Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 13, 2009, 3:30 AM   #11
Senior Member
Alan T's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 2,980

Mike162 wrote:
.........PSAnyone frequently print larger than A4 / 10x8in? I don't understand the number of megapixels offered on cameras nowadays. It seems to me that 7 is ample and would improve low light performance.
Iused to feelexactly like this. Thebit about better performance in low lightwould be true if 7Mpix sensors with the latest technology were actually available on the latest cameras. But pixel wars have led, as you point out, to pixel inflation, and you'll seldom get less than 10.

I still regularly use my 7Mpix pocket camera from 2005. I bought a Kodak Z712is 7Mpix superzoom in May 2007 as my main camera, and was very pleased with that as well. But its 10Mpix successor, a Kodak Z1012is, purchased in November 2008, offers 10Mpix, and better low light performance.

The other point that shouldn't be ignored is cropping. Unless you are a much better photographer than most, you won't always manage to frame your subject just right at the moment you shoot. You may wish to crop the image to produce the best possible artistic rendering. More pixels allows this to be done more freely, and still retain decent quality.

As for print size, I have just a few of my best images printed at 16x12, for displaying on the walls. The 7Mpix ones from the Casio EX-Z750 and the Kodak Z712 are OK, but the 10Mpix ones stand up much better to scrutiny, even at A4 size.

Also, if you ever display your images on a computer, at 1280x1024, say, if you zoom to see the detail, or exhibit to friends & family, you'll need the pixels. I find I can tolerate two stages of zoom at 10Mpix, where only was was acceptable with 7Mpix.

We recently bought a pocket camera for my daughter. She wanted more zoom than the 3x she'd had before. But in the end we paid more for a better 3x zoom lens & good sensor (Rollei XS-10) than we could have done for a slightly less good 5x zoom on its Pentax competitor.

When we compared its 10Mpix results with my those from my own 3x zoom 7Mpix pocket Casio, the newer lens & sensor gave strikingly better results, partly because of the better lens, but also because of a better sensor, allowing cropping to the equivalent of a 5x zoom. The same principle applies to superzooms. Their lens performance isn't brilliant at the long end, and there's a trade-off between zooming right in, and getting a sharper wider image and cropping it. If there are more, good quality pixels from which to crop, we'll get better results.
Alan T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 10:08 PM   #12
Senior Member
mtclimber's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143

In the Ultra Zoom Category, IMO the two best choices are the Panasonic FZ-28 or the Canon SX-10. If you shoot lots of low light level photos, the FZ-28 has a slight edge over the SX-10.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2009, 7:10 PM   #13
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 8

Unfortunately the Canon SX10 is 5oz heavier than the FZ28 and does NOT support RAW format :sad:
Mike162 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2009, 8:09 PM   #14
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 14

Mike162 wrote:
Unfortunately the Canon SX10 is 5oz heavier than the FZ28 and does NOT support RAW format :sad:
...but the Canon has a flash hotshoe, which might tilt the scale a little if you intend to take many shots at night.

I haven't tried the FZ28, just the Canon SX10 and the Sony H50. The SX10 is indeed too heavy for my taste, and the H50 seemed a little toy-like, and uses proprietary MS. IQ is exceptional for both, but I want to take a FZ28 for a spin before making my decision.
RConsonni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2009, 7:46 PM   #15
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 163

romphotog wrote:
The Canon SX10 only costs $40 more than the FZ28, but you get 560mm, a flipping LCD, and a flash hot shoe. Yes, the FZ28 has EOZ, but unless you go down to 5mp, it's not worth it.Why have 25.7 zoom but half the MP's anyway?
I've just looked over the FZ28 yet once again at B&H. Its 18x zoom is nice, but max is 486mm. Forget the EOZ; you get slightly more zoom but at halfing the MPs to 5mp. Yes, at 3mp you get even more zoom, but as the salesman there said just get a TC.

So the Canon SX10 is the winner here.

romphotog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 12, 2009, 12:27 PM   #16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,092

fz28 is clearly a better camera. Iso noise is horrible in the sx10.

I had three choices to buy.

fz28 (lense distortion in zoom)
sx10 (tons of noise)
s2000hd(180 dollars)

I went for the s2000hd. It has no lense distortion from but does show chromatic aberration just like both sx10 and fz28, has noise just like the canon.

I think I did a good buy. Paying anything over 180 you will get totally ripped off.

fz28 is the clear winner and also raw capable. I been studying these cameras for a good 2 months waiting for a better but I decided for the 180 option since I was a bit eager and didnt want to spend alot. My results are mixed all the time but If you know how to play with it, you can get some awsome shots. I already learned how to use the s2000hd. Took a long while. It can also be a point n shoot if you use chrome in auto mode. but fhr specific scenes, choose sp and pick a type and you wont be dissapointed.
Cresho is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:25 PM.