Nikon 24.5 Megapixel DSLR

Whoa! Nikon's come out with a 24.5 megapixel digital SLR that has 51-point autofocus, HDMI output, and 50 MB RAW files that expand out to 140 MB TIFF files - and it can simultaneously record RAW and JPEG images on separate memory cards. Start-up time is 12 milliseconds and shutter lag is 40 milliseconds. It sounds as though it also expands dynamic range but then does some sort of additional image processing to keep shots from looking flat. But the D3x will set you back some $7999 and 2.11 pounds just for the body. That's like hanging a small bag of flour around your neck. Ouch.

Old Camera Gallery

The site that Andreas Wolkerstorfer set up doesn't feature pictures of old cameras. It features pictures from old cameras. I think of it as more of a curiosity than anything else. However, if you've been thinking of using a pinhole camera, or maybe loading a Holga with some film to give it a spin, you can get a sense of how things might come out.

Hacking a Canon Point-and-Shoot

I wouldn't see myself doing this, but have to admire the determination and ingenuity of the people responsible. Lifehacker.com has an article on how to load low-level software (a firmware enhancement, if you know the term) into a Canon point-and-shoot, often achieving many of the following:

• added information on the display screen


• RAW image support, and not just JPEG


• exposure times of over a minute and shutter speeds over 1/25,000 sec


• automatic exposure bracketing

I am surprised and impressed by the claims - though I'm not quite ready to test them on one of the point-and-shoots members of my family own.

The Megapixel Myth

If you're like most people, when you compare digital cameras, your eye probably goes first to the megapixel count. It's understandable - the manufacturers and the press generally grasp this number close, waving it as though it proved something. And it does, in a limited way. The megapixel count tells you, more or less, how large an image you can print out at a 300dpi resolution and get really good detail. (It actually gets a bit more complex, as you can enlarge images, but let's not go there for now. I'll cover enlarging images - something easy to do - in some future post.)

You can work in two different directions. One is to check the pixel dimensions of the sensor. A camera like the Canon 10D (an "older" model, but one that I still use) might have 6.3 megapixels in a sensor that is 3088 pixels by 2056 pixels. Remember that we want 300 dots per inch for good print resolution. Divide 3088 by 300 and you get about 10.3 inches; divide 2056 by 300, and the result is about 6.9 inches. So you can figure that is the largest native print size.

The other direction is to take the actual print size you'll want - take 11x14 inches as an example. Multiple each side by 300 pixels per inch to get 3300 x 4200, or 13,860,000 pixels. That's close to 14 megapixels.

But the qualify of the image is affected by other factors, the largest being the quality of the lens and the software you use to fill in the image. Software? Yup, software. From an imaging standpoint, those sensors still have huge gaps between the pixels, and each pixel only sees one color, Something has to figure what goes between the pretty colored dots. Cameras can vary greatly in the quality of either the software or the lenses.

If you want to know how the actual images compare, you need help. Reviews can be good if the people writing them actually can tell the difference between one set of results and another. One good source for opinion is PC Magazine camera reviews, generally written by Daniel Grotta and Sally Wiener Grotta, two colleagues of mine who know a lot about the subject from all angles. Daniel also has his DigitalBenchmarks site, which has some free detailed recent reviews.

If you want to get more for your money, consider an older model camera. When new models come out, stores will be looking to clear their inventories. Getting last year's model is generally going to be safe and will give you plenty of power for what you need to do.

Easiest Improvement for Digital Photos

There is a big flaw the way most people use their digital cameras - and an easy fix. When you see people using a digital camera, notice that they often hold them away from their faces and watch the LCD screen on the back for the shot they want. They moment they do, they inject tiny motions and shaking that they don't even notice. But look at those pictures in a larger size and everything will look fuzzy, because they ended up burring the results by those small movements.

The fix is to always look through the viewfinder, and not at the screen. You can then hold the camera up to your face and brace it underneath, resulting in better focus and sharper pictures. An added benefit is that you can leave the screen off, except to preview what you just did, and that saves battery life.