|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
|
![]()
Noise is certainly NOT an issue in those kind of shots. And the FZ30 does a better job in exposure and color rendition in many cases. It is a very fine camera.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#42 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
|
![]()
Here is another example of the advantage of agreater depth of field. FZ30:
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
|
![]()
KM5D
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#44 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 921
|
![]()
rduve wrote:
Quote:
Also in macrophotography non-SLRs much deeper DOF is big advantage. BTW, were did that cactus leave thorns? :-) iason wrote: Quote:
Here's Canon's shot processed quickly with Noise Ninja: http://rapidshare.de/files/16698224/...essed.JPG.html Now again noise in this is much less irritating than very blotchy chroma noise in FZ7's image, which is propably such heavily processed that getting rid of that noise in post processsing requires washing everything. And how that brand fanatism differs from zoom fanatism, touting that big zoom number means better camera? samerlr wrote: Quote:
Here's RAW shots without Fuji's heavy noise removing: http://www.videozona.ru/photo_tests/...Z30_page05.asp (converted with Adobe Camera Raw) Could be said that all PR touting about low noise sensor is mostly pure BS. So equally important as sensor is good RAW conversion and processing. No matter how good sensor is results can be bad if processing isn't done right. Even such bad that best possible processing can get much more out from worser sensor. zygh wrote: Quote:
Then again cameras using over two years old Sony 2/3" sensor seem to use equally old processsing as sensor is, fortunately most cameras with it doesn't overprocess images. For comparison here's quickly post processed KonicaMinolta A2's ISO400 and 800 noise test shots from Steve's review: http://rapidshare.de/files/14515406/...essed.exe.html (self extracting RAR-archive) All details aren't very sharp, but that comes mostly from very mediocre incamera RAW conversion/processing. KM A200 has better incamera processing than A2 and still much better details can be achieved by using RAW with good conversion: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/koni...200/page12.asp Shouldn't be hard to realize those noise test shots would very propably look quite different if taken in RAW and processed right. So whole noise level in high ISO (&remaining details) question is much more complicated than just looking JPEGs camera spews out and only 100% fair and equal comparison would taking test photos in RAW and comparing them after good RAW conversion/processing. |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#45 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 17
|
![]()
rduve wrote:
Quote:
I understand that I will need 2 lens. I thought the couple hundred bucks more was worth it to get the picture quality at the light situation Iwill be shooting at??? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#46 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
|
![]()
bethel02 wrote:
Quote:
Oh, absolutely, for indoor gym shots the DSLR with a fast lens is the way togo. Look at the difference in these two. FZ's are particularly weak (as all small sensor digicams) when it comes to low light action shots. That's where the DSLR shines in comparison. Oh and one more thing: I find the manual zoom in the FZ30 all but useless. It is much harder to get the focus right through the EVF than it is through the lens of an SLR, and forget about it in action shots. The Continuous Auto Focus with Subject Tracking and predictive focusing is another great advantage the KM5D has over the FZ30. It tracks a moving subject (like an athlete) and keeps it in focus even if it comes toward you at high speed. For indoor sports shots, no question: Get the DSLR! #1 taken with the FZ20 plus flash (threre was no way to take it without flash) |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
|
![]()
#2 KM5D similar lighting, handheld, no flash.
So, to answer the original question of thistopic: "Why is noise the 'be all and end all' deciding factor?" For indoor shooting, especially sports, this is why! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#48 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 17
|
![]()
Thanks for all of your help. like people say a picture is worth 1000 words, and just seeing those helped tremendously. Now I just have to figure out where to get it and save up a little more money. I guess I will move to the Konica Minoltaforum for questions like this.
THANK YOU beth |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#49 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
|
![]()
Here is a place that has a good price on it. http://www.prestigecamera.com/produc...mx5-digkit.htm. Just make sure they don't sell you a bunch of junky, overpriced accessories.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#50 |
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
|
![]() That's a gray market camera without a US manufacturer's warranty. These guys have a very bad reputation, and have been accused of padding thier own ratings. See this note at resellerratings.com: "We detected and disabled 50+ fraudulent "Very Satisfied" reviews for this merchant. Due to the continuous submission of said reviews, we are no longer accepting new reviews for this store as of 1/19/2006." http://www.resellerratings.com/seller1995.html Comments from the Better Business Bureau: "Additional Information Complaints to the Bureau indicate that this firm uses high pressures sales tactics after consumers place their orders. After ordering merchandise consumers report receiving a phone call from the firm's customer representatives attempting to sell additional items. Representatives allegedly try to persuade consumers to buy the U.S. warranty, as well as accessories like cables, peripherals, and software, or lead consumers to believe the product will not work if additional merchandise is not purchased. In some cases, if the consumers declined, an email was sent advising them to cancel their orders because the item was on back-order despite being listed as available on the firm's website. Consumers also reported unauthorized charges on their invoices. When trying to dispute such charges, consumers report difficulty talking to management, claiming they are verbally abused by the company's staff." http://www.newyork.bbb.org/reports/b...1&id=68047 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|