Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Sony

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 12, 2006, 1:52 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 248
Default

I have bought an R1 at £399 on impulse because of the bargain price i think so , And so and have to keep it or return it in 28 days, It is new still sealed even and before i open it or not i would ask on this forum if its at this reduced price worth keeping or go slr , i have a panasonic Fz 20 that is good enough for all my needs except no wide angle lens , i thought about an SLR but im worried about dust cheap kit lenses and the price of a wide angle tele lensthat would equal this sony lens , The guy in the shop told me id have to pay loads more money if i want a SLR lens to match the sony , I even wondered about buying a compact withe a wide lens ie Panasonic Fx 01 or a canon S 80 ,This R1 is huge but the price was i think very good for R1 , any advice please i need some opinions / advice any drawbacks i dont shoot sports or action btw ,, Thankyou in advance.
rodo is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 12, 2006, 7:33 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
hgernhardtjr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 516
Default

The R1 is a great camera since it is all-in-one. Not much to carry with you, takes good photos, just grab it and run. However, a dSLR will give you many more options with a wide variety of lens choices, accessories, etc. ... and that adds up, £ after £, very quickly. There are several nice dSLR cameras available for under your £399 price with a basic "kit" lens ... but you will be purchasing more lenses.

Your newSony R1's price was quite good. But decide what you will really be taking photos of, and how often you will use it. Myself, I have several cameras but use my Sony F828 (the R1's older brother) as my go-everywhere-always-with-me shooter. When I go to a specific shoot, I usually take my Canon 30D dSLR, several lenses, etc. with me ... a good, heavybackpack's worth of equipment. And I do not hesitate letting one of my friends or family members use the F828 at the same time since it is extremely easy to use (just as the R1 is).

The one thing, though, that makes the Canon dSLR shine for me is it is virtually "instant on" with no shutter lag ... and if I leave it on all the time, it does not drain the batteries for many days yet instantly springs to life, focuses, and shoots at the press of the shutter release. This is absolutely great for candids of children, sporting events, etc. BUT ...... one telephoto lens alone that I use with the Canon costs twice as much as your R1 ... another, a 100mm macro cost a bit more than half. So, bottom line is the dSLR will ultimately cost you more, but it can also be tailored to your shooting at almost any time given a good lens choice. For all intents and purposes, the R1 has very little "changability" but much of what you need is built in, in the form of both megapixels, features, and a variable Zeiss lens.

If you decide to keep the R1, I think you will be very happy with that decision. If you go with the dSLR, unless you have a lot of free £££ or $$$, it will be a while before your dSLR can equal the R1 for the same money. IMHO!:?


hgernhardtjr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2006, 8:59 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 248
Default

Thankyou , much as i thought many £££ more to match the R1 lens, im not sure if i want to get into lens buying ,some canon lenses cost a bomb and no live lcd view on an slr ,if you think the R1 gives good results / better results for its price im thinking its a better option for me , only the new pentax with antishake is the SLR i think i would choose if i took that path but as you say i wont be able to keep buying lenses thanks for your point of view ,
rodo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2006, 10:29 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
RiaRia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 276
Default

I've only had the R1 for a short while, but from reading your post it seems that we had the same quandary over whether to buy a DSLR or not.* After much consideration and research, I went with the R1.* For me, it was a matter of economy.* As a single parent* with a son headed to grad school and another starting Yale (oh, yeah, I'm-a-bragging!) I just couldn't justify the cost of quality lenses.* Yes,*I know it was a compromise,* (relatively short focal length, large min. focusing distance, limited low-light capability compared to a DSLR)* but*one thing I wasn't willing to compromise on was image quality and the R1 exceeds all expectations on that score.* *Unfortunately, due to the illness of a close friend I have had little time to play with my new toy,* but what I have seen so far, I like!* Ria
RiaRia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2006, 5:37 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 248
Default

RiaRia wrote:
Quote:
I've only had the R1 for a short while, but from reading your post it seems that we had the same quandary over whether to buy a DSLR or not.? After much consideration and research, I went with the R1.? For me, it was a matter of economy.? As a single parent? with a son headed to grad school and another starting Yale (oh, yeah, I'm-a-bragging!) I just couldn't justify the cost of quality lenses.? Yes,?I know it was a compromise,? (relatively short focal length, large min. focusing distance, limited low-light capability compared to a DSLR)? but?one thing I wasn't willing to compromise on was image quality and the R1 exceeds all expectations on that score.? ?Unfortunately, due to the illness of a close friend I have had little time to play with my new toy,? but what I have seen so far, I like!? Ria
Hope you get a chance to use it again, Have you tried JPEG on the R1 that seems to be an issue with some ive read ie it is mentioned only RAW is any good? , seems a shame as i dont like doingedits of any kind ,and would mean ive got to learn and mess about with RAW files,Right nowihavnt got a clue about RAW ,Anyway not enough time to do all that to be honest perhaps its not so much paini will have to research this RAW stuff, Rodo,
rodo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2006, 5:45 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 248
Default

hgernhardtjr wrote: Great thanks for your point of view ,do you can you explain if JPEG is ok with the R1 , I must reportb i know very little about RAW it sounds vey much like ill need a year to learn it and im not so smart at edits or computer stuff i even find Picasa daunting but im getting there thanks Rodo.
Quote:
The R1 is a great camera since it is all-in-one. Not much to carry with you, takes good photos, just grab it and run. However, a dSLR will give you many more options with a wide variety of lens choices, accessories, etc. ... and that adds up, £ after £, very quickly. There are several nice dSLR cameras available for under your £399 price with a basic "kit" lens ... but you will be purchasing more lenses.

