6mp or 10 mp: D70 -> D80

[denys_meunier]

Hi guys,i just read a post,wich one is better 6mp or 10 mp,well lot a people

think more MP you have more better camera you have,I saw lot a people put for

sale the D70/D70s to buy the D80 because is 10 MP,better camera.If you check

the speed (example)D70s got 1/8000 flash sync 1/500 the D80 1/4000 flash sync

1/250, ooops,slower camera,smaller body.In the futur you`l see may be a D80x or

D200X with 12MP or 14MP and lot of D80,D200,gone a be for sale to get more

pixels but i think there is not a lot of difference between the 6 and the 10 in

your print.People want more pixels to get quality print like medium format but

tell you some things,i have a mamiya RZ 6x7 and there is nothing on the DSLR

on the market today its close compare to a medium format print and Pro film is

not done yet,believe me.......I`m currious about your opinion guys.

 

fotoman

[ellis_vener_photography]

"i think there is not a lot of difference between the 6 and the 10 in your print"

 

Thatwill dependon the size of the print. And as you point out therearemany differences, including some in sensor technology and anti-aliasing filters etc. Not just between the older D70 and 10mp cameras, but also between the D80 and D200.

 

My brief experiences with the D80 were discouraging as its CCD and internal processing technology make for photographs with a far greater noise to signal ratio than that of the D200, even at ISO 100. Put another way a photograph made with a D200 is far "cleaner" even in the dark midtones than a photograph made with a D80 using the same lighting and exposure settings. That is what I saw in NEF files from both cameras.

[juanjo_viagran]

all I have to say about MP is LOL.

 

 

I have a 4.1mp and 2.75mp cameras and can careless about MP, the pictures I get from them are excellent.

[tom_burke3]

I recently (this spring) 'upgraded' from a D70 to a D80. For me the main difference as

regards MP is that I can crop more or do things like rotate an image to correct misalignment,

and still be able to print at large sizes.

[squiggs77]

I agree with the above post. If you're not cropping much the difference in Mega Pixels alone isn't worth the upgrade. Not really noticeable in prints. But it does give you much more room to crop and still print big.

[elliot1]

10mp images have about 25% more resolution than 6mp. This may sound like a lot but in reality it isn't (many will argue this point) if your are printing pictures up to 12 x 18.

 

I recently took 3 identical shots with my d200, one at 3mp, one at 6mp and then one at 10mp. I printed all three as 12 x 18's - and while there was a very, very, very slight difference from the 3mp shot to the 10mp shot when you looked at it up close, if you looked at them from normal viewing distance, they looked identical.

 

For printing 4 x 6's, 5 x 7's, and 8 x 10's, there is really no difference from a 3mp image to a 10mp image. Even with extreme crops, there is virtually no difference from a 6mp image to a 10mp image unless you take out your microscope!

 

More is better but you really need much, much more to see a big difference. For the next generation of cameras, it will take cameras with of 25mp, 30mp or more to produce significantly better enlargements or deep crops than today's 10mp cameras (a 20mp camera will only have 25% more resolution than a 10mp camera, equivalent to the increase from 6mp to 10mp).

 

If it means anything, if you had two identical cameras, one being 6mp and the other being 600mp, prints up to about 12 x 18 would look identically.

[markci]

<i>a 20mp camera will only have 25% more resolution than a 10mp camera, equivalent to the increase from 6mp to 10mp</i>

<p>

Actually it will have 41% greater resolution. (And 6Mp->10Mp is 29% but who's counting?). And the difference with large prints will be quite significant.

[mtan]

""I saw lot a people put for sale the D70/D70s to buy the D80 because is 10 MP,better camera."

 

Maybe they wanted a better viewfinder too?

 

Also the people who have chosen 35/DX DSLRs instead of medium format may have done so because convenience and cost tend to factor into the decision as much as absolute image quality.

 

I'm having trouble figuring out what the main point you're trying to make. Is it that 6MP is good enough? Selling a D70 for a D80 is foolish decision? MF is better than a DSLR? Help me out.

[elliot1]

Mark, it takes a 4 times increase in megapixel count to get a doubling of resolution.

[ilkka_nissila]

Mark is correct about the resolution.

 

Elliot, I can easily tell the improvement in sharpness between D200 and D70 images of the same subject in a 8x12 inch print when using proper technique. If you can't see it, something is wrong with your vision, technique or lenses. That doesn't mean that everyone will have the same limitation.

[darrengold]

I recently took some photos at a friends party with Fuji Pro400H. It was scanned at the time of processing to 1800x1200 pixels = 2.2 MP. I gave them a set of 6x4's and the disk.

 

When I last visited them they had taken their favourite picture to Costco and had a 10 x 8 made from the disk. No uprezzing by themselves,or anything. The print is perfect - no grain, pixelation, or aberrations of any kind. If I hadn't taken the picture myself and seen the final print I wouldn't have believed it.

 

So what do I think now - megapixels, shmegapixels.

