Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 8, 2006, 10:45 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

gadgetnut wrote:
Quote:
meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
Here is a high ISO (1600)picture that could not be taken with image stabilzation alone. A flashwas not allowed at this event. Even if it was, a flash in this case is undesireable because it would wash out the colorful stage lighting. In this case a tripod and or image stabilization alone could not have taken this shot.
I agree completely. I don't think you could ever eliminate the need for high ISO settings. I think almost all digicams have higher ISO settings available now, including the cameras which also offer image stabilization. I don't think you'd ever have to pick one or the other. It's just some cameras have IS and some don't.
I think in the interests of clarification for the newbies reading this post, it is important to point out there is a difference between a camera having a high ISO setting and what its high ISO capability is. I normally refer to that as a camera's usable high ISO. I see a lot of cameras out there with high ISO, but when it comes to time to deliver, they just don't show up.

There are cases where you sometimes might wantto pick high "usable" ISO over IS because there may one or more otherfeatures sacrificed in order to get both. I didn't buy the F30 for High ISO alone. For example, theother "must have" feature I wanted that the F30 included was manual controls. That isnot a feature that is commonly found ona lot of compact cameras. There areexamples of other features like LCD resolution, lens quality and or capability, size, weight, intutitive controls, battery type, etc., etc. Let's not forget reliablity and repair availabilty. It is usually never as easy as saying this camera has both high ISO and IS, I think that's the one for me.

In all honesty, if I was looking at a point & shoot camera in a bigger size, I would seriously consider the Sony R1, because it has a sensor almost the size of a DSLR. It's drawbackis it lacksa long optical zoom and it is so expensive that you are better off with a DSLR. Therefore, I personally wouldn't buy it.A husband of a co-worker bought one and he is thrilled with it. When he needs more zoom, he adds ateleconvertor. For someone who wants DSLR likeimages, doesn't care about price, but just doesn't want a DSLR it is a good choice. It's just not for me.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2006, 11:03 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 267
Default



Well Maureen99 it looks like there aren't any ''easy'' decisions according to the comments above. :-)

I noticedyou said under $500 dollars for a camera. If you have that kind of money to spend as a first timer, thenafter viewing the posted photographs at varyingISO points it seems to me the Fujibrand is it, with the models listed above, although the 9000 (I believe) is more than your price point.

Again, to my eyes, it seems hard to fault the Fujis. I say this without knowing about images from other brands however.

Good luck onmaking a decision.
Andrew Waters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2006, 11:26 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 546
Default

Andrew Waters wrote:
Quote:

Well Maureen99 it looks like there aren't any ''easy'' decisions according to the comments above. :-)

I noticedyou said under $500 dollars for a camera. If you have that kind of money to spend as a first timer, thenafter viewing the posted photographs at varyingISO points it seems to me the Fujibrand is it, with the models listed above, although the 9000 (I believe) is more than your price point.

Again, to my eyes, it seems hard to fault the Fujis. I say this without knowing about images from other brands however.

Good luck onmaking a decision.
Actually, there is currently a $100 rebate on the S9000. That brings it down to $425 from Buydig.com. That's a great deal on a great camera. But I still recommend looking at the Canon S3 IS also. It's only around $350 (no rebate needed for that price) and it's a great camera too.....with IS!!!!! :lol: *runs and hides.
gadgetnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2006, 1:31 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

gadgetnut wrote:
Quote:
Andrew Waters wrote:
Quote:

Well Maureen99 it looks like there aren't any ''easy'' decisions according to the comments above. :-)

I noticedyou said under $500 dollars for a camera. If you have that kind of money to spend as a first timer, thenafter viewing the posted photographs at varyingISO points it seems to me the Fujibrand is it, with the models listed above, although the 9000 (I believe) is more than your price point.

Again, to my eyes, it seems hard to fault the Fujis. I say this without knowing about images from other brands however.

Good luck onmaking a decision.
Actually, there is currently a $100 rebate on the S9000. That brings it down to $425 from Buydig.com. That's a great deal on a great camera. But I still recommend looking at the Canon S3 IS also. It's only around $350 (no rebate needed for that price) and it's a great camera too.....with IS!!!!! :lol: *runs and hides.


Go buy the K100D before it goes up! LOL

Another 1600 ISO Fuji sample. This was one of them first photos I took with the F30 right out of the box. I was testing out the low light capabilities, but I don't know why I kept it. This was taken inmy secondliving downstairs, whichdoesn't get a lot of light and has dark rustic decor. I hate video taping in this roomeven with the lamps on. This was in natural light if I am not mistaken. Thecouch is directly under the window.







meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2006, 2:06 PM   #25
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4
Default

Andrew; True this is not easy at all, I need a speed reading course!

Morag2, your site does have some great pics of the things I'll mostly photograph, so I'm adding the Kodak 850 to the list for now, thanks!

There is one thing keeping me away from the Cannon s3 is I'm sure you all can tell me if I'm right or not. I looked at the macro mode sample pics at imaging resource and their macro area doesn't seem as small as some other cameras.

Cannon s3 samples:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S2IS/S2ISPICS.HTM

Sony H5:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/H5/H5PICS.HTM

Kodak easyshare 850:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/P850/P850PICS.HTM

Panasonic lumix dmc fz7
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/FZ7/FZ7PICS.HTM

Fuji s9000
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S9000/S9KS.HTM

Am I wrong to think the marco shots of the sony are better than the cannon or the fuji because they have a smaller area and seem to get closer?

