AGENO SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

GOLDEN GATE UNIVERSITY

Math 104

FINAL PROJECT

Title:

Factors Affecting the Overall Quality Score of Digital Cameras

By:

Date of Completion
November 2022
 Abstract
The main objective of this study was to determine the impact of weight, price and

megapixel on the overall quality score. Various variables that were measured in this survey were

megapixels, price, and weight (in ounces). The overall score was developed and depended on

these variables among others not stated here such as image quality and ease to use. This study

uses a random sample of 28 point and shoot digital cameras. Descriptive statistics were

computed to summarize the study variables. Scatter plots were generated to illustrate the

relationship between overall quality scores versus price, megapixels, and weight. Correlation

analysis was done to investigate the correlation between dependent and independent variables.

An independent sample t-test was carried to find out whether there is a difference in the overall

score between canon and Nikon brands. Regression analysis was the main statistical approach in

this study and it established the influence of price, megapixel, and weight on the overall quality

score of a digital camera. The study found that there was no significant difference in overall

score between Nikon and Canon cameras. It also found that megapixels and weight had no

significant influence on overall score, while price significantly explained the overall quality

score of a digital camera. The study recommended further studies to increase the sample size to

increase reliability and validity of the data.

 Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................................2
Chapter 1: Introduction..............................................................................................................................3
1.1 Problem Statement.......................................................................................................................3
1.2 Purpose of the study.....................................................................................................................4
1.3 Contributions...............................................................................................................................4
Chapter 2: Background / Literature Review...............................................................................................5
2.1 Literature review..........................................................................................................................5
2.2 Assumptions................................................................................................................................7
Chapter 3: Methodology.............................................................................................................................7
3.1 Hypotheses Development............................................................................................................7
3.2 Data Collection plan / Source of Data..........................................................................................7
3.3 Statistical Analysis Techniques...................................................................................................9
Chapter 4: Result & Discussion................................................................................................................10
Descriptive statistics..............................................................................................................................10
Scatter plots...........................................................................................................................................11
Correlation Analysis..............................................................................................................................13
Regression analysis...............................................................................................................................13
Model summary.................................................................................................................................13
ANOVA............................................................................................................................................14
Regression Coefficients table............................................................................................................14
Independent t-test..................................................................................................................................16
Chapter 5: Conclusions & Recommendations..........................................................................................18
5.1 Conclusions / Findings...............................................................................................................18
5.2 Recommendations......................................................................................................................18
References.............................................................................................................................................19
 Chapter 1: Introduction
Consumer Reports is a magazine that is a published every month by the consumer

Reports since 1936. It compares and reviews various consumer goods and services. It collects

data from various in-house survey research centers and testing laboratory. In 2012, the

institution tested 166 various point-and shoot digital cameras. Various variables that were

measured in this survey were megapixels, price, and weight (in ounces). They also created an

overall score which depended on these variables among others not stated here such as image

quality and ease to use. The overall quality score of the digital camera was a numeric value

ranging between 0 and 100. Zero indicates the lowest score and 100 indicated the highest score.

This study uses a random sample of 28 point and shoot digital cameras.

This report has five chapters; first chapter is the introduction, which provides an

overview of the data used in the project together with problem statement, purpose of the study

and contributions. Background/Literature review is the next chapter and it provides previous

study findings which guides us in constructing our hypothesizes. Assumptions are also listed in

this chapter. Third, methodology which provides the hypothesis development, source of data

and statistical methods used in the analysis. Fourth, Results and discussion chapter, provides the

study findings and interpretation of the findings. Finally , conclusion and recommendation

chapter summarizes the study findings and provides recommendations of the study.

1.1 Problem Statement

When it comes to purchasing a DSLR camera, many consumers will always choose

among Canon and Nikon. They are by far the most stakeholder perspective in the digital

photography industry, with the longest track records. Those filmmakers who are truly dedicated

to either one or the other are the source of the controversy. Because Canon and Nikon are the two

most popular and widely used DSLR brands, it is only natural that the majority of the debate
revolves around them. When film photography was at its peak, the Nikon versus Canon debate

was far less prominent. There were a plethora of excellent cameras to choose from, each of

which provided something unique. However, a great deal has changed since we first decided to

enter the era of digital photography. Seasoned photographers nowadays frequently choose

between Nikon and Canon cameras. In recent times, each also has begun to produce mirrorless

cameras, which is slowly threatening to push Sony to second place (Dunlop & Kedves,2021). It

has been a challenge for the upcoming photographers when it comes to choosing the best digital

camera to purchase. Many of the established photographers are recommending Canon or Nikon

digital cameras. It is also important to note that these cameras have different prices, weights, and

megapixels and thus not all cameras of these brands will offer a great quality image. Therefore

this study should establish the impact of megapixels, weight, and price of the digital cameras on

the overall quality score.

