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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 22, 2006, 1:14 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

I don't have a DSLR but I do have a Panasonic FZ20 (5MP 12x zoom) I use some times. I'm looking into buying the new Pentax K100 DSLR. It appears to offer good value for the money. Besides, I have a collection of Pentax lenses from the film SLR days.

Here are two pictures taken with my H1 w/ and w/o the Hoya Moose filter. You can easily see the difference between the two images in terms of color saturation. As I said, this filter works wellwith sky and water but not earth.

WITH HOYA MOOSE WARM POLARIZER FILTER
Attached Images
 
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 22, 2006, 1:15 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

WITHOUT THE MOOSE POL FILTER
Attached Images
 
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 22, 2006, 9:46 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

Hey Tullio,

Thanks for posting the pics. But to be honest I don't think the "over saturation" is that bad. I was expecting overblown colors. To the point of looking abnormal. But, I actually found the color pleasing.

I guess it comes down to what you were intending to do with the photo. What kind of effect. If you were trying to get a shot with accurate colors then the MOOSE filter wouldn't have been a good choice in that instance. But if you purposely wanted rock to have more color...

But, back to UV filters...priced out the filters. Found a shop carrying Hoya and Sigma. They carry the Hoya PRO1 MC ($59.99 CAD) and the regular MC version for ($35.99 CAD). The Sigma MC filter is $44.99 CAD. Have you tried the PRO1 from Hoya? Or know any one that has?

As for the Nikon CPL filter ($139.99 CAD) I haven't been able to find out whether they are MC or SC (single coated) yet. Nikon Canada doesn't even have filters listed. But for now it's still on the top of my list.
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 22, 2006, 11:56 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Dark, you have to analyze the picture as a whole. If you look at the bottom part where there are some plants and flowers, you'll see that the green foliageis not really green. Now, image you have a field of grass...it will certainly not look natural. The good news is, you can always manipulate the image, so if the extra saturation is appealing to you, use the filter most of the time in daylight conditions and then adjust the color to your likingin PS.

Amazon has the Sigma 58mm UVMC EX for $7.95 + s/h. It's a steal (I think it's a mistake because this filter sells anywhere else for $39+). I bought two so I don't need to swap them between the H1 and the FZ20 and I find them awesome. They are made in Japan andthecoating is excellent. Now, I'm not sure how it works for you since you are in Canada. I would never ever pay $100+ for an UV filter. A professional photographer might but I'm not one of them. For that price, it must be MC. I'd not pay $60 for the Hoya PRO either. I've tested every filter I mentioned here (but not the PRO) and to be honest, none of them deteriorated the image a single bit in terms of resolution. So, this idea that you should not have any piece of glass in front of your lens is good in theory but in reality, most good UV filters will not interfere with image quality. Now, coatedvs. non-coated filter is another story. You do want to have a coated UV filter in front of your lens.
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 22, 2006, 4:38 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default


Tullio wrote:
Quote:
Dark, you have to analyze the picture as a whole. If you look at the bottom part where there are some plants and flowers, you'll see that the green foliageis not really green. Now, image you have a field of grass...it will certainly not look natural. The good news is, you can always manipulate the image, so if the extra saturation is appealing to you, use the filter most of the time in daylight conditions and then adjust the color to your likingin PS.

Amazon has the Sigma 58mm UVMC EX for $7.95 + s/h. It's a steal (I think it's a mistake because this filter sells anywhere else for $39+). I bought two so I don't need to swap them between the H1 and the FZ20 and I find them awesome. They are made in Japan andthecoating is excellent. Now, I'm not sure how it works for you since you are in Canada. I would never ever pay $100+ for an UV filter. A professional photographer might but I'm not one of them. For that price, it must be MC. I'd not pay $60 for the Hoya PRO either. I've tested every filter I mentioned here (but not the PRO) and to be honest, none of them deteriorated the image a single bit in terms of resolution. So, this idea that you should not have any piece of glass in front of your lens is good in theory but in reality, most good UV filters will not interfere with image quality. Now, coatedvs. non-coated filter is another story. You do want to have a coated UV filter in front of your lens.
Ummm, I DID look at the entire picture Tullio. My comment stands. Then again we're using different monitors. So who knows. On my end the picture with the MOOSE filter just looks like the same picture with a warm tint. Darkened. But the foliage still looks green to me. Just a darker shade. Shrug.

Any how...I'm just looking to buy a UV filter and then later a PL or CPL filter. Again....when ever I get around to it.