I have read the iso vs is discussion, and am trying to understand—how does flash effect image stabilization? I have pretty shaky hands, so must I choose between low noise and stabilization? And how does this effect the macro/super-zoom? Would I be able to get a good zoom in shot of a humming bird with the S3? Ouch! My brain hurts.[img]images/emoticons/confused-smiley-017.gif[/img]

I'm so sorry if these questions seem incredibly dumb, but when it comes to cameras, I basically know how to hold it up to my face and that's it. I'm reading as much as I can but I'm still confused. My for dummies book in in the mail.

I'm not trying to get a free photography course and I greatly appreciate you all helping me understand a few basics.

Thanks again a million times,

Maureen


Maureen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2006, 2:13 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 546
Default

meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
Go buy the K100D before it goes up! LOL
LOL.....Nothing would make me happier!!!!! Soon I hope.
gadgetnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2006, 2:31 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

The Fuji S9000 isn't a bad high ISO performer, but it's not in the same class as the the F30. I think Gadgetnut's points are valid with regard to the S9000. But the F30 to my eyes is around 2 stops better than any of these in low noise. How good the S6000/s6500 will be I don't know, but I think the expectation is that, using the same sensor as the F30, it might have similar performance to that, or at least close.

On the other hand I've seen many reviews, sample pics, etc., about optical image stabilization, and the consensus seems to be that experieced photographers gererally experiece about 2 stop advantage, and an inexperieced shooter may experience more.

As I see it, if the S6000 delievers the quality expected, and if it the price is eventually competitive with the others mentioned (right now it looks like it's only available at list price), it should be competive with the other top ultra zooms. Unfortunately, there really isn't a camera which offers both that level of high ISO performance and OIS. Whether the trade off is worth it may depend on the style and habits of the individual photographer.

But, a 2 stop advantage is ISO will always be enough to offset a 2 stop advantage in OIS. And a 2 stop advantage in OIS will be able to offset a 2 stop advantage in ISO, as long as there is no subject movement.

The OIS may be more useful to a photographer who simply wants to point and shoot. Just turn it on and leave it on for handheld shots. Nearly every shot will be sharper. While the Fuji models do have "anti-shake" modes which automatically boost ISOs, I think best results will be obtained by those who excerise some manual control and put some thought into the settings they are using. One might increase ISO in order to use to a faster shutter, a smaller aperture (and greater depth of field), or greater exposure. Not every situation will be adaquately covered by a mode or preset.

Since Maureen, the OP, is inexperienced, she might benefit more from OIS.

On the other hand, since she is planning on shooting human subjects indoors, and birds and wildlife outdoors, she might benefit more from the higher ISOs, especially if she is shooting off a tripod. I disagree wih the poster who said it wouldn't be useful in these situations, as birds and wildlife often do move. And OIS is normally disabled when shooting off of a tripod, as it can actually introduce a small amount of camera shake.

I think Maureen might be best advised to save at least some of the budget for a decent tripod for shooting nature and wildlife. And she should probably consider all of these models, and consider ergonomic factors, such as which camera feels best in her hand , as all of these seem to be generally well rergarded.

kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2006, 2:46 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Maureen99 wrote:
Quote:
I have read the iso vs is discussion, and am trying to understand—how does flash effect image stabilization? I have pretty shaky hands, so must I choose between low noise and stabilization? And how does this effect the macro/super-zoom? Would I be able to get a good zoom in shot of a humming bird with the

Use of a flash means you can use a faster shutter speed. Real fastshutter speeds don't needIS. IS is good for slighty slower shutter speeds that would normally require adding more light to the situation or use of a tripod to steady the camera.

Hand shake is critical or more noticable at slower shutter speeds. If a shutter speed is too slow, IS doesn't help at all.

On my DSLR, it actuall has a falshing warning when my shutter speed is too slow for IS. At that point I either adjust my aperture to caputure more light and use a faster shutter speed. If it is still not fast enough I raise my ISO or use a flash. High ISO just make the sensor more sensitve to light so that you can use a faster shutter.

If you feel that you have extremly shakey hands, than don't give up IS, but remember that IS isn't a cure all for shakey hands. When yourshutter speed is too slowfor even the IS to work, then you need to boost the available light or use a tripod.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 9, 2006, 8:16 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 260
Default

I've read many places where the S3IS does a great job in macro. Read the review from dcresource.com

www.dcresrource.com/reviews/ canon/powershot_s3-review/

You might have seen it in regular macro mode, but you probably have not seen any shots using the super macro mode in the camera. It's supposed to go as close as you want to the subject.

KALEL33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2006, 12:48 PM   #30
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4
Default

KALEL33; thanks so much for directing me to that forum. There were alot of pics there done with the S3 in macro and using the 500d lense. I think I am going with the S3 because it seems to be able to take the kind of macro pics I want especially with the 500D lens added. Also the video mode seems to be really good.

I still thinking about all the other input here but I'm almost %100 sure it will be the Cannon powershot S3.

Thanks all for all the education and resources!

Maureen
Maureen99 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 6:50 AM.