Have you seen that Sony 8MP??

[jimsloy]

HHmmm....8 megapix's or interchangeable lenses??!!!

Sony I forget the model number - but it's $999 and 8MP! WOW!

I can't wait for the next firmware update to my 10D where it converts the sensor into 10MP.

[Morden]

I can't wait for the next firmware update to my 10D where it converts the sensor into 10MP.

The sensor in the 10D is 12.6 Megapixel. Half of the elements are used to render a convincing back focussing effect on certain "lucky" units.

[merlyn9]

It all happened so quickly...
Foggy Calf. morning 6800 pounds of Dodge Ram.... (shiny '04 model)

Out of no where, the Sony 828 jolted across the highway, I couldn't
miss it, it's reactions were slower... Dispite hiting the break, all of a sudden I had 828 all over my 17" tires (8MP covers a lot of rubber)

I stopped, pulled off to the side & checked the passanger seat making sure all abord were OK... My 10D & lenses were all un effected... closing back up the camera bag, we drove off looking for something of interest to photograph.....

[tpinchback]

The sensor in the 10D is 12.6 Megapixel. Half of the elements are used to render a convincing back focussing effect on certain "lucky" units.

Explain please?????

[defordphoto]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

This one went over the cliff real fast!

[tpinchback]

Real funny

[defordphoto]

Real funny

Yo...That had nothing to do with your comment. Morden's 12.6 megapixel comment is totally tongue-in-cheek.

[timmyquest]

It all happened so quickly...
Foggy Calf. morning 6800 pounds of Dodge Ram.... (shiny '04 model)

Out of no where, the Sony 828 jolted across the highway, I couldn't
miss it, it's reactions were slower... Dispite hiting the break, all of a sudden I had 828 all over my 17" tires (8MP covers a lot of rubber)

I stopped, pulled off to the side & checked the passanger seat making sure all abord were OK... My 10D & lenses were all un effected... closing back up the camera bag, we drove off looking for something of interest to photograph.....

LOL.

a kid at school yesterday was trying to tell me my 300D sucked because sony had an 8mp camera...i told him to shut up.

'nuff said

[drisley]

It's funny...

The first thing people ask me when I tell them I have a new digital camera is "how many megapixels is it?".
They then proceed to tell me that "if I get a digicam, it's going to have x megapixels".

I am convinced that the average person thinks that Mpixel is the most important issue when buying a camera. Anything else is a distant second.

For me, and alot of people who know anything about cameras, Mpixel is probably one of the least important factors.

A 4 Mpixel G3 for example, produces images that are better than many 5 and 6 Mpixel cameras out there.

You can have a 20 Mpixel camera with crappy optics, and poor image processing, and a good 2 Mpixel camera will produce much better results.

[EXA1a]

It's funny...

The first thing people ask me when I tell them I have a new digital camera is "how many megapixels is it?".
They then proceed to tell me that "if I get a digicam, it's going to have x megapixels".

I am convinced that the average person thinks that Mpixel is the most important issue when buying a camera. Anything else is a distant second.

For me, and alot of people who know anything about cameras, Mpixel is probably one of the least important factors.

A 4 Mpixel G3 for example, produces images that are better than many 5 and 6 Mpixel cameras out there.

You can have a 20 Mpixel camera with crappy optics, and poor image processing, and a good 2 Mpixel camera will produce much better results.

Yep, same experience with people asking "how many megapixels". I just point at the lens of my dSLR and tell them that there's still something between your object and your sensor which either gives each pixel some meaningful information, or lets the sensor guess what's out there. It's no difference if 2mp or 8mp are guessing...
My old D30 with its 3 mp produced much better results than most smaller P&S cameras with 4-5 mp. Now I got 6mp, and that's plenty. For normal prints I don't need it but it's nice to have for cropping in certain cases. The pixel density of the 10D/300D camera hits the resolution limits of most 135mm SLR system lenses, even some "L" lenses. IMO a FF sensor with the same pixel density as the 10D/300D, leading to 16mp FF, would be the upper limit for the current 135mm SLR systems. More pixel would not give you more information.

