Hallo Community,
würde mann einen Unterschied sehen zwischen einem Handy Foto und ein Foto der Canon EOS 2000D? Wäre dann die Handy Kamera nicht besser (64MP@9248×6936) als die Canon (24,7MP@6000×3368)?
Danke im Vorraus
(1 votes)
Loading...KNIPEX BiX Schneider für Kunststoffrohre und Dichthülsen 20 – 50 mm 90 22 10 BK Rohrabschneider Rohrschneider Ø 3-35mm mit Entgrater und 3 Stück Ersatz Schneidrad, Kugellagerrohrschneider für Rohre https://amzn.eu/d/3awpFzC
Ich suche eine nicht zu teuere Digitalkamera die sowohl fotos als auch Videos machen kann, einen Retro Effekt hat, (also die Fotos sollen im besten Fall einen Vintage Effekt haben) , einen wifi oder Bluetooth Funktion haben. Könntet ihr mir weiterhelfen? danke im Voraus 😉
Guten Tag, ich leih mir heute von einem Freund eine Kamera, macht es Sinn einen leihvertrag zu erstellen falls etwas kaputt geht das wir es versicherungstechnisch einfach haben? Danke im Voraus, nocb ein schönes Wochenende pepe
Momentan habe ich noch mein 5 Jahre altes iPhone XR. So langsam möchte ich mir ein neues iPhone kaufen. Momentan tendiere ich am ehesten zum iPhone 15. Welches macht am meisten Sinn zurzeit?
You can’t compare megapixels. While the 2000D has a comparatively large sensor with ~22x15mm, even most smartphone sensors bring it just to about 7x5mm.
If a high number of pixels is squeezed onto this small area, this is rather bad, and the individual pixels start to get out in bad light conditions and also reach the optical limit. This means that the optics cannot deliver to resolution what the sensor records.
This would be the next factor: optics. Many smartphones cost 300-400€ for the complete phone. With cameras you already pay this price for certain lenses alone and therefore the optical quality of these lenses also differs sharply and they simply deliver sharper images.
Since a smartphone has to operate pixel binning due to the small sensor, the many pixels remain less than a 24 MP camera.
From https://www.a1blog.net/2020/02/17/pixel-binning/
From 108 MP, which sound naturally gigantic, 12 remain, less than the 2000D. The number of pixels can only be compared in absolute terms if they have the same technical characteristics, which is not the case.
Especially since the objective is one of the most important factors.
The megapixels or Dissolution does not say anything about quality. Also the 24.7 MP of the Canon are more than enough for the most common applications, even the absolutely professional Canon EOS 1D X had only 18.
The sensor size is much more important. The Canon with its APS-C sensor is significantly superior. With fewer megapixels and additionally larger sensors, the individual pixels are larger, so that they absorb more light and this leads to less image noise, which has to be calculated from smartphones. In addition, one has such a natural depth blur that is almost always artificially added to mobile phones.
But at the 2000D, on the other hand, the cheapest equipment is again. With the Canons with four-digit numbers, everything is simply trimmed to price, it is just the second-twelfth model from the EOS series (only the 4000D tops that). It would be recommended that only cameras from at least the three-digit number series (600D, etc.) should be double-digit or even single-digit.
Can you then say that a canon 50d is better than a 2000d, where the 50d is about 100€ cheaper than the 2000d, do you look at the used prices?
The 50D was built from 2008 to 2011, of course this is cheaper today, new it was more than twice as expensive. Purely from the specs, the 2000D is even better, of course you should compare. But there are far better used EOS models for the money.
The 600D is quite popular. That was and is also a good camera and not a cheap model. The photographer still has the most influence on the picture, then the lens and somewhere at the end of the body, but if the processing is crap (2000D and especially 4000D) it is not fun either.
I don’t know how deep I know about DSLRs, I’m on the mirrorless side. It’s more compact and more practical for me.
Jap just read me on the Internet. 2000d has more strengths here and there than vice versa.
What can you tell me about used DSLR models, ranging from 100 to 400€?
The Eos 2000D is not the best camera but even the one that hits a smartphone around lengths when the photographer can handle it
And 64 mega pixels on a tiny smartphone sensor make nix better also, most of the smartphones are blocking the zoom function when you use it
the classic comparison of “apples with pears”
handycameras are there to cnipsen, a dslr to photograph.
A camera always has better lenses than a phone.