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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 4, 2006, 8:43 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

fdi-

That is a nice selection of photos from the Canon A-700 IS. However, you will notice when looking closely that there is motion blur in several photos. The Canon A-70IS is a great camera. However, what it lacks IMHO is the real ability to use high ISO settings without showing much noise.

That is where the Fuji F-20 or F-30 really shine. They can use those high ISO's without showing much noise.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2006, 9:01 PM   #12
fdi
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6
Default

Are you referring to 0156 and 0160? Motion blur is not caused by high ISO or anything to do with the sensor. It is caused by to slow a shutter speed to freeze the motion. In this case, 0160 was 1/3 second and 0156 was a 1/2 second exposure. Long exposure time will also add to the same type of noise that high ISO causes. Those two pictures were also shot at 800 ISO in addition to being extremely long exposures. They do have noise, which I did not spend the time to try to get rid of, and it appears to be comparable to my D60, which is also not the best in that regard since it is old technology now. I am not sure about the Fuji line. I stuck with Canon on the point n shoot out of convenience since all my other gear is Canon.



[size=3][font="Times New Roman"]Mark [color=white]mtclimber wrote: [/b]
Quote:
fdi-

That is a nice selection of photos from the Canon A-700 IS. However, you will notice when looking closely that there is motion blur in several photos. The Canon A-70IS is a great camera. However, what it lacks IMHO is the real ability to use high ISO settings without showing much noise.

That is where the Fuji F-20 or F-30 really shine. They can use those high ISO's without showing much noise.

MT/Sarah
fdi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2006, 9:07 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

fdi-

I understand exactly what caused the motion blur as I am a professional Digital Camera Instructor. All I was saying was that by using a high ISO setting that is available on the Fuji F-20 and F-30, you geta small convenient, that is able to use higher than ISO 800 settings with even less noise than in your posted images. I apologize, if I confused the issue.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2006, 9:19 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
flippedgazelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 930
Default

fdi, those are some really nice pics. My favorite is 229.

I believe what MT means - and please correct me if I am wrong, Sarah - is that if you had used a camera that does well at high ISO, you could have used ISO 1600 (for example) and a briefer exposure.

EDIT: heh, this is what happens when you walk away for a few minutes while replying to a message.
flippedgazelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2006, 9:45 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

You are exactly correct, flipped gazelle-

Here is a case where a high ISO setting greatly facilitated stopping fast action in a sporting event. This was taken by the Fuji S-6000fd camera. The camera is known as the S-6500 overseas. Here in the USA the S-6000sells for$US 374.00.

MT/Sarah
Attached Images
 
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2006, 10:37 PM   #16
fdi
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6
Default

Oh! Yes I agree that 1600 ISO would be nice. I did not think about that since in the case of the two shots I was talking about, they were night shots and 1600 was not going to be enough to freeze any action. I mostly use my point n shoot on trips where I am seldom real worried about stop action so in my case I don't miss it as much as someone else might. Thanks for the complement on 229. That is my favorite too. It was a quick snap shot while wating fora shuttle bus to pick me up after dog sleding. I would have never brought my SLR there without knowing in advance that scene was there. Fortunetly I had the PnS in my pocket.



[size=3][font="Times New Roman"][color=white]Mark flippedgazelle wrote: [/b]

Quote:
fdi, those are some really nice pics. My favorite is 229.

I believe what MT means - and please correct me if I am wrong, Sarah - is that if you had used a camera that does well at high ISO, you could have used ISO 1600 (for example) and a briefer exposure.

EDIT: heh, this is what happens when you walk away for a few minutes while replying to a message.
fdi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 5:47 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 448
Default

I am not so enthusastic about the high iso capabilities of the Fuji 6500fd. Sarah's nice picture has been downsized quite a bit and if you downsize so much, then any camera with heavy noise reduction looks fine.
Let me explain this with another Fuji 6500 fd shot with iso 800. Downsized it looks fine (click on the tumbnail):

However at full resolution, you see that the noise reduction has whiped out a lot of detail (click again on the thumbnail):

The Fuji 6500fd has better image quality than the A710, because it has a larger sensor. But it also a much larger camera. My Konica Minolta A200 has an even larger sensor, but is actually smaller than the Fuji 6500fd, because its zoom range is smaller at the tele end and as far as image quality is concerned it is superior over the Fuji.
kassandro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 9:39 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
flippedgazelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 930
Default

Kassandro, I know exactly what you mean when mention that downsizing a noisy pic makes it look much better! I find it very annoying when a photo review web site does this.

With the Fuji 6500fd, I would should high ISO's RAW, which should help minimize "detail destruction".

fdi, I was looking in another of your galleries, and found "Mississippi_Blues_Man". What an absolutely wonderful photo!
flippedgazelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 10:04 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Kassandro-

I am doing exactly what Chris (flipped gazelle) wrote about: I am shooting mostly in RAW to get better photos, and it works nicely. However, when helping users here on the Forum I discuss and show .jpeg photos.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 10:08 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

fdi-

I surely do agree with flipped gazelle, the Mississippi Blue Man is very nice indeed. It dates back to 2002, what camera were you using then? The Canon A-700 IS had not been released. Great galleries!

MT/Sarah
mtclimber 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 12:59 AM.