1.2 Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of price, the number of megapixels, and the

weight of Nikon and Canon digital cameras on the overall quality score. It also determines the

brand with a higher overall quality score between Nikon and Canon digital cameras.

1.3 Contributions
The findings of this study will be beneficial to producers, businesses people, and shoppers of digital

cameras. The study will equip these groups with the knowledge of the best camera brand between

Nikon and Canon. It will also suggest whether the number of megapixels, price, and weight of a camera

have a significant impact on the overall quality score of a camera. This study will guide new digital

camera shoppers on the best camera to purchase. It will help producers in the areas they need to

improve to enhance their products.

 Chapter 2: Background / Literature Review

2.1 Literature review

A popular misunderstanding whenever it comes to picture quality is that if you want

superior selection, you must have more megapixels. The situation is not as straightforward as it

appears (or appears to be, individual's point of view). For years, the majority of the attempts of

camera manufacturers have been directed toward expanding the amount of megapixels with their

most recent models. Cameras with only 3 megapixels were being produced by both Nikon and

Canon at the beginning of the century, which is a far cry from the 100 Megapixel cameras that

are now being produced. Many people have come to believe that the number of megapixels is all

that relates directly to image quality, but in order to understand image quality properly, it is

necessary to look beyond the number of megapixels. If you want to get the full picture, you must

also consider the size and type with sensor, fully comprehend how images are formed, how light

is focused onto to the sensor, the influence of lens selection and performance, and take into

account the resolution. Despite the fact that megapixel has some impact on the quality of the

camera, determining the image quality necessitates the use of some of the characteristics listed

above (Taylor, 2020).

A camera lens is a tool that is used to bring light into the camera body and let it focus on

the sensor. The sensor is where the image is recorded. The bigger the size of the optical

component, the larger the size of the lens, and the more light penetrates the camera. This is the

feature that influences the quality of the image produced. When the size of the lens is small this

means that the amount of light that enters the camera is also small and hence poor quality of the

picture. The lens is what can increase the weight of the camera and therefore the weight of the

camera is contributed by the number of lenses and its size among many other factors. The weight
of the camera was found to have a positive significant impact on the quality of the images

(Freeman, 2010).

Whenever it comes to selecting a digital camera, the magnitude of the sensor is critical

because it has a direct effect on the performance of the photographs you take. Is a larger

sensor, on the other hand, always preferable? There are advantages and disadvantages to

different sensor sizes, and it is beneficial to become acquainted with them because that you

can determine which size is most appropriate for your needs. While larger sensors offer

numerous advantages in terms of finished photographs, it is important to remember that a

larger sensor necessitates the use of a larger lens and, in some cases, a larger camera housing.

When it comes to certain types of photography, such as travel and nature photography, the

additional weight and size can be a hindrance, especially when carrying your equipment for

extended periods of time (Master Class staff, 2020).

2.2 Assumptions

It was assumed that the data on point and shoot digital cameras were randomly selected and there

was no sampling bias. Another assumption that was made in this study is that the 28 digital

cameras represented the entire population of canon and Nikon brand cameras. It was assumed

that the overall score of a digital camera is only influenced by the price, megapixels, and weight

of the camera. This means that the study assumed that there were no other variables that

contributed to the overall quality score of a digital camera.

Chapter 3: Methodology

3.1 Hypotheses Development

The following were the hypothesis to be tested in this study;

H01: There is a significant difference in the overall score between Nikon and Canon cameras.

H02: Price positively influences the overall quality score of a digital camera

H03: Megapixels positively influences the overall quality score of a digital camera.

H04: Weight positively influences the overall quality score of a digital camera.

3.2 Data Collection plan / Source of Data

The data used in this study was obtained from Consumer Reports website and it involved

28 randomly selected brands. Consumer Reports is a magazine that is a published every month

by the consumer Reports since 1936. It compares and reviews various consumer goods and

services. It collects data from various in-house survey research centers and testing laboratory. In

2012, the institution tested 166 various point-and shoot digital cameras. Various variables that

were measured in this survey were megapixels, price, and weight (in ounces). They also created
an overall score which depended on these variables among others not stated here such as image

quality and ease to use. The overall quality score of the digital camera was a numeric value

ranging between 0 and 100. Zero indicates the lowest score and 100 indicated the highest score.

