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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 2, 2006, 2:51 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 248
Default

Can any body please offer there opinion on a fast Jpeg camera i , ie not raw . Im thinking more of a prosumer or dslr type that shoots good jpegs, It has been said the Sony R1 i have is nota fast jpeg camera, only slow i presume they mean and only good with raw , Have i made a mistake buying the R1? a fast good jpeg camera is what i thought i was buying and what i think i need , i didnt get a dslr because i was told raw was needed with these types ,and i dont want to mess around with raw no time, any models i should have bought insted im very dissapointed if the R1 can only shoot good stuff in raw though the jpegs lookok from the R1 not used it much though yet only two weeks oldOh and its not too slow i think ? any advice what im missing .my other camera is a Panasonic FZ 20 great jpegs i think.:-?
rodo is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 3, 2006, 12:34 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

What is tough to match in the R1 is it's range. It's optical quality may compare favorably to the cheapest of kit lenses, but it's farily average as far as DSLR lenses go. Almost any popular standard zoom in the $400-500 range will beat it for at lesat part of it's range.

It is hard to find a zoom starting at 24mm and f2.8. But the R1 is also not a fixed 2.8. By 35mm you are at 3.2, by 50mm at 3.5, and by 70mm at 4.5. Moreover, it's somewhat soft wide open, especially at the ends of it's range. And Chromatic abberation is really only low in the middle of it's zoom range. Plus, past about 90mm Equivalent FOV, it never really gets sharp even when stopped down.

A Nikon 18-70 f3.5-4.5 will cover the 27-105 equivalent FOV range. It starts out only about a half stop less bright, and it gets closer as you zoom in. By 50mm equivalent it's only 3 tenths of a stop less bright than the R1. It's also a match for sharpness throughout, and clearly sharper at the long end between f5.6-f11. It's distortion profile is almost identical, and it suffers from less CA.

An Olympus Zukio 14-54 f2.8-3.5 also covers the a 27mm-105mm equivalent FOV. That doesn't get you quite as wide as 24mm, but it easily beats the R1 in the range it covers, and with a weather sealed build protecting against dust and water to boot.

A Pentax 16-45 f4.0 will give you a good 24mm equivalent at it's wide end. You start out at that wide angle at f4.0 rather than f2.8, but otherwise it will match or beat the R1 for optical quality for most of it's range.

In addition, fixed f2.8 zooms are available from both Sigma (18-50) and Tamron (17-50) which are optically superior throughout in addition to allowing brighter maximum appertures. The Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 is also easily a match for the R1 lens in it's range.

That said, the R1 is a great value for what it is. And it would make a fine second camera for many DSLR owners, or a good choice as well for a beginner looking for a DSLR like camera to learn with.

But if, in order to decide to finally buy it, you really need to convince yourself that it's got a completely flawless lens made by Carl Zeis (actual made in a Sony factory but with the Zeis name put on it) that's really worth thousands, than please go ahead and convince yourself! Just buy the camera!

kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2006, 12:41 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

Hmm my last post is in the wrong place.
At the top of the thread instead of at the end. How'd I do that?


kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2006, 2:10 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 248
Default

rodo wrote: No one know !
Quote:
Can any body please offer there opinion on a fast Jpeg camera i , ie not raw . Im thinking more of a prosumer or dslr type that shoots good jpegs, It has been said the Sony R1 i have is nota fast jpeg camera, only slow i presume they mean and only good with raw , Have i made a mistake buying the R1? a fast good jpeg camera is what i thought i was buying and what i think i need , i didnt get a dslr because i was told raw was needed with these types ,and i dont want to mess around with raw no time, any models i should have bought insted im very dissapointed if the R1 can only shoot good stuff in raw though the jpegs lookok from the R1 not used it much though yet only two weeks oldOh and its not too slow i think ? any advice what im missing .my other camera is a Panasonic FZ 20 great jpegs i think.:-?
rodo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2006, 5:26 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

What do you mean by fast??? Do you need a fst burst rate?? What kind of subjects are you shooting?? Also, you've only had the camera two weeks. I would give it more of a chance. Get used to it, play around with it. Any camera you choose will have some compromises.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2006, 7:01 PM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'm confused as to what you're finding lacking.

