In lowest sensitivities differences aren't such great but Pana's ISO200 is already considerably noise processed and less processed images of these others would give additional capability in post processing.
michael1973 wrote:
Quote:
1. 5x minimum zoom
Zoom number doesn't mean anything concretic, it's just ratio of longest and shortest focal length.
Focal lengths are those which are important.
Quote:
landscapes, buildings
Now that quite much means that real wide angle is really big plus... after all it's often not wise backstep to that street behind you. (and with lanscape backsteps won't help much)
Kodak P880 would have really wide 24mm wide angle but its tele is propably exatly same as G6's so 28-200mm of Pro1/A200 could be much better compromise.
I do mainly general nature photography and sky phenomenons and 200mm is quite enough for most things. (except wild animals/birds)
Pro1 and A200 have exactly same sensor so differences come from different incamera processing settings... also A200 has usable RAW mode (buffers 5 shots, in Pro1 you'll wait ~10s before next shot) which would give additional capability for lower light. (it's easier to remove noise without destroying so much details from well converted RAW than from incamera processed JPEG, but even with JPEG Neat Image/Noise Ninja can help much)
And image stabilization enables two-three stops longer exposure without tripod and with stationary targets (architecture/lanscapes) that can give big advantage.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=16708739
As for A200's speed compared to G6 I'm not sure is there much differences and don't have now time to search that but previous model, KonicaMinolta A2 is much faster in shot to shot time, also focusing is fast for non-SLR... while A2 lacks flip&twist LCD (only tilting one) its high res EVF with 4x resolution (922 000 pixel) compared to any other EVF&LCD of digicams more than balances that.
So it might be worth to look around if you can find one of those, there's some A2s in eBay... and
here's one.