This study uses a random sample of 28 point and shoot digital cameras.
3.3 Statistical Analysis Techniques

Descriptive statistics were computed to summarize the study variables. The main descriptive

statistics reported include means, standard deviation, median, modes, variance, ranges, etc.

Scatter plots were generated to illustrate the relationship between overall quality scores versus

price, megapixels, and weight. Correlation analysis was done to investigate the correlation

between dependent and independent variables. The correlation analysis demonstrated the

strength and direction of the relationship between the study variables. An independent sample t-

test was carried to find out whether there is a difference in the overall score between canon and

Nikon brands. Regression analysis was the main statistical approach in this study and it

established the influence of price, megapixel, and weight on the overall quality score of a digital

camera.
 Chapter 4: Result & Discussion

Descriptive statistics
From the descriptive statistics table below, the average price of digital cameras (Nikon or

Canon brands) was $ 175.36 (SD=82.80). The median and mode of the price variable were $160

and $200 respectively. The most expensive digital camera was $400, while the cheapest was

$80. The distribution of the price variable was positively skewed (Skewness coefficient=1.057).

Megapixel was the next study variable and it had an average of 12.86 (SD=1.84). The median

megapixel value was 12 and most digital cameras had 12 megapixels. The highest value of

megapixels was 16 and the minimum was 10. The weight of the digital cameras was negatively

skewed (Skewness coefficient =-0.1198) with an average of 5,82 oz. (SD= 0.983). The maximum

and minimum weight of digital cameras was 7 oz and 4 oz. respectively. The overall score is the

dependent variable in this study and it had a mean value of 56.36(SD=6.70). The highest score

recorded was 66 while the minimum was 42(see Table 1 below).

Table 1: Descriptive statistics

Price ($) Megapixels Weight (oz.) Score

Mean 175.3571 12.85714 5.821429 56.35714
Standard Error 15.64725 0.34776 0.185831 1.265344
Median 160 12 6 56.5
Mode 200 12 5 66
Standard Deviation 82.79748 1.840175 0.983327 6.695572
Sample Variance 6855.423 3.386243 0.966931 44.83069
Kurtosis 0.663444 -0.63315 -1.19029 -0.61624
Skewness 1.056995 0.225731 -0.11975 -0.42949
Range 320 6 3 24
Minimum 80 10 4 42
Maximum 400 16 7 66
Sum 4910 360 163 1578
Count 28 28 28 28
Scatter plots
Scatter diagram were generated to show the relationship between overall quality score

and price. From the scatter plot below, it is clear that there is a positive association between

price and overall score. An increase in the price of camera corresponds to an increase in the

overall score (See figure 1 below).

price versus overall score

70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Figure 1: Relationship between price and overall score

Scatter diagram were generated to show the relationship between overall quality score

and Megapixel. From the scatter plot below, it is clear that no association between megapixel

and overall score. There is no indication that an increase in the number of megapixel corresponds

to an increase in the overall quality score (See figure 2 below).

 Megapixel versus score
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
5 7 9 11 13 15 17

Figure 2 : Relationship between megapixel and overall score

Scatter diagram were generated to show the relationship between overall quality score

and weight of a digital camera. From the scatter plot below, it is clear that there is a weak

positive association between weight and overall score. An increase in the weight of camera

corresponds to an increase in the overall score (See figure 3 below).

Weight versus score

70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5

Figure 3 : Relationship between weight and overall quality score

Correlation Analysis
Pearson correlation analysis was used to measure the relationship between dependent and

the independent variables. From the analysis we found that there was moderate positive

relationship between price and overall score (r=0.683). The study also found that there was a

moderate positive correlation between weight and overall score of a digital camera(r=0.286).

Finally there was a weak negative relationship between weight and overall score(r=-0.008) (see

table 2 below).

Table 2 : Correlation analysis

Price ($) Megapixels Weight (oz.) Score

Price ($) 1
Megapixels 0.138906 1
Weight (oz.) 0.348815 -0.19883 1
Score 0.683212 -0.00773 0.285688 1

Regression analysis

Model summary
From model summary table, R-square =0.478. This means that 47.8% of the variation in

the overall quality score is explained by megapixels, weight and the price of a camera. The

remaining 52.2% is unexplained variation and it caused by other factors not included in our

model (see table 2 below).

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.691437
R Square 0.478085
Adjusted R Square 0.412846
Standard Error 5.130548
Observations 28
ANOVA
From the ANOVA Table, F(3,24)=7.328 corresponding to p-value=0.001, hence we reject null

hypothesis and conclude that there is a significant linear relationship between independent

variables and the response variable.

