AGENO SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

GOLDEN GATE UNIVERSITY

Math 104

FINAL PROJECT

Title:

INVESTIGATING THE FACTORS AFFECTING THE OVERALL QUALITY

SCORE OF DIGITAL CAMERAS

By:

Date of Completion
NOVEMBER 24, 2022

1
 Abstract

This study's primary objective was to investigate the effect of weight, price, and

megapixel on the overall quality score. The criteria measured in this survey included

megapixels, cost, and weight (in ounces). In addition to these characteristics, such as image

quality and usability, others, not included here, were considered for determining the overall

rating. This study utilizes a random sample of 28 digital point-and-shoot cameras. To

summarize the study variables, descriptive statistics were generated. The correlation between

overall quality scores and price, megapixels, and weight was illustrated by means of scatter

plots. To evaluate the association between dependent and independent variables, correlation

analysis was performed.

A t-test on an independent sample was conducted to see whether there is a difference in

the total score between Canon and Nikon. This study's primary statistical method was regression

analysis, which demonstrated the impact of price, megapixel count, and weight on a digital

camera's overall quality score. The survey indicated no substantial difference between Nikon

and Canon cameras in terms of overall score. It was also shown that megapixels and weight had

no major impact on the overall score, however price explained the overall quality score of a

digital camera significantly. The study suggested conducting additional research to enhance the

sample size in order to improve the data's reliability and validity.

2
 Table of Contents
Abstract..........................................................................................................................................................2
Chapter 1: Introduction................................................................................................................................4
1.1 Problem Statement.........................................................................................................................4
1.2 Purpose of the study.......................................................................................................................5
1.3 Contributions.................................................................................................................................5
Chapter 2: Background / Literature Review.................................................................................................6
2.1 Literature review............................................................................................................................6
2.2 Assumptions...................................................................................................................................8
Chapter 3: Methodology...............................................................................................................................8
3.1 Hypotheses Development..............................................................................................................8
3.2 Data Collection plan / Source of Data...........................................................................................8
3.3 Statistical Analysis Techniques.....................................................................................................9
Chapter 4: Result & Discussion..................................................................................................................10
Descriptive statistics................................................................................................................................10
Scatter plots..............................................................................................................................................11
Correlation Analysis................................................................................................................................13
Regression analysis..................................................................................................................................14
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

3
 Chapter 1: Introduction
Consumer Reports has been publishing a monthly magazine since 1936 under the name

Consumer Reports. It evaluates and compares a variety of consumer goods and services. It

gathers information from multiple internal survey research centers and testing laboratories. In

2012, the institute evaluated 166 different digital point-and-shoot cameras. The criteria measured

in this survey included megapixels, cost, and weight (in ounces). In addition, they calculated an

overall score based on these characteristics and those not shown here, such as image quality and

usability.

The digital camera's overall quality score was a numeric value between 0 and 100. Zero

represents the lowest score, while 100 represents the greatest score. This study utilizes a random

sample of 28 digital point-and-shoot cameras.

This report consists of five chapters, the first of which is the introduction, which includes

an overview of the data utilized in the project as well as a definition of the problem, the

objective of the study, and the contributors. The subsequent chapter is a review of the

background/literature, which includes past study findings that will assist us in formulating our

hypotheses. Additionally, assumptions are listed in this chapter. Third, the technique, which

includes the creation of the hypotheses, data sources, and statistical tools employed in the study.

The fourth chapter, Results and discussion, presents the study's findings and their interpretation.

The conclusion and recommendations chapter provides a summary of the study's findings and its

recommendations.

1.1 Problem Statement

When purchasing a DSLR camera, many people pick between Canon and Nikon

exclusively. They have the most stakeholder perspectives and longest track records in the digital

photography market. The debate stems from the filmmakers who are sincerely committed to one
4
 side or the other. Canon and Nikon are the two most popular and frequently used DSLR camera

brands, therefore it is logical that the majority of the discussion focuses on them. When film

photography was at its height, the Nikon versus Canon dispute was somewhat less prevalent.

There were a profusion of high-quality cameras to pick from, each offering something

distinctive. However, since we originally opted to enter the era of digital photography, a great

deal has changed. Nikon and Canon cameras are typically chosen by seasoned photographers.

Each company has began producing mirrorless cameras in recent years, which threatens to

relegate Sony to second place (Dunlop & Kedves,2021). When it comes to purchasing the

greatest digital camera, it has been difficult for aspiring photographers. Numerous professional

photographers suggest Canon or Nikon digital cameras. It is also crucial to note that these

cameras have varying prices, weights, and megapixels, meaning that not all cameras from these

companies produce images of high quality. This study should determine the effect of

megapixels, weight, and cost on the overall quality score of digital cameras.