The jpeg images from the DSC-R1 are a bit more processed than you'd get from some DSLR models.

IOW, you'd probably need to spend some time tweaking contrast, saturation and more from a DSLR for equivalent results.

If you don't like the look of the jpeg images, you can dial back contrast, sharpening and saturation a bit for more neutral results (or increase these values for even more punch). Many users prefer images that have more "punch" directly from the camera. It's a matter of preference.

As for speed, it's not going to be in the same class as some of the DSLR models around. You're limited to a 3 shot burst with the R1. It depends on what you're shooting if you really need something faster or not.

If you decide to move to a DSLR, keep in mind that it's going to cost you more for equivalent lens quality.

The lens on the DSC-R1 has the same angle of view that a 24-120mm lens would have on a 35mm camera, and it would be hard to match it in a single lens.

Sony has a lens coming out that would work on KM or Sony DSLR models that provides the same angle of view (which would require a 16-80mm lens on a DSLR like these). But, the lens by itself is probably going to sell for what you can buy an R1 for now.

We'll have to wait until it's shipping for reports on it's quality.

Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2006, 8:04 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

I agree with JimC, the lens of that Sony DSC-R1 is just excellent...(If therewas another word above this, I'llbe usingit)

I want to emphasize that you JUST CANNOT get a lens with that kind of quality and reach for your dSLR WITHOUT spending above $1000 at least!

Just now and a few days ago, I have been literally cracking my head over this R1 debate issue..."What can I do with $1000 (even with just a Nikon D50) to be able to match that lens on the R1???"; I still have not found an answer yet...But I DO know that I have been researching lenses these pass few dayslike mad, and with so far no success.
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2006, 8:08 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Find me a lens that can match the one on the R1 at least in optical quality.
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2006, 8:38 PM   #9
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

It depends on what you want to shoot.

You may not need to try and match the focal range of the DSC-R1 in a single lens. Also, you tend to get into "splitting hairs" with image quality between lenses at typical viewing and print sizes. It can take a trained eye to even see the difference between many lenses in better conditions.

A DSLR gives you the flexibility of changing lenses to better meet your needs, and you've got many lenses to choose from for most popular camera mounts (since they've been around for a long time, with lenses from the camera manufacturers, as well as third party manufacturers like Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Cosina/Vivitar and more).

For what I shoot more often, the focal range of the R1 would be about right. I'd personally want brighter lenses available for low light use without a flash (that's where primes come in). Also, if you wanted a great camera for sports, it would not make a good choice, as it's focal range would be limiting.

A DSLR also gives you the option of brighter lenses. For example, a bright 50mm f/1.8 lens is available in popular camera mounts like Nikon and Canon for around $100. It's about 4 times as bright as you'd have using the lens on the DSC-R1 at an equivalent focal length. You can also get longer lenses for a DSLR, if you need them.

There are pros and cons to any system. But, from a "bang for the buck" perspective, the DSC-R1 is a very good deal for what it does. You'll need to decide if it's limiting for the types of photos you like to shoot more often.

Any camera choice is a compromise.



JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2006, 8:46 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

I don't know, but I cannot find a zoom as good that can provide 24 mm wide angle F/2.8 on any APS-C dSLR cameras...I also cannot find a good quality lens that can provide that range of 24 - 120 mm on any APS-C dSLR cameras as well.

The lens of the R1 also doesn't have anylight fall off problems, C.A. problems, purple fringing issues, and distortion issues as well. (There is only very little purple fringing and distortions...very little.)

BTW, ofcouse a prime lens can be better in quality and large aperture(s), but no matter what;it remains only a prime lens...and that's it. (It is also not surprisingthat a prime lens canbe more expensive to much more expensive...whether including your dSLR body cost or just the prime lens alone.) But no matter what, it only satisfies ONE focal length.
BenjaminXYZ 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 11:36 PM.