word in
image quality but they are more than good enough for most of us - even
for some professional use (especially photo-journalism). I can see it
now in five years:-

"we are still at 3 gigapixels"

Oh no no no what the hell are we going to do then? We'll only be able
to crop out an eyeball and blow it up to A3 at 300dpi...that won't be
anywhere near enough......
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 8:51:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 20/04/2005 1:15 PM, Alan Browne wrote:

> Actually, reviewing the 2nd link there, it's "how many components per
> IC". Easy to forget what a law really said/meant.

Given that it was formulated in 1965, it's not surprising that someone
might 'forget'.

For the terminally geeky:

ftp://download.intel.com/research/silicon/moorespaper.p...
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 9:07:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114013148.300102.217900@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
> up processor speeds in the last one decade?
>
> - Siddhartha
>
Eventually, Moore's Law had to run afoul of the Law of Diminishing Returns
and the Law of Supply and Demand.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 9:54:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 13:50:27 +0100, Steve
<whiteroseofyorkshireNOSPAM@postmaster.co.uk> wrote:

>On 20 Apr 2005 04:38:41 -0700, "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>_.-:-._ wrote:
>>> here a mini review with sample images:
>>> http://www.photocameramag.com/news/NikonD50.html
>>>
>>
>>A lot will depend on the pricing but this looks like a lemon to me.
>>Check this from the dpreview.com's preview:
>>"A key advantage and one source of the fun associated with Nikon
>>digital SLR photography is the ability to take advantage of the
>>creative possibilities offered by interchangeable lenses."
>>
>>Eh? So other camera makers don't let you change lenses? Hmmm ....
>>Interesting.
>>
>>Anyways, lets see how they've crippled it vis-a-vis the much nicer D70.
>>- Uses SD card instead of CF.
>>- No control over AF modes
>>- No DoF button
>>- No white balance fine tuning
>>
>>And we are still at 6MP including the much hyped D70s. I think Nikon
>>bought a trillion of those 6MP sensors from Sony so isn't going to 8 or
>>10MP.
>>
>>And the review talks of the D50 competing with the Rebel XT. I just
>>love the way these marketing droids play this *competes-against* game.
>>
>>- Siddhartha
>
>"we are still at 6MP"
>
>Why so hung up about how many megapixels we have? You don't need more
>than 6MP unless you need very large prints or want to crop the hell
>out of everything you shoot.

Well, that's one way to avoid some of the aberration problems with
lenses. Shoot the picture with the subject of interest occupying only
3/4 of the frame, then crop it. Helps avoid chromatic aberration,
coma, etc. Whenever someone shoots at a wide-open lens aperture, this
could help, provided the camera has the pixel count to support some
enlargement of the image.
-Rich
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 9:56:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 20 Apr 2005 09:05:48 -0700, "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Steve wrote:
>> "we are still at 6MP"
>>
>> Why so hung up about how many megapixels we have? You don't need
>more
>> than 6MP unless you need very large prints or want to crop the hell
>> out of everything you shoot.
>>
>
>I am not hung up on megapixels. I probably won't move up from my 6MP
>Canon 300D until I can get atleast 12/16MP for the same price that I
>paid for the 300D. But as a customer, I would like to see newer
>products come out with more to offer for the same price. Its been two
>years since Canon came out with the 6MP 300D. And in two years the
>camera manufacturers have come up with only 8MP for the sub-$1000
>category? Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
>up processor speeds in the last one decade?
>
>- Siddhartha

What should be done is to incorporate features of benefit from other
cameras. The anti-shake from Minolta, the dust cleaning of Olympus.
As far as the D50 goes, some enterprising hacker will "release" some
of the hobbled features that the camera may have due to it's D70
legacy.
-Rich
April 20, 2005 11:04:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1113997121.446907.9570@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Anyways, lets see how they've crippled it vis-a-vis the much nicer D70.
> - Uses SD card instead of CF.
> - No control over AF modes
> - No DoF button
> - No white balance fine tuning
>
It depends on the market that Nikon is aiming the F55 Digital, err D50 at. I
don't see SD cards as crippled. In fact they are less prone to damage or
bent pins. The other features are aimed at the P&S crowd.