1.2 Purpose of the study

This study aims to examine the influence of price, megapixel count, and weight on the

overall quality score of Nikon and Canon digital cameras. It also determines which digital

camera brand, between Nikon and Canon, has a superior overall quality score.

1.3 Contributions

The conclusions of this study will benefit digital camera manufacturers, businesspeople, and consumers.

This research will inform these groups as to which camera brand, between Nikon and Canon, is superior. It will

also indicate whether a camera's megapixel count, price, and weight have a major impact on its overall quality

score. This research will assist new digital camera purchasers in selecting the ideal camera. It will help producers

boost their products in the areas where they need to improve.

5
 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

6
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).

7
 2.2 Assumptions

It was assumed that the data on digital point-and-shoot cameras were selected at random and that

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

represented the whole population of digital cameras manufactured by Canon and Nikon. It was

considered that the price, megapixels, and weight of a digital camera are the only factors that affect its

overall rating. This means that the study assumed there were no other factors that contributed to a digital

camera's overall quality score.

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

This study utilized data acquired from the Consumer Reports website regarding 28 randomly

selected brands. Consumer Reports has been publishing a monthly magazine since 1936 under the name

Consumer Reports. It evaluates and compares a variety of consumer goods and services. It gathers

information from multiple internal survey research centers and testing laboratories. In 2012, the institute

evaluated 166 different digital point-and-shoot cameras. The criteria measured in this survey included

megapixels, cost, and weight (in ounces). In addition, they calculated an overall score based on these

characteristics and those not shown here, such as image quality and usability. The digital camera's overall
8
quality score was a numeric value between 0 and 100. Zero represents the lowest score, while 100

represents the greatest score. This study utilizes a random sample of 28 digital point-and-shoot cameras.

3.3 Statistical Analysis Techniques

To summarize the study variables, descriptive statistics were generated. The most important

descriptive statistics presented include means, standard deviation, median, modes, variance, and ranges,

among others.

The correlation between overall quality scores and price, megapixels, and weight was illustrated

by means of scatter plots. To evaluate the association between dependent and independent variables,

correlation analysis was performed. The correlation analysis revealed the intensity and direction of the

association between the variables of the study. A t-test was conducted on an independent sample to

determine whether there is a difference in the total score between the Canon and Nikon brands. This

study's primary statistical method was regression analysis, which demonstrated the impact of price,

megapixel count, and weight on a digital camera's overall quality score.

9
 Chapter 4: Result & Discussion

Descriptive statistics

The average price of digital cameras (brands Nikon or Canon) was $175.36 (SD=82.2) according

to the table of descriptive statistics below. The price variable's median and mode were $160 and $200,

respectively. The most costly digital camera cost $400, while the least expensive cost only $80.

The price variable's distribution was positively skewed (Skewness coefficient = 1.057).

The following study variable was megapixel, which had a mean of 12.86 (SD = 1.84). The median

number of megapixels was 12, and the majority of digital cameras had that number. The greatest

megapixel count was 16 and the lowest was 10. The weight distribution of digital cameras was negatively

skewed (Skewness coefficient = -0.1198), with a mean of 5.82 oz (SD = 0.99). Maximum and minimum

digital camera weights were 7 oz and 4 oz, respectively. In this study, the dependent variable was the total

score, which had a mean value of 56.36 (SD = 6.70). The best score was 66, while the lowest 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

10
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).

11
 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

12
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

13
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

Significanc
df SS MS F eF
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

14
 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
3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5
-5
- 10
-15
Weight (oz.)

Figure 5: weight versus residuals

15
 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
Residuals

0
3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5
-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).

16
 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

17
 Chapter 5: Conclusions & Recommendations

5.1 Conclusions / Findings

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

their pricing, however the price of the cameras influences the score. There is no evidence to

support the claim that a more expensive camera will be superior. According to the r2 results for

both price and score, the amount of megapixels and weight of each camera do not play a

significant effect in the final decision. Numerous variables, including the camera's brand, can

affect its final price. This can affect the price, with no additional benefit to the customer other

than the brand name. Additionally, branding may have no effect on the outcomes.

As a result, the relationship between the price, weight, and number of megapixels and the

quality of this image lens is weak.

5.2 Recommendations

Due to the fact that two distinct brands were assessed simultaneously, this evaluation contains

several flaws that are evident in the data. If the data were independently evaluated, the conclusions could

be much different and more enlightening. As a possible explanation for the price and rating of the camera,

the product itself may be taken into account. In addition, there is no such thing as a "Perfect" camera; if a

camera receives a score of 100, what exactly does it mean? A further unanswered question is whether a

camera with a rating of less than 70 on a scale of 100 is even a good camera. Considering that each of the

under consideration cameras obtained a score below 70. Initially, there were just 28 participants in the

survey, and a bigger sample would have offered more accurate results.

18
 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/

19
20