Table 3 : ANOVA table

Significance
df SS MS F F
Regression 3 578.688 192.896 7.328173635 0.001184
Residual 24 631.7405 26.32252
Total 27 1210.429

Regression Coefficients table

From the table 4 below, an increase in price by $ 1 leads to an increase in the overall quality

score by 0.06 units. The relationship between price and overall score is significant since p-

value<0.05. Megapixel has insignificant negative impact on the overall score (p-value=0.532).

Weight has insignificant impact on the overall score (p-value=0.873). Price is the only factor

that significantly influences the overall score of a digital camera.

Table 4 : Regression Coefficients table

Coefficient Standard Lower Upper

s Error t Stat P-value 95% 95%
4.86579 28.8763 71.4174
Intercept 50.14687 10.306 4 5.84283E-05 3 1
4.25629 0.02864 0.08257
Price ($) 0.055607 0.013065 7 0.000275221 3 1
- 0.80358
Megapixels -0.35661 0.562139 0.63438 0.531832002 -1.51681 7
0.16136 2.47358
Weight (oz.) 0.179368 1.111593 1 0.87315964 -2.11485 3
The normal probability plot indicates that the overall score was normally distributed and thus it

met the assumption of normality for the response variable. The residual plots also indicates that

the error term was normally distributed.

Normal Probability Plot

70
60
50
40
Score

30
20
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Sample Percentile

Figure 4: P-P plot

Weight (oz.) Residual Plot

10

5
Residuals

0
-53.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5
10
-
-15
Weight (oz.)

Figure 5: weight versus residuals

 Price ($) Residual Plot
10

0
Residuals

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

-5

-10

-15
Price ($)

Figure 6: Residuals versus price

Weight (oz.) Residual Plot

10

5
0
Residuals

-5
3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5
10
-15
-
Weight (oz.)

Figure 7: Residuals versus weight

Independent t-test
An independent t-test was used to determine whether there was a significant difference

in overall quality score between Nikon and Canon brands. Canon had a higher mean score

(58.846) compared to Nikon (mean=54.2). The study found that there was no significant

difference in overall score between Canon and Nikon digital cameras (t=1.920, p-value=0.066)

(see table 5 below).

Table 5: Independent t-test

 Canon Nikon
Mean 58.84615 54.2
Variance 37.97436 43.17142857
Observations 13 15
Pooled Variance 40.77278
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 26
t Stat 1.920201
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.032933
t Critical one-tail 1.705618
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.065866
t Critical two-tail 2.055529
Chapter 5: Conclusions & Recommendations

5.1 Conclusions / Findings

In summary, the megapixel camera and weight of the camera systems have no effect on

their prices, but the score is influenced by the price of the cameras. There is no evidence to

support the notion that spending more money will result in a better camera. The r2 results for

both price and score revealed that the number of megapixels and the weight of each camera do

not play a significant role in the final decision. Many factors, including the camera's brand, can

have an impact on its final cost. This can have an impact on the price, with no additional value

to the customer other than the brand name itself. Branding can also have no impact on the

results. As a result, the price, weight, and number of megapixels do not have a strong

relationship with how good this same image lens is.

5.2 Recommendations

Due to the fact that 2 distinct brands were analyzed together, there are some weak points

in this assessment that can be seen in the data. If the data were analyzed separately, the

conclusions could be very different and more informative. As a potential factor in explaining the

price and score of the camera, the product might even be taken into consideration. Also, there is

no such thing as a "Perfect" camera; if a camera receives a perfect 100 score, what exactly is a

full 100 score for a camera? Another unanswerable question is whether or not a camera with a

score of less than 70 on the a scale of 100 is even that good of a camera. Considering that all of

the cameras under consideration received a score of less than 70. The sample size was initially

quite small (only 28 people), and a larger sample would have provided more reliable data.
 References
Dunlop J., & Kedves, T. (2021). The Great Debate: Canon Vs. Nikon. Retrieved

from https://expertphotography.com/the-great-debate-canon-vs-nikon/

Freeman, M. (2010). Mastering digital photography. Lewes: Ilex.

MasterClass Staff (2020). How Image Sensor Size Affects the Quality of Your Photos. Retrieved

from https://www.masterclass.com/articles/how-image-sensor-size-affects-the-quality-of-

your-photos#what-are-camera-sensors

Taylor, K. (2021). Why image quality is not just about megapixels. Retrieved from

https://karltayloreducation.com/why-image-quality-is-not-just-about-megapixels/