> And we are still at 6MP including the much hyped D70s. I think Nikon
> bought a trillion of those 6MP sensors from Sony so isn't going to 8 or
> 10MP.
>
Canon seems to be the only maker that makes a big deal about their small
pixel count increase from 6.3 to 8.
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 11:14:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 20 Apr 2005 13:17:45 -0700, "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com>
wrote:

>John Francis wrote:
>> 16x in five years isn't bad. That 100x in 10 years that you quote
>> for CPU speeds was around 10x in the first five years, and another
>> 10x in the next five years.
>>
>
>In 1995, I could buy 286 PCs that ran at 33MHz. In 2000, I could buy
>1GHz boxes.

Errrrr... I bought a Tandon 80286 PC in 1985. By 1995 I was using
Pentium Pros in servers. This may be of interest;
http://members.iweb.net.au/~pstorr/pcbook/book1/timelin...
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 11:43:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <1114025843.596686.95950@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Siddhartha Jain <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote:
>Dragan Cvetkovic wrote:
>> If you look at the speed of Intel CPUs in the last year or so, you
>will
>> notice that Moore's law has come to an end. CPU manufacturers are now
>> trying to bypass it by incorporating more cores (e.g. HT) per CPU or
>by
>> going to 64 bit (or both).
>>
>
>Right, but that was after the processing speeds went from 33MHz to 3GHz
>in the last ten years (as far as I remember). Thats a hundred-fold
>speedup. CCD/CMOS chips - in the last five years, I remember them going
>from 1MP to 8MP. I'll say 8MP because a 3GHz processor is bought by
>huge number of people whereas the 8MP+ cameras are bought only by pros.
>So thats just 8x improvement. Even if you took the 16MP Canon 1Ds-II,
>its still just 16x improvement.

16x in five years isn't bad. That 100x in 10 years that you quote
for CPU speeds was around 10x in the first five years, and another
10x in the next five years.

So that "just" a 16x improvement is ahead of the CPU speed increases.
(not to mention the fact that the new sensors are considerably faster)
April 21, 2005 12:26:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 20 Apr 2005 09:05:48 -0700, "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Steve wrote:
>> "we are still at 6MP"
>>
>> Why so hung up about how many megapixels we have? You don't need
>more
>> than 6MP unless you need very large prints or want to crop the hell
>> out of everything you shoot.
>>
>
>I am not hung up on megapixels. I probably won't move up from my 6MP
>Canon 300D until I can get atleast 12/16MP for the same price that I
>paid for the 300D. But as a customer, I would like to see newer
>products come out with more to offer for the same price. Its been two
>years since Canon came out with the 6MP 300D. And in two years the
>camera manufacturers have come up with only 8MP for the sub-$1000
>category? Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
>up processor speeds in the last one decade?
>
>- Siddhartha

Processor speeds in computers are only one parameter in system
performance (albeit an important one). Other parameters include hard
disk speed, the data bus speeds (especially the front side bus),
graphics performance, memory performance etc.etc.

The same can be said for the number of megapixels parameter in a
digital camera 'system'. Other factors are the image
processing/compression algorithms, CCD/CMOS sensor size (and hence
photodiode density), lens quality, shutter quality etc.etc.

People of today like to be able to say they have something bigger (and
hence apparently better) than the rest and this numbers game with
CPU's and camera megapixels gives them just what they need. "oh i've
got a 3 gig pentium 4" they chime at the bar in my local pub. I have
not yet felt the need to enlighten them that they don't have enough
memory, the hard disk is only 5200rpm, and the motherboard can be
obtained from hong kong for £15 on eBay.
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 12:36:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
> Dragan Cvetkovic wrote:
>
>> "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>> Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
>>> up processor speeds in the last one decade?
>>
>>
>>
>> If you look at the speed of Intel CPUs in the last year or so, you will
>> notice that Moore's law has come to an end. CPU manufacturers are now
>> trying to bypass it by incorporating more cores (e.g. HT) per CPU or by
>> going to 64 bit (or both).
>
>
> Moore's law is "how many transisitors" per CPU, not clock speed. So a
> dual core CPU or a 64 bit CPU would accomplish quite a leap.
>
> http://www.physics.udel.edu/wwwusers/watson/scen103/int...
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=1229
>
> Beyond that, given that "CPU's" do so much more than what a CPU did 0
> years ago, the "law" may still hold w/o being as obvious. Much of what
> is on a "CPU" chip is not what traditionally went there.
>
> Look for more clustering as well. So chip densities might not grow but
> processing power can increase dramatically at low cost.

I didn't see it linked from the urls above, but CNET posted an article
yesterday[1] that talks about Moore's law and how it will likely
continue through 2023. As already noted by others, it has little to
nothing to do with the advancement of cameras, but it is a pretty
interesting read.

1. <http://news.com.com/New+life+for+Moores+Law/2009-1006_3...;
April 21, 2005 2:06:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 13:28:04 -0700, paul <paul@not.net> wrote:

>Siddhartha Jain wrote:
>>
>> I am not hung up on megapixels. I probably won't move up from my 6MP
>> Canon 300D until I can get atleast 12/16MP for the same price that I
>> paid for the 300D. But as a customer, I would like to see newer
>> products come out with more to offer for the same price. Its been two
>> years since Canon came out with the 6MP 300D. And in two years the
>> camera manufacturers have come up with only 8MP for the sub-$1000
>> category? Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
>> up processor speeds in the last one decade?
>
>
>Some say we've pretty much maxed out on the resolution of high quality
>sensors due to limitations of quantum physics. The better SLR sensors
>are actually larger which goes against Moore's law and makes them more
>expensive. Smaller sensors simply aren't big enough to capture
>sufficient photons for the best quality signal to noise ratio. Moore's
>law is based on cost savings through miniaturization but sensors just
>can't get any smaller and still look good. I'm sure there are plenty of
>other ways to advance the technology but not through miniaturization.
>
>Silicon costs a lot so smaller sensors are much less expensive. You
>can't save money by making them smaller.
>
>You can put a bigger sensor in an SLR for more MP but it's going to cost
>a bundle. You could use the small sensor technology to put a ridiculous
>amount of pixels in an SLR but it would be noisy with poor dynamic range
>so nobody wants that. And it would still be expensive.

Paul, you've hit the nail on the head. A 6MP camera with a 'full
size' sensor would probably beat the pants off an 8MP camera with a
'two thirds' size sensor. Yet all people are interested in is the
number of megapixels rising every 6 months - irrespective of what this
actually means in terms of image quality.
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 2:06:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Steve wrote:

>
> Paul, you've hit the nail on the head. A 6MP camera with a 'full
> size' sensor would probably beat the pants off an 8MP camera with a
> 'two thirds' size sensor. Yet all people are interested in is the
> number of megapixels rising every 6 months - irrespective of what this
> actually means in terms of image quality.

Such a sensor could exist but would still be very expensive (v. 24 x
16mm) at 4X the number of pixels.

Pixel counts will legitimately rise as long as noise is reasonably well
contained.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 12:08:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Steve wrote:
[]
> Paul, you've hit the nail on the head. A 6MP camera with a 'full
> size' sensor would probably beat the pants off an 8MP camera with a
> 'two thirds' size sensor. Yet all people are interested in is the
> number of megapixels rising every 6 months - irrespective of what this
> actually means in terms of image quality.

That's not all that some of us are interested in. We may be happy with a
smaller than 35mm size sensor (e.g. half-frame) providing that a system
with similarly reduced size, bulk and weight is available. I have great
hopes for the 4/3 system, but its present implementation is disappointing.

As I am no longer prepared to accept the weight and bulk of 35mm
equipment, I currently use point-and-shoot cameras, and accept that I
won't get quite such good quality results. At least I'm taking pictures
again!

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 12:08:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk>
wrote in message news:D cJ9e.16615$G8.4319@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Steve wrote:
> []
>> Paul, you've hit the nail on the head. A 6MP camera with a 'full
>> size' sensor would probably beat the pants off an 8MP camera with a
>> 'two thirds' size sensor. Yet all people are interested in is the
>> number of megapixels rising every 6 months - irrespective of what this
>> actually means in terms of image quality.
>
> That's not all that some of us are interested in. We may be happy with a
> smaller than 35mm size sensor (e.g. half-frame) providing that a system
> with similarly reduced size, bulk and weight is available. I have great
> hopes for the 4/3 system, but its present implementation is disappointing.
>
> As I am no longer prepared to accept the weight and bulk of 35mm
> equipment, I currently use point-and-shoot cameras, and accept that I
> won't get quite such good quality results. At least I'm taking pictures
> again!
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
Interestingly enough, the Canon 350D/RebelXT is the same thickness, slightly
taller (4mm) and slightly narrower (8mm) than the Olympus E-300/Evolt. I
wonder what limitations in size are imposed by things like physical volume
of electronics, mechanical bits like the shutter and ease of handling that
are independent of sensor size...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 12:12:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Darrell wrote:
[]
> It depends on the market that Nikon is aiming the F55 Digital, err
> D50 at. I don't see SD cards as crippled. In fact they are less prone
> to damage or bent pins. The other features are aimed at the P&S crowd.

Although you seem keen to dissociate yourself from "the P&S crowd", the
more people who are attracted to the camera, the greater the ales may be,
and the more lenses will be sold. This may help reduce the cost of the
lenses that you buy!

Cheers,
David
April 21, 2005 12:41:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Darrell" <cota348@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:V5edndGGv_qOffvfRVn-2A@rogers.com...
> "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1113997121.446907.9570@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Anyways, lets see how they've crippled it vis-a-vis the much nicer D70.
>> - Uses SD card instead of CF.
>> - No control over AF modes
>> - No DoF button
>> - No white balance fine tuning
>>
> It depends on the market that Nikon is aiming the F55 Digital, err D50 at.
> I
> don't see SD cards as crippled. In fact they are less prone to damage or
> bent pins. The other features are aimed at the P&S crowd.
>
>> And we are still at 6MP including the much hyped D70s. I think Nikon
>> bought a trillion of those 6MP sensors from Sony so isn't going to 8 or
>> 10MP.
>>
> Canon seems to be the only maker that makes a big deal about their small
> pixel count increase from 6.3 to 8.
>
I heard the price of the D50 will be about $900cdn MSRP, I'll confirm that
as soon as I hear from Nikon Canada. So less than even the original
Drebel...
April 21, 2005 12:52:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk>
wrote in message news:1gJ9e.16620$G8.12385@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Darrell wrote:
> []
>> It depends on the market that Nikon is aiming the F55 Digital, err
>> D50 at. I don't see SD cards as crippled. In fact they are less prone
>> to damage or bent pins. The other features are aimed at the P&S crowd.
>
> Although you seem keen to dissociate yourself from "the P&S crowd", the
> more people who are attracted to the camera, the greater the sales may be,
> and the more lenses will be sold. This may help reduce the cost of the
> lenses that you buy!
>
> Cheers,
> David
I merely noted the D50 was not a camera aimed at the normal 35mm SLR user.
The D50 is estimated to have a Canadian MSRP of $899. That will make it the
lowest priced dSLR currently on the market. Nikon's own wording indicates it
is aimed at beginners, much like the F55 was. My experience tells me it will
sell well, but my experience also tells me only a small percentage will buy
extra lenses. I do expect brisk sales, as well as more sub $1000 dSLR to
emerge, rumours of a KM 5D, a new Pentax, the Panasonic dSLR will soon
emerge.
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 2:04:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Randy W. Sims wrote:

>
> I didn't see it linked from the urls above, but CNET posted an article
> yesterday[1] that talks about Moore's law and how it will likely
> continue through 2023. As already noted by others, it has little to
> nothing to do with the advancement of cameras, but it is a pretty
> interesting read.
>
> 1. <http://news.com.com/New+life+for+Moores+Law/2009-1006_3...;

Seen that one too... as to advancement of cameras, may have an impact on
sensors or not; but certainly will have an impact on processing
in-camera before storage.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 5:22:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Darrell wrote:
[]
> I merely noted the D50 was not a camera aimed at the normal 35mm SLR
> user. The D50 is estimated to have a Canadian MSRP of $899. That will
> make it the lowest priced dSLR currently on the market. Nikon's own
> wording indicates it is aimed at beginners, much like the F55 was. My
> experience tells me it will sell well, but my experience also tells
> me only a small percentage will buy extra lenses. I do expect brisk
> sales, as well as more sub $1000 dSLR to emerge, rumours of a KM 5D,
> a new Pentax, the Panasonic dSLR will soon emerge.

Even though it may be a beginner's camera, starting someone on the DSLR
ladder will, I suspect, result in a brand commitment, and many people
going on to purchase better, more versatile models, and the add-on lenses
etc. Having a loss-leader (and I don't think it's that for one minute),
or a beginner's DSLR is not a bad idea. I agree that sales will be brisk.

