Go Back   Team-BHP > Around the Corner > Shifting gears > Gadgets, Computers & Software


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 3rd June 2013, 10:35   #11821
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Delhi
Posts: 2,133
Thanked: 1,003 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe1980 View Post
I've never heard of focus stacking. Sounds interesting but also demands a lot of work to get that right. I checked the specs of the D3200, would the 24 MP do any good against the 18 MP in the 5100 especially for Macro photography? But otherwise both the cameras seem to have more or less the same specifications.
1. Focus stacking is used a lot for still life photography, where you want sharp focus across the frame.

2. 24MP will give you more latitude in cropping the image. As both cameras are similarly priced D3200 is a better buy in my opinion.
Aroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd June 2013, 11:13   #11822
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 613
Thanked: 116 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Errr... I started this thread, but noticed today that a post by Rudra Sen has been appended to it and his post is first now.

It's a very small matter, but I just wonder - why?
ntomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd June 2013, 11:41   #11823
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Andromeda
Posts: 311
Thanked: 59 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aroy View Post
1. Focus stacking is used a lot for still life photography, where you want sharp focus across the frame.

2. 24MP will give you more latitude in cropping the image. As both cameras are similarly priced D3200 is a better buy in my opinion.
I'm sorry for a dumb question. Wouldn't the 24MP result in overall softness of the image for the same sensor size against an 18MP resolution? I never crop my images. I just want to decide based only on one factor, the IQ. Do you have any idea on the IQ from both these cameras? Excuse me if my question was very basic.
joe1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd June 2013, 12:49   #11824
Senior - BHPian
 
DerAlte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 8,076
Thanked: 2,876 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntomer View Post
Errr... I started this thread, ...
It's a very small matter, but I just wonder - why?
1. Since those posts were relevant in this thread, they were moved here

2. Moved posts are inserted in date order

3. Those posts (from 2005) predate your (originally first) 2006 post
DerAlte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd June 2013, 13:12   #11825
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 2,035
Thanked: 384 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe1980 View Post
I'm sorry for a dumb question. Wouldn't the 24MP result in overall softness of the image for the same sensor size against an 18MP resolution?
I see no reason why higher MP should give softer image in general. Your lens has certain maximum resolution ( generally expressed in Lines pair / mm) and the number of pixels per mm digitize it.

So more pixels actually mean better though for a human eye 18 or 24 does not matter at all.
amitk26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th June 2013, 00:31   #11826
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Andromeda
Posts: 311
Thanked: 59 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by amitk26 View Post
I see no reason why higher MP should give softer image in general. Your lens has certain maximum resolution ( generally expressed in Lines pair / mm) and the number of pixels per mm digitize it.

So more pixels actually mean better though for a human eye 18 or 24 does not matter at all.
Amit, thanks for that explanation. I did not quite understand the Lines pair / mm concept. Could you please elaborate on that? The sensor comparison between the Nikon D5100 and the Nikon D3200 is as below:

APS-C 23.6x15.6 on the D5100
APS-C 23.2x15.4 on the D3200

There is very marginal difference in the sensor size with the D3200 being a tad smaller. What difference would that make to the image quality on the D3200 with the same lens that is shot on the D5100? I just cannot decide between the D5100 and the D3200. This camera that I will buy will be just used with the 105mm Nikon macro lens. I will not buy or invest in any lenses for this DSLR. This will just be used for macro and sometimes portrait shots. No lenses will be purchased. So what should I go for? D5100 or D3200?
joe1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th June 2013, 11:55   #11827
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Delhi
Posts: 2,133
Thanked: 1,003 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe1980 View Post
Amit, thanks for that explanation. I did not quite understand the Lines pair / mm concept. Could you please elaborate on that? The sensor comparison between the Nikon D5100 and the Nikon D3200 is as below:

APS-C 23.6x15.6 on the D5100
APS-C 23.2x15.4 on the D3200

There is very marginal difference in the sensor size with the D3200 being a tad smaller. What difference would that make to the image quality on the D3200 with the same lens that is shot on the D5100? I just cannot decide between the D5100 and the D3200. This camera that I will buy will be just used with the 105mm Nikon macro lens. I will not buy or invest in any lenses for this DSLR. This will just be used for macro and sometimes portrait shots. No lenses will be purchased. So what should I go for? D5100 or D3200?
1. line/mm is a test for the resolution of the lens, and refers to the maximum lines (minimum distance) that can be distinguished. After that the lines will look blurred and merge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...ding-mtf.shtml

2. D3200 is a more modern offering. Its advantage over D5100 are
. Marginally cheaper
. Some comparisons
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Nikon-D5100
http://www.digitalrev.com/article/ni.../MjExMzkzMTU_A
http://versusio.com/en/nikon-d5100-vs-nikon-d3200

The verdict is that if you are not into movie shots and do not need ISO 25000, then D3200 is a better buy.
Aroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th June 2013, 12:29   #11828
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Andromeda
Posts: 311
Thanked: 59 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aroy View Post
1. line/mm is a test for the resolution of the lens, and refers to the maximum lines (minimum distance) that can be distinguished. After that the lines will look blurred and merge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...ding-mtf.shtml

2. D3200 is a more modern offering. Its advantage over D5100 are
. Marginally cheaper
. Some comparisons
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Nikon-D5100
http://www.digitalrev.com/article/ni.../MjExMzkzMTU_A
http://versusio.com/en/nikon-d5100-vs-nikon-d3200

