|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#21 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 48
|
![]()
No worries about mentioning the DSC-R1 first. That looked like the camera for me untill I saw the price. Maybe I can get one used in a few years. I bet it can make some great prints!
The only drawback I've read about the P880 is that it's REALLY big. But it's also the least expensive... so who knows which I'll end up with. All the advice I've received has been very helpful. I'm getting closer to choosing! BenjaminXYZ wrote: Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
|
![]() Quote:
Read the following quote taken from imaging resource, it might say it all>>> Quote: "About a month prior to updating this review, we launched our second website, SLRgear.com. At the core of that site are the unusually revealing lens tests we're able to perform with the help of DxO Labs' DxO Analyzer program, and some back-end graphing and presentation software that we wrote in-house. We hope to expand our use of this technology in our testing of higher-end digital cameras, to see how they stack up with available SLR/lens combinations. The Sony DSC-R1 seems highly worthy of such comparison, so we're including the results of our DxO-based tests here. For details of how we conduct these tests, just what they reveal, and equally importantly, what they don't reveal, visit SLRgear.com, and check out the links covering these topics on the right hand side of the home page. Meanwhile, here are the results from our evaluation of the DSC-R1. Click on one of the thumbnail images at right, to view either the full-size graph, or to launch an interactive viewer to see how blur and chromatic aberration vary as you change the focal length and aperture. We need to make a very important note about the results seen here, before we actually discuss them. The Blur Index graphs are showing a measure of "softness" that's derived from MTF curves measured at multiple points across the image plane. This measure correlates very well with visual perceptions of sharpness, but is also quite susceptible to variations in the sharpening applied to an image. To remove this factor as much as possible in our measurements, we choose the sharpening setting for each camera that produces the most accurate edge profile, that shows the steepest slope as an edge transitions pixel boundaries, but with the least possible overshoot or undershoot on either side of the edge, caused by the sharpening algorithm. In the case of the DSC-R1, the default sharpening produced a rather large overshoot on the light sides of edges, indicating significant over-sharpening of the image. As it happens, the "low" sharpening setting on the camera produced a nearly ideal edge, with a clean, relatively steep profile, and virtually no overshoot. For this reason, we chose to shoot the DxO targets with the in-camera sharpening set to low. This results in higher values than would otherwise be the case, but the default sharpening produced artificially low ones. Based on the contour of the edge profiles, the graphs shown above right should correlate fairly well with the results on SLRgear.com, obtained with Nikon and Canon d-SLR bodies, because we chose sharpening settings on those cameras to produce the sort of clean edge profiles we see in the R1's images captured at its low sharpening setting. (This serves to illustrate quite well the difficulty of making cross-camera comparisons with the DxO data, and the care needed in doing so.) With all the above as a caveat, when we look at the R1's optical test results, we see graphs so good that they're almost boring. Sharpness across the frame and across the aperture and focal length range is almost perfect, as shown by the exceptionally low and uniform blur numbers. Worst-case chromatic aberration is likewise low, and the average CA numbers are lower still, indicating that what CA is present doesn't extend very far into the frame. Shading (or vignetting, as it is more popularly called) is also very low, reaching a maximum of about a third of an f-stop at the 24mm equivalent focal length and maximum aperture, but in all other cases being less than 1/4 stop. Worst-case geometric distortion is about 0.8% barrel, at maximum wide angle, dropping rather rapidly to about 0.2% pincushion at 20mm actual/35mm equivalent focal length, rising just a bit at 50mm equivalent, and then gradually decreasing to nearly zero at maximum telephoto. To understand just how good these results are, you'll need to visit SLRgear.com and look at some of the test results for the more expensive lenses there. Even a cursory comparison will reveal that you'd easily have to spend several thousand dollars on lenses alone to get this kind of optical performance with a conventional digital SLR." From imaging resource. The site that owns SLRgear as well. Thiswas also taken from the same review>>> Quote:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A6.HTM http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A3.HTM BTW, the quality of the OLYMPUS Zuiko 14 mm - 54 mm F/2.8 - F/3.5 lens is not better in quality than the R1's C.Z. Vario Sonnar T* lens. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
|
![]()
Reply: digraph,
Keep in mind that there are also camerasin the range (price/features)of the P880from the other manufacturers. Canon PowerShot G7 Fujifilm Finepix S9100 (Fujifilmn FinePix S9600) Fujifilm FinePix S6500fd Leica V-LUX 1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ50 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ30 Ricoh GR Digital Samsung NV7 OPS And the SONY ALPHA-A100 (Just kidding) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 163
|
![]()
Any prosumer camera that has a flash hot shoe will give you better
low light pics. I have a lot of experience with the Kodak P850. great zoom, strong flash, A/S/M priority. In fact, you can increase its flash to +1 which is as strong as a small external flash. The P880 is wide angle, and will do fine. However, my choice would be the P712. Look at the Lumix FZ-50 or Fuji S9000 as well. Actually, for really low light, you might want a camera that goes above ISO400 with low noise, that would be the Canon Rebel xT. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 260
|
![]()
Digraph asked about the P880 which costs less than $400 and is a very good camera. As for the cameras just mentioned
Leica V-Lux: $849 price which is larger than $500 Canon G7: $599- also more than $500 Fuji S9100: $599- again more than $500 Both Panasonic Lumix DMC cameras more than $500 Ricoh GR digital: $699 The Samsung NV7 is under his $500 ceiling, but I cant find a review. I've heard good things about them from users though. There are so many cameras just coming out now and the ones above will drop down in price in January and Febuary. If your not needing one now, some of those above would be a very good choice. If you are comfortable with the P880 it is a very good camera and would serve you well. I am waiting to see how well the G7 does on the reviews. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
|
![]() Code:
The P880 is wide angle, and will do fine. However, my choice would be the P712. Code:
Actually, for really low light, you might want a camera that goes above ISO400 with low noise, that would be the Canon Rebel xT. Why do you need to get the Rebel XT to get good ISO 400 - ISO 1600 shots? The Nikon D50, D70s, Fujifilm FinePix S6500fd (with the F30's Super CCD), and the F30 itself all have just as great an ISO performance. Code:
Digraph asked about the P880 which costs less than $400 and is a very good camera. As for the cameras just mentioned Leica V-Lux: $849 price which is larger than $500 Canon G7: $599- also more than $500 Fuji S9100: $599- again more than $500 Both Panasonic Lumix DMC cameras more than $500 Ricoh GR digital: $699 The Samsung NV7 is under his $500 ceiling, but I cant find a review. I've heard good things about them from users though. There are so many cameras just coming out now and the ones above will drop down in price in January and Febuary. If your not needing one now, some of those above would be a very good choice. If you are comfortable with the P880 it is a very good camera and would serve you well. I am waiting to see how well the G7 does on the reviews. If I am not mistaken, he mentioned $500 and below. (BTW, he might be willing to come out a bit more) Those cameras Ihave listed are great options (To consider) as well. Most enthusiast would choose such "feature packed" all in one cameramodels. (They're already togetherin the highest level of pro-sumer cameras) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|