As for DSLR's....that Pentax looks like an okay deal. Decent performer for the money. I read the review for your model here on Steve's and on dcresource.com. That and you do have some old Pentax lenses as you said. Might as well make use of them. And it actually still uses AA batteries. Convenient I suppose. You get to use your current stash of batteries too.

When I do decide to get a DSLR I think I'll be looking at either a Nikon D80 or D200. Or their replacements. Personally, I've always found the pictures shot by Nikon users to be more detailed and vibrant (than those shot by Canon users, Olympus users...etc.). Keeping in mind I'm talking about pictures viewed off the internet and not actual prints.

Or, I might go with the Canon 30D. I find the colors of images shot by Canon DSLR users to be more true and possibly less sharp (vs. images shot by Nikon users) in general. Which isn't to say I find the images "soft" or not pleasing.

I would have considered the new Canon XTi but the grip is still problematic IMHO. They only rounded it off a little. But it still appears uncomfortable to hold unless you have small hands. I was reading a review and he said he still has to (as he did with the XT) leave his pinky below the grip.

That and I found the XT too plasticy. Cheap build quality. Felt like a toy.

I suppose in the end it comes down to what appeals to you more (not that I'd be basing my DSLR purchase solely on those reasons of course). Do you want a true detailed image? Or a detailed image where the colors have a little more pop? To each his own.

Time to check on the BBQ. Steak night!! :-)
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 5:54 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8
Default

As far as batteries go, I am very pleased with my purchase about a year ago from Radio Shack a "15 Minute Charger" which I believe is manufactured by Ray-O-Vac. I am getting very good service from the AA Rechargable Batteries designed to be used with the "15 Minute Charger" with my H1.
Kimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 11:24 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

Kimmer wrote:
Quote:
As far as batteries go, I am very pleased with my purchase about a year ago from Radio Shack a "15 Minute Charger" which I believe is manufactured by Ray-O-Vac. I am getting very good service from the AA Rechargable Batteries designed to be used with the "15 Minute Charger" with my H1.
Hello Kimmer,

Welcome to the H1 owners "offical thread".

As for 15-minute chargers...sounds good on paper...but is actually not good for the life or performance of the batteries. Better to do a long charge. So for now I'm still using the supplied 6 hr charger from Sony (and the supplied 2100 mAh batteries).

The next charger will be the Maha 401 along with their 2700 mAh Powerex batteries. Supposedly the best combo out there.

Sanyo batteries are good too. And if my neighborhood Costco carries them I'll pick up some 2500 mAh Sanyos first instead. Rather pick them up in-person. Just on the off chance there's a problem.

How many times have you charged your batteries? And roughly how many shots do you get per charge? Curious. I know we all use our cameras differently...but still...


DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2006, 4:44 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8
Default

My understanding is that the batteries used with the 15 Minute Charger are especially designed to be used with this charger.

I'm not one for taking a huge amount of photos in a single day. However, most recently I visited Great Falls National Park in the Washington, DC area and did take approximately 90 photos during that day. I had no problems with battery power
Kimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 26, 2006, 10:53 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

Kimmer wrote:
Quote:
My understanding is that the batteries used with the 15 Minute Charger are especially designed to be used with this charger.

I'm not one for taking a huge amount of photos in a single day. However, most recently I visited Great Falls National Park in the Washington, DC area and did take approximately 90 photos during that day. I had no problems with battery power
I see. Any ways I was just speaking in general. In general when you're talking about NiMH batteries quick charges are never a good thing for battery life. But, if your batteries are "made for" the 15-minute charger ok.

Are they Ratshack's own brand? Or Ray-o-vak batteries? 2500 mAh?

As I mentioned, I'll be getting either some new Powerex 2700 mAh or Sanyo 2500 mAh (at the neighborhood Costco...assuming the one in my area sells them...I heard that the Sanyo's are being sold int he Ottawa location).

If I don't end up ordering the Powerex or the Sanyos within the next month (going on a trip to HK in Nov) I'll just drop into a Sony Store and pick up a 2500 mAh 4-pack.

Btw...on the average, how many shots to you get per charge?

Take it easy.
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2006, 9:58 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

Tullio,

You mentioned months ago you would be getting Sony 2500 mAh batteries? How did that go? Do you remember approximately how many shots you got per charge (at partial capacity or full) on average? Did you end up getting some 2700 mAh Powerex batteries?
DarkDTSHD 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 4:32 AM.