--Jens--

[neil_r]

A friend of mine has the new Sony and it is an excellent camera (for what he wants to use it for) I would not buy one personally because I have been using SLRs for the last 25 years and am just too tied in to the flexibility that gives me.

I always have a grin on my face when I read posts on here, where brand loyalty seems to replace common sense. It’s almost as if people are trying to justify the fact that they have shelled out huge amounts of money by saying that they got the best camera / lense for it.

It really does not matter. I started my photography using Pentax, over the years I must have had at least 6 different Pentax cameras, I then bought a Canon EOS 1N then an EOS D60 and to be honest there is very little deference in the quality of the photographs from any of them, the reason for this is that the limiting factor in most of the photographs I take is me.

Some of the most memorable photographs ever taken were taken with kit that many of the people on this forum would write off as crap.

Please people, don’t let brand loyalty become the new religion, we all know how dangerous that can be.

Neil

[Cadenza]

Even more than specs, CA etc., the main problem I have
with the F717/828 series is the design. It is disconcerting
to have a cyclop/cyborg shoved at your face. Else, it
looks like the photographer is coming to rape me with the
camera.

Of course the F828 is an exceptional imaging tool (with
the Zeiss coated lens particularly tempting), but it is very
difficult to blend in the crowd with a camera like that. The
300D is more traditional looking, the way people expect
a camera to look, so your subjects won't be as alarmed,
and you the photographer won't need to feel as self
conscious either. I'm waiting for PMA to get a Digital SLR,
but for these same reasons I won't ever give up my G3.

Cheers, Cadenza

[J.A.F. Doorhof]

Well ok I bite ;D

I have seen the camera, it's a very nice (but overpriced) unit.
The REAL problem is NOISE, the camera is really really REALLY noisy.

For the same price you buy a Canon 300D with lens, so I guess that will be the better choice.

Greetings,
Frank

[zerolight]

i really fancied the 828 before settling on the 10D... mostly because of 828 manufacturing delays. however, I have now seen one in the flesh and had a play. it feels lovely. looks lovely. but as soon as you put the evf up to your eye, or try to use the LCD, you really appreciate the SLR. the 828 also has way more noise than the 10d, and a lot of CA. more to the point, it may be an 8MP camera, but those 8MP are crammed onto the same size CCD that was in the 5MP, and in this case that doesnt make for great pictures. the 10D pics are much much better. really.

the 828 is still a nice camera. but i'm glad i bought the 10d.

[Morden]

I am convinced that the average person thinks that Mpixel is the most important issue when buying a camera. Anything else is a distant second.

Indeed; it is like comparing cars based solely on top speed, or computers based solely on processor clock speed.

I have had several people make comments along the lines of, "Your 6 megapixel camera cost how much? Mine is 5 megapixel and it only cost x! And it's much smaller and lighter!".

[Forge]

the thing i find with the sony 828 , 300d compairison is it doesnt work its virtually two different classes. Megapixals in my mind is overblown. in the end it comes down to things other than pixals.

A 1ghz AMD duron is not going to compair to a 1ghz P3 Cameras are getting into the same race pcs are in - More mega____ . a car that has a top speed of 200 mph is not going to nessaraly going to finish the race in first, because the car that has a top speed of 160 has a more efficient means of getting to 160. the top speed in my mind has no bearing on the whole thing its only part of the math.

Watching the Megapixel race is like watching trees grow.
My 2nd camera was 1.3 mp and my brother was floored that it produced better images then his 2mp camera.

but as said because megapixels is not everything when it comes to cameras. Optics, hardware, and knowledge comes before megapixels..

Anyways that my thoughts ..

[GenEOS]

The new Sony looks like a nice camera, I find it interesting that Sony opted to add a CF card slot to this camera.

It will surely find a spot in the market and shows a trend in cameras that Canon better hurry up and get off their butts and do something about.

It's now almost February, we have been promised 20 new digital models by Canon in 2004 and yet, none so far.

[jimsloy]

Merlyn9: Was your dodge a HEMI? Imagine if it was a Ford F250 - I mean, with the engine and tire size, you could have smashed the 8MP sensor into 8 pieces, and had yourself 8 1MP cameras - and produced some amazing pictures. Or better yet, if the lens of the Sony survived, you could attach it to your dSLR and git sum rilly good pixtures...hehehe.