The verdict is that if you are not into movie shots and do not need ISO 25000, then D3200 is a better buy.
Thanks for those links. In fact, I have also seen them before when I was researching on entry level DSLR's. I have now made up my mind to go for the Nikon D3200. Hope not to spend any more money after this purchase on this bad hobby called photography.
joe1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th June 2013, 18:16   #11829
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Andromeda
Posts: 311
Thanked: 59 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Sorry mods to chain my post. I just got the Nikon D3200 and below is the sample shot taken using the Nikon 105mm Macro lens.This is a shot of the lens cap that has Nikon embodied on it. Like Samurai was mentioning in his other post (in the EVIL cameras thread), getting a proper macro shot looks like a challenge and this challenge makes it interesting for me to get my gear out and keep shooting. Nice!
Attached Thumbnails
The DSLR Thread-nikon_d3200_105mm_macro_2_2013.jpg  

joe1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th June 2013, 21:25   #11830
BHPian
 
superbhikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Muzaffarnagar
Posts: 411
Thanked: 143 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

I indeed was in same confusion with Nikon 3200 and 5100. But finally, bought 5100 since my primary requirement was for stills not movies.
superbhikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th June 2013, 21:39   #11831
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Andromeda
Posts: 311
Thanked: 59 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by superbhikari View Post
I indeed was in same confusion with Nikon 3200 and 5100. But finally, bought 5100 since my primary requirement was for stills not movies.
Even my primary intention was for still photos and more over that, just for macro photography. I did not want to pay that extra money for the D5100 for those features that I might not need like exposure bracketing, swivel screen, High ISO (not sure if anything above 3200 is really useful). Certainly the D5100 is feature rich comparing to the D3200, but that did not deter my getting the D3200. I got some good advice from our friends here at T-BHP that sealed my purchase.
joe1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th June 2013, 14:43   #11832
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Delhi
Posts: 2,133
Thanked: 1,003 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by superbhikari View Post
I indeed was in same confusion with Nikon 3200 and 5100. But finally, bought 5100 since my primary requirement was for stills not movies.
Actually most of the comparison reviews recommend D5100 over D3200 if movies is the primary object.

I feel that very high ISO settings are of not much use, unless you are into very low light situation. Even there a better prime used wide open gives better shots, as high ISO reduces DR drastically and increases the noise.
http://photographylife.com/what-is-iso-in-photography
http://www.exposureguide.com/iso-sensitivity.htm
http://photo.stackexchange.com/quest...e-the-exposure
http://ophrysphotography.co.uk/pages/highiso.htm
Aroy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th June 2013, 14:57   #11833
Senior - BHPian
 
alpha1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: P00NA
Posts: 1,626
Thanked: 967 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aroy View Post
Actually most of the comparison reviews recommend D5100 over D3200 if movies is the primary object.

I feel that very high ISO settings are of not much use, unless you are into very low light situation. Even there a better prime used wide open gives better shots, as high ISO reduces DR drastically and increases the noise.
http://photographylife.com/what-is-iso-in-photography
http://www.exposureguide.com/iso-sensitivity.htm
http://photo.stackexchange.com/quest...e-the-exposure
http://ophrysphotography.co.uk/pages/highiso.htm
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...(brand3)/Nikon

D3200 sensor performs the same as D5100.

However in general: a one stop better sensor is equivalent to getting a one stop brighter lens. I am sure the cost of one stop brighter lens (except the nifty fifty) would be far more than one stop better sensor. Also better sensor means better performance at ALL focal lengths.
Whereas brighter lens means only those fixed focal lengths ...

Last edited by alpha1 : 5th June 2013 at 15:07.
alpha1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th June 2013, 16:32   #11834
Senior - BHPian
 
clevermax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Tvm/Amsterdam
Posts: 1,601
Thanked: 403 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe1980 View Post
I have been shooting with my Sony NEX 6 for the last couple of months. Though I find the camera to be interesting to shoot with, I seriously cannot do what I wanted - Macro photography. I'm not sure if there will be a decent lens in the 85 to 120mm focal length range for the NEX in the next couple of years. So I'm planning to get either a DSLR with a Macro lens or just a Macro lens with an adapter for my NEX. I do not like the latter and not sure how that combination might work. What are your suggestions?
Ditching an EVF camera for not being able to do macro (Lens availability) isn't fair, for EVF is far more easy for macros than the OVFs! I started enjoying macros only after I switched to EVF.
clevermax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th June 2013, 18:08   #11835
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Andromeda
Posts: 311
Thanked: 59 Times
Default Re: The DSLR Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by clevermax View Post
Ditching an EVF camera for not being able to do macro (Lens availability) isn't fair, for EVF is far more easy for macros than the OVFs! I started enjoying macros only after I switched to EVF.
I'm not ditching my EVIL camera all together. I love to work with my NEX 6. But looking at the available options for doing macro photography with the kind of lens that I want (in the 85 - 105mm range), I had no other choice other than to buy a basic DSLR and a 105mm macro lens. I committed to myself to not to buy any lenses or any other accessory for the DSLR. If you are talking about EVF (Electronic View Finder), yes the Nikon D3200 has it as well, otherwise I wouldn't have bought it in the first place.
joe1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DSLR Video Discussion Sankar Gadgets, Computers & Software 129 18th August 2017 19:07
On a Temple Visiting Spree! Returned with only 1 wish. Need a DSLR! mclaren1885 Travelogues 23 27th July 2007 11:21


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 04:49.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks