Zoovroo
Why do pictures taken by DSLR cameras look so professional?
I have a point-and-shoot camera, and I have taken some really good shots with it, but it seems like you can take a picture of anything with a DSLR and it'll look amazing.
So what exactly sets apart the quality of a DSLR and a Point-and-Shoot camera?
Answer
A dSLR does not automatically take great pictures. It still depends a lot on the person holding it. However there are some clear technical advantages that they do have:
- The sensor in your typical point and shoot is tiny. Small enough to fit on the tip of your finger. This helps make the camera both more compact and cheaper. However the much larger sensors used in dSLRs can collect more light, which allows for less noise and greater dynamic range. The size, or rather the longer focal lengths needed for a given field of view because of the size, also makes it easier to produce the often eye pleasing out-of-focus background effect.
- With SLRs and dSLRs you can swap out the lens for one better suited for the task at hand. And the average quality of a particular lens is often significantly better than what is generally found in compacts. Especially in the case of "superzoom" compacts, whose lenses are riddled with compromises.
- DSLRs usually have better image processors.
- DSLRs, and a handful of serious compacts, possess the ability to connect to external flashes. This, in the right hands, allows for much greater flexibility when lighting the subject. On board flashes tend to create an unnatural look because they're small, underpowered, and mounted so close to the lens.
A dSLR does not automatically take great pictures. It still depends a lot on the person holding it. However there are some clear technical advantages that they do have:
- The sensor in your typical point and shoot is tiny. Small enough to fit on the tip of your finger. This helps make the camera both more compact and cheaper. However the much larger sensors used in dSLRs can collect more light, which allows for less noise and greater dynamic range. The size, or rather the longer focal lengths needed for a given field of view because of the size, also makes it easier to produce the often eye pleasing out-of-focus background effect.
- With SLRs and dSLRs you can swap out the lens for one better suited for the task at hand. And the average quality of a particular lens is often significantly better than what is generally found in compacts. Especially in the case of "superzoom" compacts, whose lenses are riddled with compromises.
- DSLRs usually have better image processors.
- DSLRs, and a handful of serious compacts, possess the ability to connect to external flashes. This, in the right hands, allows for much greater flexibility when lighting the subject. On board flashes tend to create an unnatural look because they're small, underpowered, and mounted so close to the lens.
Nikon vs. Sony DSLR camera?
.....
I'm a little new with digital SLR's and I am wondering which camera choice would be the smartest. I'm debating on whether I should buy the Nikon 10.2MP Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm VR Lens - Black (D3000) or the Sony 10.2MP Digital SLR Camera with 18-55mm Lens - Black (Alpha-A330L)
I prices of these two cameras dont matter but I'm looking for best quality of photos bases on user experience!
thanks :)
heres the links of the cameras below:
NIKON:
http://www.target.com/Nikon-10-2MP-Digital-Camera-18-55mm/dp/B002JCSV5I/ref=sc_qi_detaillink
SONY:
http://www.target.com/Sony-10-2MP-Digital-Camera-18-55mm/dp/B0029U0WY8/ref=sc_qi_detaillink
*based sorry
Answer
Nikon and Sony share the same Sony sensor.
There's a slight difference in the electronics behind the sensor, but Nikon pip Sony at the post for 'perceived' image quality at higher magnifications than you're likely to use or even see. Dead heat.
Nikon does not have Vibration Reduction in the body - each lens you buy has to have VR built-in. The Sony has Anti-Shake built into the body - all lenses are automatically anti-vibration.
Nikon's implementation is slightly better than Sony's - but Sony's goes across the entire lens range at 'no extra cost'.
We could go on all night about the little things. Get a hold of one. Feel it. Try the different knobs, buttons and switches. Personally (more down to my hand size/shape/oddities) I prefer handling Sony cameras - I own both. Your hands are different to mine. You might disagree.
Sony's a330 has a tiltable Live View screen. It means you can hold the camera at ground level and still see the Live View clearly. A better implementation than the Nikon's fixed screen. You could also snap the Sony's screen off, but you'd find it hard with the Nikon....
It's all swings and roundabouts. Image-wise, they're perfectly matched. Handling-wise, the Sony might be better for your hands or vice-versa.
Whichever you choose, however, you're married to it. Buy into a system and stay with it. By the time a few lenses and a flash etc have populated your kit-bag, your camera is suddenly the cheapest part of the kit - you end up buying a camera to suit the kit you have. In this respect Nikon wins - by a hair.
Sony's sensors/electronics produce better colours, though.
Nikon and Sony share the same Sony sensor.
There's a slight difference in the electronics behind the sensor, but Nikon pip Sony at the post for 'perceived' image quality at higher magnifications than you're likely to use or even see. Dead heat.
Nikon does not have Vibration Reduction in the body - each lens you buy has to have VR built-in. The Sony has Anti-Shake built into the body - all lenses are automatically anti-vibration.
Nikon's implementation is slightly better than Sony's - but Sony's goes across the entire lens range at 'no extra cost'.
We could go on all night about the little things. Get a hold of one. Feel it. Try the different knobs, buttons and switches. Personally (more down to my hand size/shape/oddities) I prefer handling Sony cameras - I own both. Your hands are different to mine. You might disagree.
Sony's a330 has a tiltable Live View screen. It means you can hold the camera at ground level and still see the Live View clearly. A better implementation than the Nikon's fixed screen. You could also snap the Sony's screen off, but you'd find it hard with the Nikon....
It's all swings and roundabouts. Image-wise, they're perfectly matched. Handling-wise, the Sony might be better for your hands or vice-versa.
Whichever you choose, however, you're married to it. Buy into a system and stay with it. By the time a few lenses and a flash etc have populated your kit-bag, your camera is suddenly the cheapest part of the kit - you end up buying a camera to suit the kit you have. In this respect Nikon wins - by a hair.
Sony's sensors/electronics produce better colours, though.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar