Is there such a thing as a "high quality" camera?

Question

I approached my dad about whether or not a camera obscura can truly be "high quality" in this day and age. (Basically, if I still use my Nikon Coolpix L11, it would be as good as using the Canon Rebel XTi as far as simple editing can go.) He tells me that there is "no bad picture, and no high quality camera." Since my Coolpix is the worst piece of crap I've ever owned, (no offense, Dad, since he bought it), I find this doubtful. My dad now blames ME for the low quality in my photos, saying that I'm "not using my camera correctly." Once again, I find this weird, because I'm very good with operating my camera.

But, to get to the point: Is there such a thing as "higher quality" in cameras?

Answer 1

Most of what you're buying when you get a better camera is increased capability and control. These enable you to take a wider variety of pictures, not better pictures. There are quality issues with the pictures from point and shoot cameras, but 95% of the time they're not the sort of things that make a big difference when you're looking at a picture on your computer screen. Rather, they're the sort of issues that make you decide you can't blow a pic up to 16x20".



Your dad is right. If you're making crappy pictures with the Coolpix, having a D3 and a bagful of lenses will just enable you to make a wider variety of crappy pictures. Starting out with a simple camera is good training. It relieves you of most of the technical concerns of a big DSLR with its two dozen buttons and dials and lets you concentrate on developing your eye.

Answer 2

It's so interesting that you mentioned a camera obscura, I have never built one myself but I am very aware of how they work. I imagine it would be difficult to get the center in focus at the same time as the edges no matter how small the aperture. Eventually as you stopped the aperture down, the aperture would get so small that you would no longer see any image.



Modern lenses are capable of delivering to the camera an image that is in focus all the way to the edge save for some vignetting, with enough light to have a good picture.



I'm not real sure of your question, but if your asking if camera's are better from the days of camera obscura to modern 16,000 digital backs -- well of course they are. Everything is better, easier to edit, easier to see what you just took-- you name it- higher detail, faster. more options --- you know as well as I do, they are better.



Of course a bad picture is always a bad picture weather using a camera obscura or a modern d-slr.



I have a modern d-slr that is capable of taking pictures in situations that just 5 years ago was a pipe dream. Your Coolpix camera is just fine for taking pictures of the fam standing outside on a sunday afternoon, but take it inside a building during the evening and try to take a picture without using a flash, your probably out of business. Without the ability to change lenses your not going to get the image. I'm not saying you can't take the picture-- just you can't take a great picture under those circumstances. Big modern camera's would even blink under those conditions.

Answer 3

In theory, the statement that your Father makes has some validity,... "no bad picture, and no high quality camera" since he's someone who apparently knows little if anything about photography.



Saying that there is no bad picture is the same as saying there is no bad food... it's rubbish and you know it.



No high quality camera is a cop out statement however, if I looked at your images and found that he was right about your not knowing how to use your camera, I'd be inclined to side with him where you are concerned. Do you understand where I'm going with this?



The gauntlet has been given by him so now you must prove to him that you can create magic from the camera he bought you.



If, in fact, your images are a reflection of your poor composition, buying you a better camera isn't going to make you a better photographer.



I can repair machinery with Craftsman tools just as well as I can with Mac Tools (even though Mac is considered 'better' tools). If you can't use the tools you have, there's certainly no justifying buying you a better wrench, is there?!

Answer 4

People who say the camera does not matter at all are totally false. I do not know why they say that, because it does make a difference.



Cameras do matter- to an extent. I've tried nearly every point and shoot out there, and the quality never comes out AS GOOD as a SLR. Yes, with a ton of editing it can be good, but with an SLR my photos are much better. A lot of it IS dependent on talent, mind you. And once you get a good camera, there is no need to upgrade for at least 5 years; maybe even more.

Answer 5

Of course there are higher quality cameras. This is why professionals don't run around shooting with a point and shoot camera. On a higher end Digital SLR you have larger sensors, the ability to shoot in RAW format, very high quality interchangeable lenses that open to a larger aperture, a sensor that can capture more colors, and many other improvements.



Think of it like this:

A novice can take a picture on a point and shoot or a picture on a professional camera and not see much of a difference.



A professional can take a great shot on a point and shoot, or a great shot on a professional camera, but when you want to blow it up and use it on a poster or a billboard, you'll certainly see the benefit of better equipment.



In other words, better equipment won't help you if you don't know how to use it, but high quality equipment can take your work up another notch if you know how to use it properly.

Answer 6

There are varying degrees of qualities in cameras just like any other mechanical/electronic device. (Holga is made from low quality plastics and a Hassleblad is made from a solid block of aluminum milled to very tight tolerances.)



Your dad is essentially correct, the ultimate success of your pictures is dependent on you and not the quality of your camera.







Addendum 10/20/08 10:27PM



That is a very good question. In the film days people often did not upgrade their cameras for decades because the "upgrades" occurred in film technology.



Today, the image upgrades occur in the camera itself. Although the content of an image is up to the photographer the base technical specifications of an image are almost completely dependent on the imaging hardware. Thus the need to upgrade as your competition does.

Answer 7

Yes there are high quality cameras in a sense of the quality of the pictures they take and the quality of their build. For instance, professionals who own DSLRs usually upgraded within two to three years due to upgrades in camera models. Those newer models usually incorporate higher megapixel counts, more features and functions, bigger and brighter and higher resolution screens, newer technology, sturdier build quality it terms of the camera body, more compatibility with newer products while at the same time retaining compatibility with older products and accessories. So yes, to answer your question, there are such things as high quality cameras. And also just to add, although the quality of the pictures these cameras produce and the build quality they retain, that doesn't mean they will essentially take nice looking pictures in terms of composition and what not. Those attributes lay in the hands of the photographer.

Answer 8

if your dad is old school, just talk to him about negative size.



35mm SLR

120/220 Medium format

4x5 Large format



and yea when it comes to digital sensors, size matters. thats why a picture taken on a medium format digital back @ 5 megapixels (with a really good lens) outshines a photo taken at 10 megapixels on a Digital SLR. everything else besides the film plane is preferential when it comes to the camera body. the camera lens makes a huge difference. your cool pix probably has one lens that can do lots of things, but not the best. Interchangeable lens systems are preferable.



That being said, having a proper understanding of lighting and exposure gives you good photos from any camera, ANY CAMERA.

Answer 9

While , yes there are higher quality cameras, I did a search on Flickr for the Nikon Coolpix L11 and looked through several pages. If your quality is not up to par with these, then your father is correct.http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=nikon+coolpix+l11

Answer 10

I much prefer my film 4x5 view camera over my Nikon D40. I much prefer my film Pentax K1000 with over my Nikon D40. But, that being said, my D40 has its uses.



People upgrade usually because of marketing. You are told that you have to have the newest gadget because its new. And as mentioned the cameras does not make the photograph but rather the photographer using the camera to its fullest extent.

Answer 11

Yes, high quality cameras do exist... but that doesn't mean that they will always give you high quality photos... you must know how to use them properly.