Old SLR's vs New Compacts?

T

timboellis

Messages
282
Name
Tim Ellis
Edit My Images
No
Just wondering how far have we come if i was to buy a new camera just for general use, as after spending the cash on a new camera outfit for my son a D5300 and a Sigma 18-300mm f3.5-6.3 C DC Macro OS HSM got me thinking,

So if i was to now buy a Nikon D50 and a Sigma 75-300mm F4-5.6 Apo which i could get for £120, how would to compare to say a Coolpix L340 or similar at the same price?
 
timboellis said:
Just wondering how far have we come if i was to buy a new camera just for general use, as after spending the cash on a new camera outfit for my son a D5300 and a Sigma 18-300mm f3.5-6.3 C DC Macro OS HSM got me thinking,

So if i was to now buy a Nikon D50 and a Sigma 75-300mm F4-5.6 Apo which i could get for £120, how would to compare to say a Coolpix L340 or similar at the same price?
Click to expand...

Apart from the size. And portability.. you would winning with the D50. Coincidentally, I picked up a D40 and kit lens for only £60 today from a camera shop! Utter bargain and looks an excellent way to try SLRs and complement my bridge. Sensor size is far bigger than the cool pix. Won't regret it!
 
Well 99% of the time i use my phone camera when out and about on my MTB and road bike however once or twice a year when i go on a wee break the the wife it would be nice to take a decent camera without the cost.

So in Feb heading for Edinburgh for a few nights so again looking for a decent camera on a major budget seeing i will not use it for the rest of the year, ill keep a look out for an SLR .

I was looking at either the D40, D40x or D3000 they are all around the same price
 
Last edited:
I thought we were talking film here when I saw the title, in which case I'm a sucker for 35mm film. In terms of DSLRs I think the old ones will still be better than modern compacts in terms of outright IQ.
 
I have a Panasonic LF1 which is a fairly recent shirt pocket type camera and it's rubbish. Apparently it has the same sensor as the top end Panasonic LXx which is/was highly regarded although I have to say that I had the LX5 and that was rubbish too and I actually preferred the earlier LX2.

I suppose I should clarify what I mean by rubbish... whole images don't look too bad even at ISO 3200 but if you look closely at low ISO files they're a mess and the higher ISO ones are even more of a mess. All things are relative though and whole images can look good on screen and in print but IMO these cameras don't produce files a pixel peeper would be proud of.

Maybe you have to go to 1" sensors to get decent quality?

And a PS.
One of my sisters has a new model Sony compact which I think is JPEG only and it's the same story, whole images can look very good on screen but look closely and they're just awful.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I have a Panasonic LF1 which is a fairly recent shirt pocket type camera and it's rubbish. Apparently it has the same sensor as the top end Panasonic LXx which is/was highly regarded although I have to say that I had the LX5 and that was rubbish too and I actually preferred the earlier LX2.

I suppose I should clarify what I mean by rubbish... whole images don't look too bad even at ISO 3200 but if you look closely at low ISO files they're a mess and the higher ISO ones are even more of a mess. All things are relative though and whole images can look good on screen and in print but IMO these cameras don't produce files a pixel peeper would be proud of .......
Click to expand...
If you know the smaller Panasonic compacts produce poor images, why do you keep buying them? :rolleyes:

I have a Panasonic compact, and that produces mushy looking images. I have also started to re use an old Canon compact, colours look good. But on closer inspection, image quality is poor.
 
Outright image quality from an older sensor will exceed that of most small sensor compacts. If your primary use for a camera is to pixel peep the images at 100%, or do lots of photoshop adjustments, or produce giant prints, then forget it. However, if you are happy to take family snaps, print realistic sizes and not crop, or just stick images online, then they're fine.

I'm more than happy with my Panasonic TZ60 for its primary purpose, which is to stick in my pocket in family days out and holidays. It will never be my primary camera, but my primary camera is a D810 and that won't fit in my pocket.
 
jonbeeza said:
If you know the smaller Panasonic compacts produce poor images, why do you keep buying them? :rolleyes:

I have a Panasonic compact, and that produces mushy looking images. I have also started to re use an old Canon compact, colours look good. But on closer inspection, image quality is poor.
Click to expand...

John, did you read what I posted? As you didn't and instead just fixated on my assessment of them as rubbish I'll give you another chance and explain a little further just for you :D

I said... Whole images can look good even to ISO 3200 but when you look closer it all (IMO) falls apart. There are other reasons to buy a small camera than to pixel peep though as there are times when I don't want to take or use a large camera for example there are times when I want a camera that'll fit in my pocket and although when compared to larger sensor cameras these small sensor jobbies can be poor in good light they're better than any phone I've had.

I'm not sure that I "keep buying them" as you put it as I've only had three, LX2, LX5 and LF1, which hardly qualifies for obsessiveness in the context of this forum :D
 
Last edited:
IIRC the D40 and 50 are 6MP so if you want prints over A4, you could be pushing your luck a bit! However, since few people these days print at all, let alone to a decent size, those 6MP will be plenty. Not ideal for ISOs over 800 - noise will be a problem unless exposures are nailed. Luckily, the metering is pretty good so you'll probably get away with 1600 as long as you don't pixel peep. At EFLs between 24mm and 120mm, my X30 Fuji compact gives nicer images in a much smaller package.
 
woof woof said:
John, did you read what I posted? As you didn't and instead just fixated on my assessment of them as rubbish I'll give you another chance and explain a little further just for you :D

I said...

I said... Whole images can look good even to ISO 3200 but when you look closer it all (IMO) falls apart. There are other reasons to buy a small camera than to pixel peep though as there are times when I don't want to take or use a large camera for example there are times when I want a camera that'll fit in my pocket and although when compared to larger sensor cameras these small sensor jobbies can be poor in good light they're better than any phone I've had.

I'm not sure that I "keep buying them" as you put it as I've only had three, LX2, LX5 and LF1, which hardly qualifies for obsessiveness in the context of this forum :D
Click to expand...
You bought the LX2, the LX5 and you continued buying Panasonic by going on to purchase the LF1 ;). At the moment, I am using both the Panasonic TZ55 poop image quality, but OK ish for video while zooming into wildlife. Plus a very old Canon ixus, not too bad IQ for stills, but poop at video. I love small pocketable cameras, just hard to get one with good IQ.
 
Last edited:
Nod said:
IIRC the D40 and 50 are 6MP so if you want prints over A4, you could be pushing your luck a bit! However, since few people these days print at all, let alone to a decent size, those 6MP will be plenty. Not ideal for ISOs over 800 - noise will be a problem unless exposures are nailed. Luckily, the metering is pretty good so you'll probably get away with 1600 as long as you don't pixel peep. At EFLs between 24mm and 120mm, my X30 Fuji compact gives nicer images in a much smaller package.
Click to expand...
Yes it is indeed 6.1 mp - I’d wager it would give some good pictures over A4.. but we shall see! Will be headed out with it tomorrow afternoon after I get back from the office, in the hope of finding a “gem”.
 
Takes some careful upsizing to get much bigger than A4, although for wall hanging, you can just about get away with A3. Only sold my old D70 (same sensor) recently and that was only because LCE and Fuji gave me £125 for it as a trade in against an X-T2!
 
viewfromthenorth said:
I routinely print 15x10's from my old D70 (without any kind of upsizing) and they look good. Not as good as prints from my D700 / D810, but they're good enough to go into my exhibitions. I wouldn't go much bigger than 15x10 though.
Click to expand...

Not managed to get round to trying out the D40 yet, but new ink for the A3 printer arrived so I am all prepared!
 
Enjoy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top