fz50 or canon 400d with sigma?

[BenjaminXYZ]

I do so agree just piked up a Sony R1 , i did not know if it was the right choice still trying it but this camera is of such good build, great performance so far wonderfull first pics , easy to use i think it is ,. silent operation , ect i much prefer it to two SLR ive also tried and returned recently very poor build imo. +toy kit lensthe kit lenses on those do not thrill imo ,but the glass on thR R1 is wonderfull like the FZ 20, Btw the R1 has a smart zoom ive been reading reduce MP to 5 or 7 and it gives superb results up to 200, With my Panasonic FZ 20 again superb results for the £££ against long SLR lenses and maybe a Fuji f 30 /40 later for pocxket use i feel im wellsorted tojust get on and take photosinsted of givingC / N / P ect loads of my hard earned to match what i have now and a bad back carrying it all ,I dont want to shoot fast or very low light btw , The R1 must have the most powerfull on board flash it lights up myLarge room just great ,dont think i need an expensive extra flash more savings ,just my opinion / point of view you understand .

Congratulations!I am also feeling excited that someone got the R1.:|

I remembered the last time whenI heldthe R1, andthethought of owning it and shooting with it was so exciting! All in all, the R1 is a very interesting camera; you would surely like it very much.

:|

[bomber1]

i have judged all my cameras by taking a picture with all different lenses coming in from where ever ive been downloading said pictures to computer, then magnifying the image so much that if it were a real picture it would be 75 yards by 75 yards

and this is the basis ( in my opinion ) how we all judge cameras ! cos if you took any camera shot slr dslr bridge ect and went and got them printed normal size i would defy any one to tell me what took what ( I'm 45 been playing with cameras 20 + years ) but most people use the computer, with all that can be done with it, and this brings out the differences , every picture we take starts off at 19 inches? ( might be just me dunno? )

[BenjaminXYZ]

i have judged all my cameras by taking a picture with all different lenses coming in from where ever ive been downloading said pictures to computer, then magnifying the image so much that if it were a real picture it would be 75 yards by 75 yards

and this is the basis ( in my opinion ) how we all judge cameras ! cos if you took any camera shot slr dslr bridge ect and went and got them printed normal size i would defy any one to tell me what took what ( I'm 45 been playing with cameras 20 + years ) but most people use the computer, with all that can be done with it, and this brings out the differences , every picture we take starts off at 19 inches? ( might be just me dunno? )

The image quality of the R1 is as good as those captured by the digital SLR cameras.

The R1'slargeimage sensorand high quality glass, is equivalent to a dSLR with high quality glass. You can also capture R.A.W. on the R1 as well.

Reviews always compares the R1 to the dSLR cameras. Similarly, thebuyers that are looking at theR1will also usually be looking at the dSLR cameras. Reviews have also stated that the image quality of the R1 compares to those ofthe dSLR cameras.

All this serves to indicate that the R1 isa camera to compare with the dSLRs, although it is factually in a class of it's own. But since it's image qualityis as good as that ofthe dSLRs,people would becomparing the R1to the dSLRs as well. (Having aprice of $999.99those dayshave also directly compared itto the dSLR league of cameras)

In addition toit's image quality & price, the R1 also shares advance featureslike the dSLR cameras; placing it intocomparison with thedSLR cameras.

:idea:

[rjseeney]

You may be able to compare the R1 to DSLR's image wise, but that doesn't tell the whole story. As I said before, it is obviously a great camera, but it is quite limited. IQ is important, but the lack of flexibility makes this camera a poor choice for many consumers. In terms of features, speed, and flexibility the R1 really does not compare to any DSLR. There is more shutter lag, the EVF is inferior to any optical viewfinder, AF is slower etc, etc. For the typical user, I think a DSLR is a better choice.

[BenjaminXYZ]

You may be able to compare the R1 to DSLR's image wise, but that doesn't tell the whole story. As I said before, it is obviously a great camera, but it is quite limited. IQ is important, but the lack of flexibility makes this camera a poor choice for many consumers. In terms of features, speed, and flexibility the R1 really does not compare to any DSLR. There is more shutter lag, the EVF is inferior to any optical viewfinder, AF is slower etc, etc. For the typical user, I think a DSLR is a better choice.

