DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> 8MP Nikon for $400
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 7 of 7, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/02/2005 09:45:29 AM · #1
I saw this and thought I'd share for those interested in a decent P/S. I don't know ANYTHING about this camera and I usually don't go around endorsing Nikon, but it looks like a good deal. This is $100 cheaper than anywhere else I could find it. Nikon Coolpix 8400
 11/02/2005 02:59:35 PM · #2
I saw the same price, anyone know anything about this camera?
 11/02/2005 03:04:42 PM · #3
It's an evolution of a continuing series, with more Mp in each succeeding model plus some other small changes. I used the Coolpix 5700 for a couple years. They are good cameras, for their category.

HOWEVER (and it's a big "however") the "huge Mp/tiny sensor" race is mostly marketing hype. You get sharper pictures with an early dSLR with a 4 or 6 Mp sensor than you do with one of these. One of the factors that impacts perceived sharpness the most is the actual size of the individual photo-sites on the sensor and how closely they are packed together.

Still, it's mucho bang-for-the-bucks, a nice little camera.

Robt.
 11/02/2005 03:19:35 PM · #4
and correct me if I'm wrong (cause I probably am)but I was told once that one reason I was having problems with getting a good DOF in this particlar shot (SEE HERE) even though I was zoomed all the way out and had a low f-stop was because my small sensor didn't give the range of DOF the larger ones did. (I know they were too close to the flowers but I hoped the trees would be more blurred.)

I myself have given up on racing to get the highest MP since the biggest I have ever printed was a 16x20 for my brother of a 3mp image I did. I seriously doubt I'll ever print bigger than that and everything below it looks great. I'd rather have the abilities of a bigger sensor than the MPs.
11/02/2005 03:42:03 PM · #5
Originally posted by sabphoto:
and correct me if I'm wrong (cause I probably am)but I was told once that one reason I was having problems with getting a good DOF in this particlar shot (SEE HERE) even though I was zoomed all the way out and had a low f-stop was because my small sensor didn't give the range of DOF the larger ones did. (I know they were too close to the flowers but I hoped the trees would be more blurred.)

I myself have given up on racing to get the highest MP since the biggest I have ever printed was a 16x20 for my brother of a 3mp image I did. I seriously doubt I'll ever print bigger than that and everything below it looks great. I'd rather have the abilities of a bigger sensor than the MPs.


You are correct, DOF is related to the focal length of the lens and the aperture. For smaller sensors, the focal length of the telephoto end of the zoom may be 17mm and the wide end 5mm. Even with a relatively wide open aperture, this will give deep DOF.
 11/02/2005 03:46:00 PM · #6
Originally posted by sabphoto:
and correct me if I'm wrong (cause I probably am)but I was told once that one reason I was having problems with getting a good DOF in this particlar shot (SEE HERE) even though I was zoomed all the way out and had a low f-stop was because my small sensor didn't give the range of DOF the larger ones did. (I know they were too close to the flowers but I hoped the trees would be more blurred.)

I myself have given up on racing to get the highest MP since the biggest I have ever printed was a 16x20 for my brother of a 3mp image I did. I seriously doubt I'll ever print bigger than that and everything below it looks great. I'd rather have the abilities of a bigger sensor than the MPs.


Kinda, sorta, but not quite...

DOF is solely dependent on the physical size of the aperture in the lens. Period. An aperture of "x"mm in diameter will have "y" DOF no matter what the lens is, basically.

Apertures, of course, are defined as f/stops; f/2.0. f/5.6, f/8.0, whatever. The f/stop is a ratio between the diameter of the aperture and the focal length of the lens. A 25mm aperture on a 50mm lens is f/2.0. Same aperture on a 100mm lens is f/4.0, and on a 200mm lens it's f/8.0. The reason for this is that we need a "constant" to calculate exposure, and light falls off with the square of the distance traveled; so a longer lens needs a bigger "hole" to transmit the same amount of light to the sensor.

Now, at the same time, the smaller the sensor the shorter of a focal length lens is needed to get the same angular coverage. To visualize this, realize that the light transmitted by a lens is in the form of a cone with its apex (thin point) at the rear of the lens. The larger the sensor, the further must it be from the lens to fit within that cone, and this translates into a longer focal length lens to cover the same angular coverage with a larger sensor.

This is the "crop factor" everyone refers to. The 10mm lens on my 20D covers the same area as a 16mm lens on a "full frame" sensor camera like a pro body. My 200mm lens is the same degree of telephoto on my 20d as would be a 320mm lens on the full frame sensor.

Now, since our exposures are calculated based on how much light reaches the sensor, and f/4.0 is f/4.0 no matter what system it's defined on (it's a constant), what's happening is that your little camera has a MUCH smaller sensor than mine does, so YOUR telephoto f/4.0 is a MUCH smaller hole than MY telephoto f/4.0. and yoyu have therefore MUCH more DOF than i do at that degree of telephoto and at that f/4.0 aperture.

So the short version is, at anything less than fairly solid telephoto lengths the little cameras have virtually infinite DOF (or it seems that way anyway), and you simply cannot separate objects by focal planes the way you can with a bigger sensor. It's one of the great limitations of the little cameras, and one of the main reasons I moved to dSLR. (The other reasons were less noise and wider-angle capability)

R.
 11/02/2005 04:10:40 PM · #7
Another question... currently I only have a Fujifilm Finepix A200, I am going to be getting a new camera sometime this winter, but I'm still relatively new to digital cameras. I have looked at Canon Powershot A520, & Nikon 5600 & personally thought the Nikon was better. I haven't had a chance to check out the Nikon 8400 yet but have read several reviews on it. I'm looking for a camera that is relatively easy to operate in manual or auto settings, is good for macro shots, landscapes, etc... basically something that I would be able to use for personal use or possibly some professional work (little bit of the dreams coming out, but i can always hope!)
Thanks for opinions & advice in advance
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/21/2025 06:58:55 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/21/2025 06:58:55 AM EDT.