Digital Photography from 20,000 Feet
by Wesley Fink on September 25, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Digital Camera
Moving Forward: Digital Camera Reviews at AnandTech
Digital SLR cameras have come a very long way in a very short period of time. They have gone from very expensive instruments affordable only to corporations and professionals to the fastest growing segment of the imaging market in only a few short years. Many of the early problems like low resolution, slow startup, slow saves of images, high energy requirements, and bulky batteries have all but disappeared. The fairest measure of the state of Digital SLR cameras is that today they are not much different in appearance and function than the last generation of film cameras. In general, however, they offer even more electronic sophistication than the film cameras they replace.
Recent digital SLR cameras are capable of 1000, 2000 or even more images on a single battery charge. Digital SLRs are also getting smaller in general, and now average even smaller than the last generation of film SLRs. Despite the decreasing size, many camera makers are paying much more attention to ergonomics - how the cameras feel in the users hands - and the smaller digital SLRs handle very well.
For all of these reasons you will find many more digital SLRs than point-and-shoot cameras in future digital camera reviews at AnandTech. This is because the digital SLR is now the fastest growing segment of the digital camera market, and that is where most of the new camera introductions will happen. This does not mean we will ignore the digital point-and-shoot, as there is always a place for a small, pocketable, and reasonable digital camera. It does mean AT will pick more carefully among the point-and-shoot cameras we will choose to review.
The Sony Alpha or A100 and Nikon D80 are already planned for review. They are the first of the new breed of affordable (under $1000) 10 megapixel SLR cameras. We will also review the other announced members of the 10 megapixel club - namely the Canon Rebel XT1, Pentax K10D, and Samsung GX-10 - when they become available in the market. As stated at the beginning of this guide, we really need your help in deciding how to test these cameras.
Many of the tests used at photo websites have very little real relevance to the digital SLRs of today. Start-up and shot-to-shot times are all but instantaneous with the latest models and even those fast times continue to improve. Virtually none of the lags of early digital cameras remain, and the response time no longer reminds you that you are using a digital SLR camera. Since SLRs have interchangeable lenses there is no fixed lens to review and every major lens line has some incredible lenses and a few dogs. Do you want us to test the standard kit lens in our upcoming reviews or should we use a standard quality lens for all tests in that line like a 50mm f1.4? Or both?
What tests would you like to see in the digital camera reviews? This is your time to sound off. Resolution targets are available and it is fairly easy to determine resolving ability of the kit or a standardized lens. Would these be useful to you in our reviews? There has also been the suggestion that we shoot a standard scene (the same scene) in every review so readers can compare fine details like color balance and resolution. If you want that let us know. We are open to new ideas and new ways of examining digital cameras in AnandTech reviews. We have a different audience than the photo websites and we want our reviews to provide you with what you are looking for.
We sincerely hope you enjoyed our overview of digital photography, with a slant toward the digital SLR. It is our belief that, in contrast to computers, many readers at AnandTech don't know a lot about photography and digital cameras. Some of you are very knowledgeable, but our letters indicate many more readers have been shopping for digital cameras with little understanding of how they work or what to look for. The purpose of this Guide from 20,000 feet is to provide a broad overview with enough specifics to help our readers become better shoppers for digital cameras in general and digital SLRs specifically. If we helped in that arena please let us know in your comments. If there are additional articles on digital imaging you would like to see in the future we would be happy to hear your suggestions.
Digital SLR cameras have come a very long way in a very short period of time. They have gone from very expensive instruments affordable only to corporations and professionals to the fastest growing segment of the imaging market in only a few short years. Many of the early problems like low resolution, slow startup, slow saves of images, high energy requirements, and bulky batteries have all but disappeared. The fairest measure of the state of Digital SLR cameras is that today they are not much different in appearance and function than the last generation of film cameras. In general, however, they offer even more electronic sophistication than the film cameras they replace.