 

Regards

[sjmurray]

My printing service prints on Kodak Endura at 300 ppi. With my D70 that makes a 6.7x10 inch print with no re-sizing of the pixels. Makes a nice sharp print too. My D80 gives me a print with no re-sizing of 8.5x13 inches. I agree with Ilkka, up-sizing a D70 print to the size of a print from the D80 you can see a difference in sharpness and detail in prints where there is a lot of fine detail. Hence, you have more "room" for cropping with 10mp, and you can up-size it more than a 6mp image. On the other hand, many people don't go above 4x6 or 5x7 inch prints most of the time for their family vacation shots, and a 10mp camera would be overkill. IMO, a print 11x14 or smaller from a 10mp DSLR is comparable to the same size print from a medium format camera. Going larger than that you'll begin to see a difference, so it depends on how large you need to print. Since I rarely print larger than 11x14, a 10mp DSLR suites me fine, and I don't need the medium format film cameras any more!

[elliot1]

Illka, you are correct. There is a difference in image quality from the d70 to the d200. I noticed it right away when I upgraded. But the difference is not because of the pixel count - it is because of the differences in the cameras.

[ken_schroeder]

The D 70 is the only digital camera I have ever owned. I am very pleased with it. I do not print large. I do not plan to replace it unless it breaks. Little things like shutter/flash speed seem insignificant to me. I don't even see the real advantage of the higher megapixel rate unless one is using the camera to make a living and the client/market demands the higher mp. Should one be in that league, maybe the camera to consider is one of the top Canons with the full frame chip instead of the little half frame chip.

 

The D 70 is not a perfect camera. However, if you already own it, why take the loss to buy the flavor of the month?

[mtan]

"I don't even see the real advantage of the higher megapixel rate unless one is using the camera to make a living and the client/market demands the higher mp."

 

I don't understand. You don't see a real advantage, but you acknowledge that there is one to be had with more MP?

 

"The D 70 is not a perfect camera. However, if you already own it, why take the loss to buy the flavor of the month?"

 

Calling something the flavor of the month is one way to trivialize what you've already rationalized. Most would regard the D80 to be a better camera than the D70 -- it's a matter of how much money vs. how much improvement. If the D70 is working for you, that's fantastic. Others have made a different analysis and have obviously come to different conclusions.

[ken_schroeder]

Interesting comments, Micah. It might help clarify my thoughts if I mention that I use the digital camera instead of color. I do like it for that. I don't mean to demean digital or color. In my case, my passion remains with black and white film. Those who use digital for more would probably have other thoughts. I do not believe beginners or near beginners receive much benefit from frequent changes of equipment.

[nilanjan_sen]

I tried the same experiment as Elliott with my D40x. I took pictures of a rose bush in my garden at the Large and Medium file size settings (10 MP and 5.6 MP respectively), using both the Normal and Fine image quality options. Then I pored over the pictures on screen at various zoom settings.

 

Below 100% zoom, all four variations looked equally great. Obviously, 100% means a larger file size at 10 MP vs. 5.6 MP, which will allow for more cropping or a larger print without resizing. But I was extremely impressed with the quality of the smaller files and could detect no difference between the Fine and Normal options.

[denys_meunier]

Hi guys,all your opinions was very interesting but what I`m saying,I think its a mistake to replaces a D70/D70s for a D40x or a D80 just to get a 10MP camera,thinking you have better camera or better performance,if we said for a D200,we are not talking about the same camera,compare a D80 vs D200,not the same gear.So if you have more comments,,,,,,go ahead

[nilanjan_sen]

I think I got what you said until "....just to get a 10MP camera". I am not clear on what you meant by the words after that.

[mtan]

"I do not believe beginners or near beginners receive much benefit from frequent changes of equipment."

 

Ken, I'm something of a new beginner -- I don't have much experience w/film, and I have zero when it comes to developing my own prints. However I wholeheartedly agree: frequent changes of equipment tend to retard skill development rather than enhance it.

 

That being said, I believe that the D80 is a better camera than the D70, and if people have the money for it, who am I to tell them that what they have is good enough?

 

I appreciate the comments.

[mtan]

"I think its a mistake to replaces a D70/D70s for a D40x or a D80 just to get a 10MP camera,thinking you have better camera or better performance"

 

Denys, that's exactly my point. It's not JUST the upgrade from 6 to 10MP, it's more. From the D70 to the D80: Better viewfinder, bigger LCD, lower base ISO, arguably better out-of-camera image quality, etc.

 

Now whether or not these extra features is worth the upgrade price is debatable, but I don't think it's unequivocally a mistake.

[ken_schroeder]

I may have misunderstood the question. I would not trade a D70 for a D80 and incur the cost, probably several hundred dollars. However, if I was buying a camera today, I would opt for the D80. At the time I bought my D70, there was no D80. For the purchase price (no loss on a trade in), I think the extra features would warrent the cost. I would be more interested in an improved finder and larger lcd screen than in the megapixels. (I have 57 year old eyes.)

 

In general, I do believe frequent "upgrades" (changes) of equipment are not the most productive use of one's funds. I would make exceptions for those whoes photography regularly challenges the limits of the equipment. An example would be someone who does a lot of sports photography, where speed is critical. Ken

[ShunCheung]

The D80 has a lot of improvements over the D70 besides more pixels. Micah has pointed out a few; additionally, the D80 has 11 AF points, improved CLS commander control, etc. etc. The D70 is still a decent DSLR, but I recall that when the D80 came out last year, a number of people sold their D70s that were purchased just a few months prior for the D80.

 

Whether you should upgrade or not will be your individual decision, but at least I can see where the justification is.

 

Please keep in mind that the D80 uses SD memory cards, not CF as on the D70. Unless you already have SD cards, this upgrade will also involve buying some new memory cards and that part of the cost should be factored in.