Well, the flexibility will be good enough for most people. I assumed that you meant interchangeable lenses. As I've already stated many times, the lens of the R1 have a nice range of 24 - 120 mm and high quality too; that might be well enough for some people. Looking at it, the R1 also offers the advance features found on most dSLRs such as full photographic controls, wide range of aperture selections, and color modes etc...

In terms of speed, I agree that the R1 is slower that most dSLRs, but not by a lot. The average user probably won't notice the difference unless shooting RAW and continuous, which the R1 is slower at than most dSLRs.Interestingly, the R1 have an almost instant shutter when pre-focused. All in all, the R1can just be fast enough forthe majority ofusers.

The EVF may not be asfast as a dSLR viewfinder, however, keep in mind that you can evaluate live W.B., W.B. fine-tuning,exposure, & histogram on it. In addition, you also get 100% coverage of the scene. The live preview LCD also provides the same function as the E.V.F.. I have been shooting with live previewdigital cameras for 5 years or more, and I know howuseful it is. Aperture evaluation is also more accurate since it is the image sensor directly seeing the scene. (Insteadof a mirror a few mm off the sensor plane) [The R1's D.O.F. will be shallow, so the live D.O.F. will bevery useful]

The A.F. is slower thansome dSLRs (I agree) in dimmer lighting conditions (as stated by some users as well), however, it is accurate as claimed by them "It always focuses correctly in the end".

Ultimately, it will all depend on the user's preference.

I forgot to mention that the R1 also have the magnified manual focus feature. When you set it in the custom menu, theR1 will strongly magnify the center of the scene when the focus ring is turned. (This can be useful for manual focusing)

EDIT:

The R1 also have a spot focus feature that dSLR lacks. Spot focus enables you to focus at the sides, corners of the frame or anywhere else on the screen; it promotes moreflexibility in focusing. Combined with the shallow DOF of the R1, spot focus can be very creative indeed.Live metering evaluation and RGB histograms are some other features of the R1. Some photographers at dpreview forums are appreciating the ability to see the scene in B&W before capturing.

In case you query my experience;

I have been shooting with live previews, and Iknow how useful it is tohave live spot metering. You can see the scene change effects as you meter theparts of it. On the other hand, I have been playing around with spot focus on my Sony DSC-N1in macro mode; I found it a very creative opportunity with spot focus and blurred out backgrounds.

Add everything together for a shot:Spot focus, live spot metering, live exposure adjustments, live histogram, live W.B. evaluation, andlive B&W preview; it all becomes a powerful andhandycombination. (I personallybelieve thatit would be very hard for a dSLRto achieve all thiswith ease.)

Put is simply, you can see what you are doing, and you can see it all happening (Taking effect).

[bomber1]

its not about whats the better camera a good dslr with good glass will out perform a good bridge its about what you as the user needs the camera for, i think we as consumers can get caught up in the mega pixel race ect ect , the bottom line is they are all different animals ,

and good at different jobs! ( ya wouldn't go touring car racing in a bus!! but both vehicles carry people ) decide what you want to do with it and buy accordingly.

[rjseeney]

BenjaminXYZ wrote:

You may be able to compare the R1 to DSLR's image wise, but that doesn't tell the whole story. As I said before, it is obviously a great camera, but it is quite limited. IQ is important, but the lack of flexibility makes this camera a poor choice for many consumers. In terms of features, speed, and flexibility the R1 really does not compare to any DSLR. There is more shutter lag, the EVF is inferior to any optical viewfinder, AF is slower etc, etc. For the typical user, I think a DSLR is a better choice.

Well, the flexibility will be good enough for most people. I assumed that you meant interchangeable lenses. As I've already stated many times, the lens of the R1 have a nice range of 24 - 120 mm and high quality too; that might be well enough for some people. Looking at it, the R1 also offers the advance features found on most dSLRs such as full photographic controls, wide range of aperture selections, and color modes etc...

In terms of speed, I agree that the R1 is slower that most dSLRs, but not by a lot. The average user probably won't notice the difference unless shooting RAW and continuous, which the R1 is slower at than most dSLRs.Interestingly, the R1 have an almost instant shutter when pre-focused. All in all, the R1can just be fast enough forthe majority ofusers.