Recent digital SLR cameras are capable of 1000, 2000 or even more images on a single battery charge. Digital SLRs are also getting smaller in general, and now average even smaller than the last generation of film SLRs. Despite the decreasing size, many camera makers are paying much more attention to ergonomics - how the cameras feel in the users hands - and the smaller digital SLRs handle very well.
For all of these reasons you will find many more digital SLRs than point-and-shoot cameras in future digital camera reviews at AnandTech. This is because the digital SLR is now the fastest growing segment of the digital camera market, and that is where most of the new camera introductions will happen. This does not mean we will ignore the digital point-and-shoot, as there is always a place for a small, pocketable, and reasonable digital camera. It does mean AT will pick more carefully among the point-and-shoot cameras we will choose to review.
The Sony Alpha or A100 and Nikon D80 are already planned for review. They are the first of the new breed of affordable (under $1000) 10 megapixel SLR cameras. We will also review the other announced members of the 10 megapixel club - namely the Canon Rebel XT1, Pentax K10D, and Samsung GX-10 - when they become available in the market. As stated at the beginning of this guide, we really need your help in deciding how to test these cameras.
Many of the tests used at photo websites have very little real relevance to the digital SLRs of today. Start-up and shot-to-shot times are all but instantaneous with the latest models and even those fast times continue to improve. Virtually none of the lags of early digital cameras remain, and the response time no longer reminds you that you are using a digital SLR camera. Since SLRs have interchangeable lenses there is no fixed lens to review and every major lens line has some incredible lenses and a few dogs. Do you want us to test the standard kit lens in our upcoming reviews or should we use a standard quality lens for all tests in that line like a 50mm f1.4? Or both?
What tests would you like to see in the digital camera reviews? This is your time to sound off. Resolution targets are available and it is fairly easy to determine resolving ability of the kit or a standardized lens. Would these be useful to you in our reviews? There has also been the suggestion that we shoot a standard scene (the same scene) in every review so readers can compare fine details like color balance and resolution. If you want that let us know. We are open to new ideas and new ways of examining digital cameras in AnandTech reviews. We have a different audience than the photo websites and we want our reviews to provide you with what you are looking for.
We sincerely hope you enjoyed our overview of digital photography, with a slant toward the digital SLR. It is our belief that, in contrast to computers, many readers at AnandTech don't know a lot about photography and digital cameras. Some of you are very knowledgeable, but our letters indicate many more readers have been shopping for digital cameras with little understanding of how they work or what to look for. The purpose of this Guide from 20,000 feet is to provide a broad overview with enough specifics to help our readers become better shoppers for digital cameras in general and digital SLRs specifically. If we helped in that arena please let us know in your comments. If there are additional articles on digital imaging you would like to see in the future we would be happy to hear your suggestions.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
81 Comments
View All Comments
Sunrise089 - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
Wesley - I feel that wgoldfarb makes one very good comment which I may have missed your answer to. He states that if you have decided to take a less technial approach to digital camera reviews compared to your other hardware reviews, and the other editors are suggesting even less technical detail than this article had (shame on you Anand, Derrick, etc, I read many articles by you guys that forced me to do outside research, and it made me a more informed user because of it) then why are you focusing on the higher-end digital camera segment, where the buyers will tend to be much more informed. The only reasons I can see are:1) This is the segment more personally interesting to you, so you're going to cover it
2) This is the segment where the most new products are appearing, so you will have the most to review
3) This is the segment that still opperates at high margins, so more samples will be sent to you to be reviewed and more inside information will be directed your way
4) You have decided to attract the same users who buy DellXPS and Alienware systems - users that have the $$$ to afford a high-end product, but lack the motivation to become an informed consumer, and will therefore buy whatever products they happen to be told to buy.
Options 1,2, and 3 will still attract a more informed consumer who desires technical detail, and by denying them that you are in effect offering reviews of one class of product written in a style for an entirely different class.
Option 4 has never been AT's approach, and furthermore, the "more money than brains" class probably won't seek out any product reviews anyways, prefering to simply buy the more expensive version of the camera their coworker has recently been showing off.
