Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Kodak (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/kodak-24/)
-   -   Z1012 vs Z1015 (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/kodak-24/z1012-vs-z1015-148601/)

ssoman Nov 7, 2008 8:56 PM

I'm comparing the 1012 vs the 1015.
I noticed that the 1012 has a wider lens (2.8 vs 3.5).
Will this make a difference in shooting indoor shots without flash?

I want to take indoor shots (gymnastics meets) when I cannot use a flash.

Will this camera be better?

Apart from the Fstop and zoom, are there any other differences between the 2 cameras?

Also, would anyone recommend an extended warranty from any particular company?

Thanks
S

Alan T Nov 8, 2008 6:24 AM

1 Attachment(s)
ssoman wrote:
Quote:

...the 1012 has a wider lens (2.8 vs 3.5).
Will this make a difference in shooting indoor shots without flash?

I want to take indoor shots (gymnastics meets) when I cannot use a flash.

Will this camera be better?

Apart from the Fstop and zoom, are there any other differences between the 2 cameras?....
Yes, the loss of a half a stop in aperture will mean your maximum shutter speed will be 1.4 times slower for any given shot, clearly important in sports at any time, let alone indoors. You will have to use higher ISO to get the same shutter speed.

There are quite few differences in software between the two cameras. The 1015 is perhaps better if you want automation, but the 1012 used more manually might be better for this demanding task. BUT...

Though I am an enthusiast for this particular range of cameras for general purposes, (Z712 the best all-rounder I've ever owned, including film SLRs) I should say neither is very suitable for indoor sports. That is a very challenging field at the best of times. Indoor non-flash shots on these cameras will require a tripod and slow shutter speeds for good-quality results. The image stabilisation helps, but I have found even the movements of seated musicians difficult to capture without blur.

I suggest you enquire in the 'Sports & action photos' forum here, or post a 'newbie' question, and askabout recommended equipment.Most people will suggest expensive dSLRs and lenses. Some of the budget dSLRs now represent good value, but you'll still need an additional expensive lens to do the job well.

My local camera shop has useful & precautionary tiny reviews of cheap dSLRs near the bottom of the page at...

http://www.wrexcam.com/digi-CAMslr-PRICE.htm

I attach an example from my Z712, taken with...

Aperture priority
F-Number: F2.8
35mm focal length [mm]: 36
ISO value: 200
Shutter speed [s]: 1/3
Aperture: F2.8

mtclimber Nov 8, 2008 9:05 AM

JohnG is our resident sports photography expert. He is often active in the "What Camera Shall I Buy? folder. Both he and I are currently posting there.

For indoor, no flash photos of gymnastics, you would be best served by a consumer level DSLR camera. Neither the Kodak Z-1012 nor the Z-1015 will be able to cope well with those kind of photos.

Sarah Joyce

ssoman Nov 8, 2008 1:35 PM

Thanks for the quick. The gymnastics meets are very occasional. I only want to spend that certain amount of $, since prices and models change so much.

I want an overall camera for a variety of shooting modes. I like the zoom. The sample pics look terrific.

I also like how intuitive it is, since I want my family to able to use it.

S

ssoman Nov 8, 2008 1:39 PM

That is an incredible shot w/ the 712 - Can I assume you took it without the flash?

Thanks

ssoman Nov 8, 2008 1:41 PM

How about an extended warranty? Does anyone recommend any? Does Kodak offer an extended warranty?

Thx.

mtclimber Nov 8, 2008 3:05 PM

These are just my personal opinions. However, as a digital camera instructor who has owned 87 digital cameras, I have only had one fail on me which would have made an extended warranty viable. So, based on my experience, I pass on extended warranties unless they will cover accidental damage such as theft or dropping the camera on concrete.

I had one such accidental drop that resulted in a cracked LCD years ago, and HP sent me a brand new camera. So evaluate your hazards and then decide.

Sarah Joyce

Alan T Nov 8, 2008 3:50 PM

ssoman wrote:
Quote:

That is an incredible shot w/ the 712....
Well, not really! I think it's a pretty poor shot apart from the subject matter, and the main object was to show you that I couldn't use anything but a slow shutter speed indoors on the Z712. Even if I'd used ISO1600, the shutter speed would still have been a slow 1/24s . I wish I could have done better. Note the lighting was good enough for the players to read the music, so it wasn't particularly dim.

Yes, it was without the flash. The built-in flash, like those on most cameras, is usefulonly for subjects within a few feet ofthe camera. The Z1015 spec says useful flash range is 5 metres at ISO400. This range of cameras doesn't have scope for synchronising an external flash, either. The only way to use a big flashgun would be as a slave flash.

(I still occasionally use a Casio QV-5700, my second digicam, bought in 2003, because it's the last camera I ownedto which I could attach an external flashgun).

With this range of cameras you'll have to use high ISO settings in such circumstances. If you look atmy ancient thread....

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=18

...you can see higher ISO in action on the Z712. That thread is mostly about white balance, but you can also see the ISO settings, shutter speeds and apertures that I used there. Even with higher ISO I had to use very slow speeds that wouldn't freeze rapid action at all.

At higher ISO you get more noise. There would probably be less on the newer 1012 and 1015 sensors than on the older Z712. On the bigger sensors in dSLRs noise is much less noticeable.

So I think you'd enjoy the 1012 or 1015 for your general everyday photography, but I also think you'd be lucky to get anything better than postcard-sized snapshots of the gymnastics, and they might be rather blurred. Maybe video clips from the same machine might be more satisfying, because the viewer would be concentrating on the action rather than the image quality. I haven't tried that, myself; I use a camcorder when I want video.

Good luck, anyway!



Alan T Nov 8, 2008 4:02 PM

mtclimber wrote:
Quote:

...I have only had one fail on me which would have made an extended warranty viable...I pass on extended warranties...
Yes, in the UK consumer organisations regard extended warranties on such goods as an expensive & profitable way to sell us not very good insurance. And we all know now where dodgy bits of the insurance industry can get us, don't we?

Also, over here at least, many household insurance policies will cover acccidental damage automatically, even outside the home.

JohnG Nov 8, 2008 5:11 PM

As Sarah mentioned, neither camera you are considering is going to get you many gymnastics photos. Gymnastics is one of the toughest sports because the lighting is often very poor and it's difficult to get close.

I would buy your camera with your other needs in mind. I wouldn't make gymnastics shots part of the evaluation.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:38 PM.