[drisley]

I just had a look at some pictures at Steve's digicams.

I couldn't beleive how bad the 828 images looked compared to the 300d's when compared side by side . I compared the pictures of the Bon Apetite Cafe and the red brick building.
The 828 images really seemed to lack detail.

Then when you look at the ISO shots, yikes. I think my old s30 had better noise than the 828.

Finally, I had a look at some of the 828 night shots of the christmas lights. I almost coughed up a lung when I saw all the CA/fringing.

Here is a case where I would probably choose my old G3 over the 828.

[Canuck]

It all happened so quickly...
Foggy Calf. morning 6800 pounds of Dodge Ram.... (shiny '04 model)

Out of no where, the Sony 828 jolted across the highway, I couldn't
miss it, it's reactions were slower... Dispite hiting the break, all of a sudden I had 828 all over my 17" tires (8MP covers a lot of rubber)

I stopped, pulled off to the side & checked the passanger seat making sure all abord were OK... My 10D & lenses were all un effected... closing back up the camera bag, we drove off looking for something of interest to photograph.....

LOL.

a kid at school yesterday was trying to tell me my 300D sucked because sony had an 8mp camera...i told him to shut up.

'nuff said

I'm with you there, just take some pics w/ L glass and even small fine should blow it away, provided the pic isn't jacked up. Now try it large, fine jpeg and note difference, noe resize to 1536x1024 and I think you will be amazed! Finally, shoot RAW and watch that person walk away with disgust that the Sony sux! More MP is not necessarily better. Much like in computers, adding RAM can do more than upgrading processor, adding superior optics will take you over the edge!

[openspace]

Sigmund Freud is rolling over in his grave. My sensor is bigger than your sensor! It's not the size that counts. It's what you can do with it. According to my wife, I fail on both accounts. Grrr.

[MarkH]

With the amount of people on this group that always use RAW I'm amazed that there aren't several posts stating that the biggest flaw with the Sony is unusable RAW.

Imagine trying to shoot action with RAW! The camera locks for 12 seconds after each shot.

RAW conversion is also pityful, only the Sony software can be used.

I use ISO 1600 on my 10D, for me the Sony couldn't even be considered.

[defordphoto]

Yeah Mark. Pretty amazing. People are going to have glazed eyes when they go to purchase this camera. Salespeople will use the more megapixels are better when selling this thing and there will be so, so many disappointed people after they take it home. And personally I just think this thing is butt-ugly.

[GenEOS]

Yeah Mark. Pretty amazing. People are going to have glazed eyes when they go to purchase this camera. Salespeople will use the more megapixels are better when selling this thing and there will be so, so many disappointed people after they take it home. And personally I just think this thing is butt-ugly.

These type people will probably, more than likely, think it was the best camera they have ever owned...because they have nothing to compare it too. Plus they will be able to use the LCD as a viewfinder and never know why anyone would want anything different!

[ijohnson]

You are right. I just looked at the sample pics at Steve's and the noise even at ISO 100 is MUCH worse than even my G2 at 200.

It is unfortunate that cameras are resorting to megapixels as the most important stat. Anyone seen an HP or a Fuji perform? I would rather have a 3mp Canon shot than 12 megapixels of that Sony garbage.

My brother just got a Sony 5mp (ugh, he has sony everything) and I make fun of him all the time because my friends s200 takes better pictures.

[neil_r]

I make fun of him all the time because my friends s200 takes better pictures.

I think you will find that it is your friends that take the better pictures, the camera is simply the tool they use to do it.

One of the things that really hacks me off is when someone looks at one of my pictures and remarks,"Thats a really good picture, you must have a really good camera". (not that it happens too often)

Just another 2c worth

Neil

[ijohnson]

I make fun of him all the time because my friends s200 takes better pictures.

I think you will find that it is your friends that take the better pictures, the camera is simply the tool they use to do it.

Neil

I agree Neil, but neither of them are good at taking pictures, however the color reproduction, focus, and light metering are all better on my friends camera (Canon), granted that you can't blow it up to 11x17.

To prove your point, mine is better than both of theirs and all of my pictures suck.