Wesley Fink - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
There is a misunderstanding here. I did not mean a lower degree of technical expertise, I meant a different way of approaching digital camera reviews. Sites like dpreview do an excellent job at what they do, as many point out here. We hope to bring a different and a bit unique approach to these reviews, and not just try to emulate other sites.As for #3, I confess I have personally bought the stuff I will be reviewing so far, a Sony and a Nikon D80, so that kills that argument :) #4 doesn't even deserve comment, it is not my style or Anand's, though we are all too often ready to condemn mass market computers without truly looking first.
What some of you are forgetting here is there is a great void between sites that eat, breathe and live digital cameras and many of our readers who really want some solid info on digital cameras, but who find some of the super technical sites less than approachable. These readers want solid info to help them buy what they need, but they have not yet reached the level of photo knowledge where they are ready to argue "exposing to the right" makes digital photography different from film photography. It's a valid point, and I get what "exposing to the right" means from the link to Luminous Landscape, but I think it will be a while before that perspective is a major part of our Digital Camera reviews.
I have received a huge number of emails with very good suggestions for Digital Camera testing, and we do appreciate your comments. We can't do it all, but we are very interested in what you have to say.
As an aside Derek is busy with his wife in the hospital having their first baby and Anand is now in San Francisco covering IDF.
wgoldfarb - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
The issue I was referring to depends on the linear nature of digital sensors, and AFAIK is common to all digital cameras. A full discussion probably does not belong here, but let me try to briefly explain what I meant.
Digital camera sensors are linear devices, whereas we perceive light exponentially. This creates a mismatch between how sensors record an image and how we perceive it, to the point that about half of the perceivable tonal values in an image are recorded in the brightest f-stop of dynamic range of a camera (a typical camera may have about 5 f-stops of dynamic range). Thus, the ideal exposure for a digital sensor is one where the histogram is as far to the right as possible, yet without reaching the point of blown highlights.
I probably did a terrible job of explaining myself in a single paragraph, so a much better explanation http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/expose...">can be found here.
wgoldfarb - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
I understand your problem of trying to meet everyone's needs. But I will try to continue to convince you to go more in the direction I'd like to see (can't blame me, can you? ;-)and
Points very well taken. Still, limiting your reviews to more "basic" skill levels may be a disservice even to those users with basic skills. Cameras chosen based on "basic" knowledge may serve readers well intially, but as they start to learn more (by reading your guides!) they may realize they made a wrong decision because they did not know enough. The problem is, these cameras are expensive, so it is not easy to upgrade them as your knowledge and skills improve. Ideally, you should choose a camera that can fit your current skills, but also those skills you will learn once you start experimenting with your new camera, as well as the many ways in which you might use the camera in the future. Before selecting components for a new rig people here usually determine how they will use their new build: will they overclock? is it for gaming? Same thing for a camera. If I know I will only use my camera in Auto mode for casual family events, I will probably choose a very different camera than if I think I may eventually try some more advanced settings or different types of photography. But if I don't know anything about those advanced modes I will be unable to make that decision.
An approach that may work is to use different instruments for different people. Readers who "know next to nothing" might benefit more from a number of "guides" to teach them the basics of what they need to know about digital cameras to make a better purchase decision, and to eventually benefit from more thorough reviews. These guides could also help them decide how they will use their camera in the future. Thus, you could have a number of introductory guides for newbies, allowing them to learn the jargon and the basics they need to understand your reviews and make a good purchase decision. If you add AT's outstanding community support, this should be enough for almost any level of knowledge. This is precisely how I started learning about computer hardware. I read lots of beginner's guides (like those to be found in many stickies in AT's forums) and made extensive visits to your forums until I knew enough to understand your reviews and decide what features were important for my needs. If people do that amount of research for GPUs costing $300, they will probably also do it for camera systems costing up to $1000.
Yet another approach that may work is to tailor the review to the camera's market. If you are reviewing an entry level SLR you may serve that camera's audience quite well with a more limited review. Yet, when you review cameras aimed at higher segments of the market, you may conduct more thorough reviews to benefit the more knowledgeable likely buyers of these cameras. Also, having this "advanced" content will allow your beginner users to learn more, and help them push their skills to the next level where they may stop relying on their camera's Auto setting so often.
