Stay focused folks, no personal confrontations
Bobby. wrote on Jan 14
th, 2017 at 7:36am:
Hi Bias - you're getting distracted by megapixels.The true quality of a camera is in it's lens.
A standard DSLR with a kit lens with a 10 MByte APS-C 22.2mm x 14.8mm sensor 5.7 micron pixel size
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_1000Dwill take better pictures than a 41 M pixel mobile phone camera with
a little pea lens. 1.12 micron pixel size
e.g
http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_lumia_1020-5506.phpThe larger pixels have more dynamic range.
You are also forgetting that electronic pixels have up to
100 x more sensitivity than film.
That means faster shots with less blurring in high light &
less exposure time for night targets.
Ok, I'll reveal the truth, I love developing film just as much as I love exposing film, but we all know that having to develop and scan film is the big disadvantage over digital. That said, my compact digital cameras ranging from 4MP to 15MP are pretty useless wide open and for detail in highlights
I found myself constantly setting exposure to 1/2 or even 1 stop underexposed in "Manual" to achieve something anywhere near acceptable. If I was to carry on with digital, I'd need to dish out 3-4 grand at least, because I wouldn't trust anything less. Then again you don't really know what you'd get for 3k-4k until you tried it, then it's too late, pot luck I think
My best film camera, a mint Bronica ETR Si, cost me $450, a camera that cost around $2,000 perhaps when new. A tank of a thing with aperture priority, motor wind, TTL flash exposure, mirror lock-up, a metered finder and interchangeable lenses. lol what else would you want?