By the way, although I am a point-and-shoot owner (although I might prefer
the term non-interchangeable lens electronic reflex SLR), I do find the
scene modes (which I think prompted your comment about "for the P&S
crowd") very annoying. Partially because they are not explained well -
for example: Snow mode: for shooting snow scenes". Arrgh! Just tell me:
adjusts the metering up a couple of stops, or limits the white balance
range. But no, such explanations are not forthcoming. I think on my
Nikon cameras I have never used a Scene mode, and on the Panasonic I have
used one scene mode - macro - simply because it's the only way to get into
macro mode.

Interesting to see if a cheap KM will retain their unique image
stabilisation, and whether Panasonic will contribute an image stabilised
Leica lens to the 4/3 format.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
April 21, 2005 6:45:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote:

>Interesting to see if a cheap KM will retain their unique image
>stabilisation, and whether Panasonic will contribute an image stabilised
>Leica lens to the 4/3 format.


Leica probably won't be involved, but Panasonic will contribute a very
interesting image stabiliser that will also be used by Olympus.
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 1:44:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Steve" <whiteroseofyorkshireNOSPAM@postmaster.co.uk> wrote in message
news:33ad61dndabuhmm4b3hlh531qdrclhdsrb@4ax.com...
> On 20 Apr 2005 09:05:48 -0700, "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Steve wrote:
>>> "we are still at 6MP"
>>>
>>> Why so hung up about how many megapixels we have? You don't need
>>more
>>> than 6MP unless you need very large prints or want to crop the hell
>>> out of everything you shoot.
>>>
>>
>>I am not hung up on megapixels. I probably won't move up from my 6MP
>>Canon 300D until I can get atleast 12/16MP for the same price that I
>>paid for the 300D. But as a customer, I would like to see newer
>>products come out with more to offer for the same price. Its been two
>>years since Canon came out with the 6MP 300D. And in two years the
>>camera manufacturers have come up with only 8MP for the sub-$1000
>>category? Whatever happened to Moore's law or whatever law kept driving
>>up processor speeds in the last one decade?
>>
>>- Siddhartha
>
> Processor speeds in computers are only one parameter in system
> performance (albeit an important one). Other parameters include hard
> disk speed, the data bus speeds (especially the front side bus),
> graphics performance, memory performance etc.etc.
>
> The same can be said for the number of megapixels parameter in a
> digital camera 'system'. Other factors are the image
> processing/compression algorithms, CCD/CMOS sensor size (and hence
> photodiode density), lens quality, shutter quality etc.etc.
>
> People of today like to be able to say they have something bigger (and
> hence apparently better) than the rest and this numbers game with
> CPU's and camera megapixels gives them just what they need. "oh i've
> got a 3 gig pentium 4" they chime at the bar in my local pub. I have
> not yet felt the need to enlighten them that they don't have enough
> memory, the hard disk is only 5200rpm, and the motherboard can be
> obtained from hong kong for £15 on eBay.

Well said!
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 2:11:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Darrell" <cota348@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:BsudnQTTYIcSAvrfRVn-hQ@rogers.com...
>
> "Darrell" <cota348@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:V5edndGGv_qOffvfRVn-2A@rogers.com...
>> "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1113997121.446907.9570@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> Anyways, lets see how they've crippled it vis-a-vis the much nicer D70.
>>> - Uses SD card instead of CF.
>>> - No control over AF modes
>>> - No DoF button
>>> - No white balance fine tuning
>>>
>> It depends on the market that Nikon is aiming the F55 Digital, err D50
>> at. I
>> don't see SD cards as crippled. In fact they are less prone to damage or
>> bent pins. The other features are aimed at the P&S crowd.
>>
>>> And we are still at 6MP including the much hyped D70s. I think Nikon
>>> bought a trillion of those 6MP sensors from Sony so isn't going to 8 or
>>> 10MP.
>>>
>> Canon seems to be the only maker that makes a big deal about their small
>> pixel count increase from 6.3 to 8.
>>
> I heard the price of the D50 will be about $900cdn MSRP, I'll confirm that
> as soon as I hear from Nikon Canada. So less than even the original
> Drebel...
>
>
D50 price in US$, with the lens, around $900. About $750 for the body only.

D70s is about $1200 with the lens. Body only about $900.

D70 is the same price as the D70s but with a rebate.

Considering the minor differences between the 70s and the 70, and
considering I heard Nikon is releasing a new firmware version for the 70,
that camera may be an incredible bargain when you consider the rebate price.
Not much more than the D50 while they last.
!