Don't get me wrong, I do realize the problem you face. But I honestly believe you can add a lot more to the current mix of review sites by doing what you do best: reliable, thorough, in depth reviews.
Agreed. It is not only forgiven, it is even expected. But what is stopping you from also becoming known as a digital SLR review site? ;-) If you apply the same "business model", the same standards and techniques to SLRs that have made you so successful in computer hardware, I am confident you will enjoy the same level of success in the area of digital photography.
Belldandy - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
I like your introduction to digital SLR's, well written and covers much of the basics. Others have commented that dpreview is the premier site for photography, which they are very good at, but 2nd or 3rd opinions are always a good thing. Even the pro's may miss out on some details. Detail wise, I believe readers of Anandtech who are interested in digital SLR reviews, will have fairly basic understanding of photographic basics. Certainly maybe not everyone will know the technical differences behind say lens based or sensor based image stabilization, or image quality and noise of different sensor size, sensor type, and say software processing at different ISO. But in depth highly technical reviews is what makes anandtech articles so intriguing and there is bound to be new stuff for all of us to learn.Personally I'm a photo enthusiast using a Fujifilm S3Pro & and Nikon F90x film SLR. It's a slow camera compared to other DSLRs, and perhaps my F90x. The power on time, shutter lag and focus times are all very good, (using my set of Sigma F2.8 zooms at least) however the buffer size for raw images and flush rate to compact flash is painfully slow. My point is most equipment have their strengths / weaknesses and many reviews fail to stress that it is a very good jpeg camera, with high image quality. Have to at least comment on what it was designed for, and whether it's suitable for each individual. Speed alone won't make for better images, and if I needed more speed, switching to jpeg or xD type H cards or lower to standard dynamic range, all provide additional speed for the situation. So perhaps reviews should give pointers on how to bring out the best in each camera.
In this area I totally agree with you on basing your reviews on the target group who will be interested in buying the said camera. Entry level DSLR cameras need to be tested from the basics up with both kit lens and reference for those moving up from point and shoot. Most of their targeted buyers are first time SLR users, some pro's may buy an entry level camera for backup use and rest of the family and some from film slr's. For more pro oriented bodies, more empahsis should be placed on image quality, noise, speed, and other technical details for the more advanced users.
I'd like to see tests of cameras using identical images at different ISO's that we can compare across cameras and Brands, using both reference lens and kit lens as well. Speed of both camera focusing, power on & shutter lag and image processing are important. Viewfinder image quality and built in + external flash operation are significant areas that seperates SLR & Point and shoot experience. Hopefully those can be touched upon for indoor and fill flash shots.
gohepcat - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
Good stuff. I'd like to pass on some wisdom I learned a long time ago about photography and I like you to look into it a little more.10 years ago I was turned on to a photographer named Fred Picker. I was never really into his work, but his books and newsletter were outstanding. He was a crotchety old man, but he was a real straight shooter.
One of the things I remember him talking about were lenses. He basically said...forget about lenses. You blur your picture far more by handholding your camera than any small imperfection in your lenses. Also the act of the mirror slamming against the top of the camera causes shake that is larger than the resolution that the lens can provide.
I love the digital age, and don't fight it one bit, but I'm sad to see some of the qualities of film disappearing. You still can't really make a digital image as good as my $100 sixty year old Rolliflex with Tri-X pan (a 60 year old film)
Tonal range is HUGE, and I hope things improve in that area.
silver - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
Excellent ! A good, solid primer capturing some of the basic developments, capabilities and challenges of digital imaging.I'd like to make a couple of points of course and given some of the previous commentary I'll provide a little background on myself. I used to have a photography studio and I'm still often asked to photograph portraits, weddings and such. I currently work for Really Big Computer Co. in a technical role and I still shoot film even though I have a Fuji FinePix S602 digi-cam.
