Anyone still using their old DSLR from pre 2008, we are going to give it a go next week to see whether it's the photographer or the camera.
If you still have your first Digital or DSLR please post a link to yours below :-)
Edited by tandi
Bought mine about 2008/09-ish, IIRC. Canon 450D. Does that count? Not sure of the spec but I think it's about 10megathingies. Is that any help for your survey?
Orson Carter said
Bought mine about 2008/09-ish, IIRC. Canon 450D. Does that count? Not sure of the spec but I think it's about 10megathingies. Is that any help for your survey?
Anything around 10MP and pre 2010 would be fun to see :-) but try and use the kit lens or a 35mm or 50mm 1.8, no fantastic glass :-)
Edited by tandi
tandi said
Orson Carter said
Bought mine about 2008/09-ish, IIRC. Canon 450D. Does that count? Not sure of the spec but I think it's about 10megathingies. Is that any help for your survey?
Anything around 10MP and pre 2010 would be fun to see :-) but try and use the kit lens or a 35mm or 50mm 1.8, no fantastic glass :-)Edited by tandi
Pick anything from my portfolio. My entire kit consists of two 450D bodies, a kit zoom and a nifty fifty. Never had any other kit.
This post has been filtered based on your content filter settings because it is NSFW. View reply
Other than resolution, the three things that have seen the biggest change in terms of possible images are ISO capabilities, Dynamic Range, and Auto Focus - take an image of a static subject, with sufficient light to shoot at ISO 100, and a limited dynamic range in the scene, and there should not be a lot of difference in an image viewed online.
Take the same two cameras (modern and old) and shoot moving subjects in low light with large dynamic range, and there will be a huge difference in the images.
I don't have my D100 (4MP) any more, but I think I still have my D200 upstairs somewhere. I'll look this evening. There are plenty of my pictures from it on here, including the ones I took in Kenya.
Oh, and I'd have been using the old 24-120 zoom on it for a lot of pictures, a lens which was notoriously soft!
Edited by Sensual Art
Jonathan C said
Other than resolution, the three things that have seen the biggest change in terms of possible images are ISO capabilities, Dynamic Range, and Auto Focus - take an image of a static subject, with sufficient light to shoot at ISO 100, and a limited dynamic range in the scene, and there should not be a lot of difference in an image viewed online.
Take the same two cameras (modern and old) and shoot moving subjects in low light with large dynamic range, and there will be a huge difference in the images.
Understood about limitations of dynamic range and ISO.
Did a shoot earlier this year and, when viewing the back of the camera, I thought 'these don't look too good'. Hmmm... On that shoot I was also surprised that I could use f11 instead of the f4 or f5.6 that I'd expected. Being a dim-witted old git I failed to put the two things together. I'd somehow set the camera to ISO1200. Not too clever on a 450D. Let's just say that the pics weren't worth editing.
Thanks everyone, any older camera and basic lens is fine, if you can take a 2nd shot to show a comparison between your older and latest greatest that would be great, we will do the same at our shoot next week if I can find a new outfit in time :-)
Sensual Art said
I don't have my D100 (4MP) any more, but I think I still have my D200 upstairs somewhere. I'll look this evening. There are plenty of my pictures from it on here, including the ones I took in Kenya.
Oh, and I'd have been using the old 24-120 zoom on it for a lot of pictures, a lens which was notoriously soft!
Edited by Sensual Art
thanks, I will take a look :-)
Jonathan C said
Other than resolution, the three things that have seen the biggest change in terms of possible images are ISO capabilities, Dynamic Range, and Auto Focus - take an image of a static subject, with sufficient light to shoot at ISO 100, and a limited dynamic range in the scene, and there should not be a lot of difference in an image viewed online.
Take the same two cameras (modern and old) and shoot moving subjects in low light with large dynamic range, and there will be a huge difference in the images.
Good advice, luckily I'm not a fast mover but we'll shoot in studio for flash, fingers crossed :-)
This post has been filtered based on your content filter settings because it is NSFW. View reply
First DSLR was a 6mp Nikon D50, which I gave to my niece. when I upgraded to the massive 12mp Nikon D90. I'm still using the D90. All of the pics on my portfolio were shot with it.
Saying that I've big birthday this year, so I paid a visit to MPB recently and treated myself to a 36mp D810. Now I just need a new computer to run it!
Well a 36MP is a little more than pre 2010 sensor territory, but post away. Just looked at your profile, your D90 did some great work, nice edits too.
Edited by tandi
I have a Pentax D200 in my display cabinet. I occasionally take it out and take a couple of images and view them on the back of the camera. They look nothing like the back of the camera compared to my Pentax 645z. But the lcd viewing screen will have a lot to do with it. But also the way the cameras meter for the image and process the image (jpeg).
If I did a side by side comparison between the Pentax D200 and the Nikon D5 in the studio, then I am sure the Pentax D200 would get some reasonable images. But anything outside this controlled environment other than Mediterranean light would likely result with poor images. It is fun comparing though.
Not quite like for like but my Canon 50D with the highly regarded (at the time) ef-s 17-55 f2.8 lens comfortably outperformed my Canon 350D with the original version of the ef-s 18-55 kit lens. Also more and better pixels; 15mpix vs 8mpix; and the 50D has a better autofocus system.
The first 7 pictures on my portfolio are from the 50D.
Edited by RobertP