 Elizabeth R. McNeil |
Pixels Gotta question... The Nikon D100 is a 6.0 megapixels and the Nikon D1H is a 2.7 megapixels...how come the D1H is a better camera? I have a digital camera that is 2.0 and it does not take good pictures at all. I know Megapixels is not everything but...I’m just kinda confused =) Elizabeth
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
First of all, the D1H is no longer in production. It was designed more for sports shooters who need a fast and reliable camera but who didn't need big photos. Saying the D1H is a better camera than the D100 is a stretch. It was better for certain applications but not for others. The body was a better build quality but the resolution wasn't very high.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
"Better" depends on your intended use. You are correct, megapixel count is not everything. The D1H is a discontinued model (replaced by D2H) that was intended for photojournalist use, where rugged build and fast shooting (up to 5 fps for 40 consecutive shots) are more important, and the photos will generally be printed in low-res newspaper or less than 8"x10" size in magazines. The sensor size in the D1H is much larger than that in a 2mp point & shoot, which leads to less noise and other problems, especially at higher ISO settings. The D100 was introduced a year later than the D1H, and so has improved, higher pixel count sensor. But it has lesser capabilities in other areas comparted to the D1H: the body is not as rugged, the meter will not function with older non-CPU lenses, it shoots slower with smaller buffer, has slower maximum flash sync, etc.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Elizabeth R. McNeil |
Thanks so much! Now I am not confused
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||