HN Explorer

Ask HN: Best digital camera for a post-4k world?

4 points by this-dang-guy ↗ HN
I saw this post up on G+, and decided that Hacker News was really a better place to ask this kind of question.

What with a 12MP camera really being 4,000 by 3,000 and a 4K screen displaying 4,000 by 2,000 - I had never considered how fast display technology was advancing.

So - what would be the best options for someone to go with? Should they just go WAY out there and get an ultra high MP camera, or stick to something just slightly ahead of the current displays?

(original post went here: http://rationalviews.com/t/best-digital-camera-for-a-post-4k-world/267?u=mbybee)

11 comments

[ 53.7 ms ] story [ 79.0 ms ] thread
cjbprime
This is an odd question. Unless someone's a professional photog, they're going to pick an amount of money they feel like spending on a camera and then do that. If that's less than thousands of dollars, they're not going to be getting an "ultra high MP camera".
[dead] invalidconst
From the context (ie, I looked at their post and found their site) I suspect he is a professional photographer. Not sure this is really a great forum to ask about cameras, however. I suspect he was better off on G+ or maybe Flickr even.

Where-ever those people go.

lcmatt
The "best digital camera" is the one you can afford. That said unless you're a true enthusiast spending £3-5k on a top end body it's pretty pointless, might as well go for something along with the 70D or d7100/7200.
this-dang-guy
I think it's a given that anyone asking about cameras that high end is spending that kind of money.

I brought it to HN from a different angle. Most photographers crop and downsample to help them establish proof of copyright (since they don't have negatives). With 4K screens becoming commonplace, it seems like they're about to lose that arms race.

lcmatt
But even then most DSLRs are at least 20MP+ giving enough wiggle room to crop/manipulate the image and still have a high enough resolution to display on 4K devices.

I don't think it will be an issue for a good while yet and by that time I'm sure new bodies will come out to take advantage of it.

this-dang-guy
The one he was referring to in his post is 12MP.
detaro
I think the parent was talking about currently available models. The D90 quoted is from 2008, and nowadays even good compact/superzoom cameras can do useful 4k photos.
this-dang-guy
Yes - looks like from his followup he's going with a D750.

So, yeah, body swap. I guess the war continues :)

l33tbro
Camera bodies come and go fairly quickly, which is why I tend to invest more in glass.

If you start paying over say $1000 per lens, they generally retain their value. What's more, a quality lens on a mediocre chip is going to look much better than the inverse. That's my experience anyway.

this-dang-guy
That's what I would think. Just keep swapping out bodies to keep pace with the tech
throwaway420
Different camera systems are best at different things. Are you shooting sports and action and wildlife photos? Are you into portraits? Shooting video? Dark clubs at night? Street photos? There's lots of types of photography. For me I'd personally look more into Fuji and Nikon stuff, but there's a lot of options.

I'd second looking more at the glass you'd need to get than the camera. The camera body you spend 1000-2000 or more on today will be available on eBay for relatively cheap in 5 years, but good glass will retain its value and use for decades. There's 20+ year old lenses that are better for some tasks than any modern equivalents: they just lack a few modern features.

Depending on your type of photos, look into spending more of your budget on lighting. You can do more with a junk camera and Lens and great light than you can with poor light and a great camera and lens.