My Little History of DSLR/ML

The year 2017

www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72177720321564819/

Sigma sd Quattro H (2017) / iPhone X (2017) by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

Sigma sd Quattro H (2016-17)
25.56 MP APS-H sensor (6192 x 4128)
Price: $1,200.00 USD
Photos taken with the Sigma 24-105mm F4 DG OS HSM Art
(with a multiplication factor of 1.35)
ISO 100-6400
______

iPhone X (2017)
12MP sensor (4032x3024)
Main camera: 12MP, ƒ/1.8 28mm (wide)
1/3.0" 1.22µm sensor
Telephoto camera: 12MP, ƒ/2.4 52mm (telephoto)
Sensor 1/3.4" 1.0µm
1x 2x optical zoom
(with 7x multiplication factor)
Selfie camera 7 MP f/2.2, 32mm (standard)

For those interested, see the comparison
right here: www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72177720321564819/
I would like to have your comments if possible, thank you!

Fortunately, Sigma's results are superior. Did you realize the difference in lens sizes here?
I find it much harder to slip the Sigma into my trouser pocket.

Nikon D1 D2 D3

Nikon D1 (1999-2000)
Nikon D2X (2005)
Nikon D3S (2009)

Nikon D1 D2 D3 by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

Sirs,

Undoubtedly ancient digital devices did make photos, but my experience with the later EF mount 14mpKodaks was rather disappointing.Anything beyond 400ASA was terriby noisy, however the Kodak software gave very pleasant ressults comared to Photoshop at that time.

(Since enveryone here go on about their susequent equipment use, I can join in) and point out that I have kept my analogue Leitz , Zeiss and Nikon stuff especially their optics. but find that the overly fat and heavy Nikoin Z 7 plus the reasonably smaller Leitz CLdigital, serves my needs even if the erratical movements of their focus- and light metering points plus loosely moving adjiustment wheels are annoying.

p.

The Kodak DCS 14n is a camera that was heavily criticized when it was released. And rightly so!
This is a particularly unpleasant camera to use, one of the worst I own!

Kodak DCS 760 (2001) / Kodak DCS Pro 14n (2003)

Kodak DCS 760 (2001) / Kodak DCS Pro 14n (2003) by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72177720307824390/

I am interested in only the new Nikon MLs, the Z8. However, its price and weight are rather dissuasive.
I prefer a less bulky camera like my Fujifilm X-T5

www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72177720312520077/

Nikon D810 (2014) / Fujifilm X-T5 (2022) Macro by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

As usual, excellent and fair comparisons, Marc !!

Especially fair because no resizing is used, the comparisons are between 100% resolutions.

Thank 👍🏻

Hi,

The 14n, SLR/n and SLR/c were DCS models I skipped. I had 560 and 660 units, and Nikon D1 and D2 units and Canon 1D and 1Ds units. All at the same time, when the new CMOS 14 MP units were what was in production. They did not appeal to me, and then the chatter on the forums regarding them meant that they would never appeal to me.

I sold off my most of my set of cameras and bought a fire sale DCS 760c and 720x pair. I kept only the 520c and a 660m along with a well used Nikon D1H. That was 2003 and I didn't buy anything newer until the Df. Then I sold the 720x. I sold the 660m I. 2020 after I bought a Pentax 645D. I still have some dedicated uses for the other three.

What I decided to do in '03 for higher resolution than 6 MP was get a Kodak Pro Back Plus (another fire sale) and a Contax 645. That gave me 16 MP rather than 14 MP. I only kept it until 2009 though.

In the end, I am glad I went that route than go for one of the 14 MP models.

Stan

👍🏻

Unlike the Kodak 14n. The Pentax 645D is a real success and a pleasure to use.
Its viewfinder is magnificent 🎓

www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157720071808920/

Kodak DCS Pro 14n (2003) / Pentax 645D (2010) by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

Hi,

The 645D is also quite the improvement over the Kodak Pro Back Plus on a Contax 645 I had by way of a high res unit alongside the Kodak 760c. And I am talking much more than just the 40 v 16 MP part.

Stan

Sony Alpha 100 (2006) / Sony Alpha 7 (2013)

www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72177720323290081/

Sony Alpha 100 (2006) / Sony Alpha 7 (2013) by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

Comparison between the first digital SLR and the first ML FF from Sony.
Two cameras that paved the way for the success of Sony

Two examples

100 ISO

Sony Alpha 100 (2006) 100% / Sony Alpha 7 (2013) 100%

Sony Alpha 100 (2006) 100% / Sony Alpha 7 (2013) 100% by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

1600 ISO

Sony Alpha 100 (1600 ISO) 100% / Sony Alpha 7 (1600 ISO) 100% by Marc Aubry, sur Flickrr