First, if I were a pro again I'd be shooting digital in a heartbeat. It's cheap, fast and easy. The results are instantly gratifying and lead to increasd sales. Boy are there a lot of analogies there ! That said I'm not a pro and I only shoot digital as A) a replacement for Polaroids and B) for use in a digital realm such as website design.
Second, "Image stabilization was first introduced by Nikon and Canon in specialized zoom lenses. These zoom lenses were first designed for pros at pro prices". Wasn't it the longer high magnification lenses such as the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS which is extremely popular with sports photographers that first received stabilization ? And of course I realize that the majority of your readers would no more know the difference between a telephoto and prime lenses than they would between Jimmy Carter and Dubya.
Third, "Digital Challenges: What Needs to be Improved". I think you left out resolution ;>) Digital has certainly come a long way however the actual image resolution still pales when compared to any good film/camera combination.
Fourth, unfortunately you didn't directly mention the other formats of film. When it comes down to it most pro's never bothered with 35mm as it faced the same constraints as does digital which is to say that there is a limit to the amount of visual information that can be acquired per each square millimeter of light sensitive medium. That's why most of us "old timers" used cameras like the RB67 which has a film area that is several times larger than 35mm's dinky 24X36 window. 35mm was deemed adequate for low end weddings, sports, stock and wildlife photography but it was widely recognized that the limitations in image quality was difficult to overcome. Only a few photographers such as Sebastio Selgado, W.E. Smith and H. Cartier-Bresson chose the 35mm format while those that wanted the better tonal scale used medium format cameras such as the Hasselblad's, Mamiya's, Pentax, etc. or even larger cameras such as the 4X5's, 5X7's (still my favorite), the 8X10's and even larger cameras.
I would hope that you touch on the issues of image modification, output ("printing") methods and archival storage. When faced by the "technoratti" I like to paraphrase Lance Armstong and say "It's not about the camera" so in turn I hope that your scope goes well beyond the capturing equipment. In particular image stability which is one of the most poorly illustrated facets of digital imaging, and image archiving which is a huge concern given the extremely limited lifespan of digital files and formats.
Wesley Fink - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
Thanks for your comments. The best information I could find indicates you are correct that the first image stabilized lenses were designed for the long fast primes. It really doesn't matter for our discussion in the article, but in the interest of historical accuracy I have updated the two sentences on p. 10. They now read "Image stabilization was first introduced by Nikon and Canon in specialized lenses designed for action photography. These lenses were first designed for pros at pro prices, but image stabilization quickly found its way to consumer zoom lenses."As for medium and large format film, I confess I also shot 120/220 when I was selling my images. Things have improved a great deal, but the larger negative still has advantages. I did list these formats in some of the photo charts, but I felt it would just lengthen the article if I spent any time on the large foramts. It is something those shopping for a digital SLR would not likely care much about, although the digital backs for the medium format cameras are incredibly interesting.
We will definitley consider your suggestions as we move forward in Digital Camera reviews.
silver - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
LOL ! I spoke with Fred on several occassions. The last time was immediately prior to him selling Zone VI to Calumet when I bought one of his last cherry wood 4X5's. You had to take Fred with a big grain of salt. He was a shrewd businessman and realized that most photographers wanted "straight talk" instead of scientific facts.I agree about the digital revolution. It's certainly an exciting time. I subscribe to the alt-photo list (http://www.usask.ca/lists/alt-photo-process/)">http://www.usask.ca/lists/alt-photo-process/) where many photographers are combining the capabilities of platinum printing with digital negatives created using inkjet printers. It's all about the image and permenance.
Still, I'll keep shooting film for as long as possible. No hard drive crash is going to ever take out my files again and I can always scan negatives which don't take a computer to look at or batteries to run. Hmmm, kinda like that Rollei of yours !
Wesley Fink - Monday, September 25, 2006 - link
Storing images on a DVD certainly appears more "crash-proof". I don't recall seeing archive times for DVDs, but I do know know corporations who store GMP (Good Manufacturing Practices) records on optical, and those must have a minimum 100-year storage life.