The EVF may not be asfast as a dSLR viewfinder, however, keep in mind that you can evaluate live W.B., W.B. fine-tuning,exposure, & histogram on it. In addition, you also get 100% coverage of the scene. The live preview LCD also provides the same function as the E.V.F.. I have been shooting with live previewdigital cameras for 5 years or more, and I know howuseful it is. Aperture evaluation is also more accurate since it is the image sensor directly seeing the scene. (Insteadof a mirror a few mm off the sensor plane) [The R1's D.O.F. will be shallow, so the live D.O.F. will bevery useful]

The A.F. is slower thansome dSLRs (I agree) in dimmer lighting conditions (as stated by some users as well), however, it is accurate as claimed by them "It always focuses correctly in the end".

Ultimately, it will all depend on the user's preference.

I forgot to mention that the R1 also have the magnified manual focus feature. When you set it in the custom menu, theR1 will strongly magnify the center of the scene when the focus ring is turned. (This can be useful for manual focusing)

EDIT:

The R1 also have a spot focus feature that dSLR lacks. Spot focus enables you to focus at the sides, corners of the frame or anywhere else on the screen; it promotes moreflexibility in focusing. Combined with the shallow DOF of the R1, spot focus can be very creative indeed.Live metering evaluation and RGB histograms are some other features of the R1. Some photographers at dpreview forums are appreciating the ability to see the scene in B&W before capturing.

In case you query my experience;

I have been shooting with live previews, and Iknow how useful it is tohave live spot metering. You can see the scene change effects as you meter theparts of it. On the other hand, I have been playing around with spot focus on my Sony DSC-N1in macro mode; I found it a very creative opportunity with spot focus and blurred out backgrounds.

Add everything together for a shot:Spot focus, live spot metering, live exposure adjustments, live histogram, live W.B. evaluation, andlive B&W preview; it all becomes a powerful andhandycombination. (I personallybelieve thatit would be very hard for a dSLRto achieve all thiswith ease.)

Put is simply, you can see what you are doing, and you can see it all happening (Taking effect).

As I said, the R1 is a great camera....as long as it is in the hands of somebody who understands its strengths and weaknesses. It is not a camera built for speed. THe style of shooting you describe is slow and deliberate and takes advantage of some of the features the R1 offers. Personally, live preview (in my opinion) and LCD framing is overrated....shooting with a camera this large with hands extended is poor technique and an invitation to camera shake. Live preview is great for macro/tripod shots however. There is no denying alot can be accomplished with the R1, but it can also be the source of frustration because it is limited in some key respects (again speed and flexibility).

[kenmck15]

bomber1 wrote:

and good at different jobs! ( ya wouldn't go touring car racing in a bus!! but both vehicles carry people ) decide what you want to do with it and buy accordingly.

agreed

i used the be the guy yelling and screaming how good the fz30 was. No need for dslr. I didnt know what all the fus was about. Now i own onei know what everyoe means.

I think buying the fz50 is a fantastic camera, but you get what you get.

Buying a dslr, you get a fantastic foundation to build an incrediblecamera from. NO DOUBT it will cost you more, but i thik itsmoney well spent.

i also think the r1 is a good camera. Iconsidered it when buyingmy fz.

I dont think spot focusing is an issue withdslr, with optical view finder its very easy to focus manually.

Honestlymate, thisthread will go on and on forever, bascially prosumer owners vs dslr owners.

shot from my old fz30 below.

ken

[rodo]

BenjaminXYZ wrote:

Congratulations!I am also feeling excited that someone got the R1.:|

I remembered the last time whenI heldthe R1, andthethought of owning it and shooting with it was so exciting! All in all, the R1 is a very interesting camera; you would surely like it very much.

:|
Thanks, at the uk price £400 i think its so good for so little its a must have , If a Dslr is going to be a future purchase for meso be it but for me at this price the R1 is in my opinion a better bargain for now, I cant afford a prodslr and the cheap entry level ones ive tried are not desirable or nice at all imo ,Theseentry models they can flap there mirrors collect dust and wear the cheap glassuntill i can pay £400 for one that has the R1 build and performance nah i dont think so , I think youhave to pay too much for a Dslr with the sony R1 value ie much more and i think ive found the bargain of the year camera,Only my point of view of course no offence to those who differ,
,:-)

[bomber1]

And that is exactly what i have done!! i bought an fz20 then just about every new dslr on the market , and found that i really am not using a camera enough to justify spending proper money on good glass, the debate will go on and on! but it is a no boner ya get what ya pay for and thats the bottom line ! or as i said earlier weigh up all the pros and cons before purchase ,because a better camera will not take better pictures if you don't know how to take a picture ! ( people forget that ) horses for courses find out what course your on first. then buy !!!