Your newSony R1's price was quite good. But decide what you will really be taking photos of, and how often you will use it. Myself, I have several cameras but use my Sony F828 (the R1's older brother) as my go-everywhere-always-with-me shooter. When I go to a specific shoot, I usually take my Canon 30D dSLR, several lenses, etc. with me ... a good, heavybackpack's worth of equipment. And I do not hesitate letting one of my friends or family members use the F828 at the same time since it is extremely easy to use (just as the R1 is).

The one thing, though, that makes the Canon dSLR shine for me is it is virtually "instant on" with no shutter lag ... and if I leave it on all the time, it does not drain the batteries for many days yet instantly springs to life, focuses, and shoots at the press of the shutter release. This is absolutely great for candids of children, sporting events, etc. BUT ...... one telephoto lens alone that I use with the Canon costs twice as much as your R1 ... another, a 100mm macro cost a bit more than half. So, bottom line is the dSLR will ultimately cost you more, but it can also be tailored to your shooting at almost any time given a good lens choice. For all intents and purposes, the R1 has very little "changability" but much of what you need is built in, in the form of both megapixels, features, and a variable Zeiss lens.

If you decide to keep the R1, I think you will be very happy with that decision. If you go with the dSLR, unless you have a lot of free £££ or $$$, it will be a while before your dSLR can equal the R1 for the same money. IMHO!:?

rodo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2006, 8:10 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29
Default

I have a 350D (which i wasn't happy with) and an R1. I now realise that to match the R1, the 350D would need a very expensive lens, thus making it much more expensive than the Sony, so i shan't be bothering.

The DSLR of course has far more scope for add ons etc, but for what i personally want the camera for, i don't need any of that - i wouldn't be changing the lens regularly etc. The R1's lens, at 24 to 120, is easily more than i need, and it gives me better shots than my 350D.

For now, i'm selling the 350D, and sticking with the R1

Hope that helps,

Gareth
Gaz7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2006, 2:39 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
RiaRia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 276
Default

Hi, Rodo:* Sorry it took me a while to get back to you, my friend has taken a turn for the worse and I haven't had much chance to play with the new R-1.* My camera was bought used on ebay for $695.00 USD (with shipping, bag, remote, UV filter and 3 batteries) but it did not come with the RAW software, so I haven't been able to shoot in RAW.* (If anyone knows where I can get the RAW software for Mac, I would appreciate a link!)* I have not heard of the .jpg problem you mentioned, but my initial impression was*that after even moderate cropping, the normal setting was over-sharpened.* (You can see this "jagginess" in the fence post detail in my "happy accident" shot posted earlier in the forum.)* So taking a tip from another online forum (dppreview I think?), I am now planning to turn the in-camera sharpening to low and sharpen in PS instead. * *I'll let you know how it turns out when I have more time to test out the new settings.* Hope this helps! * Ria*
RiaRia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2006, 3:45 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 248
Default

RiaRia wrote:
Quote:
Hi, Rodo:? Sorry it took me a while to get back to you, my friend has taken a turn for the worse and I haven't had much chance to play with the new R-1.? My camera was bought used on ebay for $695.00 USD (with shipping, bag, remote, UV filter and 3 batteries) but it did not come with the RAW software, so I haven't been able to shoot in RAW.? (If anyone knows where I can get the RAW software for Mac, I would appreciate a link!)? I have not heard of the .jpg problem you mentioned, but my initial impression was?that after even moderate cropping, the normal setting was over-sharpened.? (You can see this "jagginess" in the fence post detail in my "happy accident" shot posted earlier in the forum.)? So taking a tip from another online forum (dppreview I think?), I am now planning to turn the in-camera sharpening to low and sharpen in PS instead. ? ?I'll let you know how it turns out when I have more time to test out the new settings.? Hope this helps! ? Ria?
Yes thanks for any info that jpegs are ok , i have not got PS, just picasa and RAW scares the pants off me , im only a simple joe thanks again.
rodo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2006, 5:13 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

I think that's a good buy for what it does. But I don't think you have to pay that much more to match or beat it either, if you would prefer a DSLR.

The following two lenses (Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 DC Macro & 70-300 4-5.6 APO) are currently available form sigma4less.com for a total cost of about $536 US shipped (varies a bit depending on mount--and I'm not sure about prices outside the US):

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/349/cat/31
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/230/cat/31

That covers the 17-300 range, or with a 1.5 crop factor DSLR, 25.5mm-450mm.

That glass is equal to the R1, IMHO, and you give up very little on the wide end, and have alot more zoom, macro capability, and a bit better high ISO performance.

You are going to be a bit over $1000, and if you want in body IS (to match the R1) probably near $1100 US if you choose a K100D. So it would be several hundered dollars (or pounds) more, but there are benfits as well.

kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 3:33 AM.