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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 5, 2006, 1:24 PM   #41
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I agree - not bad for under $400. But not even close to the same league as a DSLR can provide. I just disagree with your statement above that the digicam is capable of the same shot. it's not.

It's perfectly OK to say this is the quality you're after in a camera - it's why I always encourage people to seek out actual photos of the same type of thing they want to shoot with the gear being recommended.

I have a very open mind and don't try to push people towards a DSLR. But I also object to statements like the one above indicating the digicam was capable of producing the same quality shot. So, here's a shot with a DSLR and good lens. Think the shots you posted here are the same quality? Again, nothing wrong with not wanting to spend the money - but don't mislead people into thinking they'll get more than they really will:





So, back to the original question - NO, the digicam is not going to take a shot like that surf shot. You can get shots like the ones posted by Sarah - and that may be good enough - but you won't get shots like the surfer - not if the exif is correct and it was taken with a 600mm lens


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 1:43 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

John-

You are very correct. No digicam will consistently produce the results that come from DSLR cameras as a whole. The only real issue is this: look, we can get you some very nice, but not perfect results with an under $US 400.00, are those photos acceptable to you?

If the compromise is acceptable to the inquirer, then we have found a very good match. If you want better results, then perhaps you should consider a larger investment in a DSLR kind of camera.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 2:03 PM   #43
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 38
Default

I just got back from the camera shop. I was able to play with a d50, d80, k100d, H5, and s5200. After spending about 1-2 hours in the shop playing with all of the cameras I favored the Pentax k100d the most. It does SD memory cards which I have a few 2GB cards, takes AA batteries which I have plenty of 2700 rechargables, feels great in my hands, not too complicated but complicated enough that I have tons of room to learn. I tried a 18-55 and a 50-200 lens. Loved both of them but do they make a 18-200 lens? I saw that Sony had one at the camera shop but it would not fit the Pentax.

I am pretty sure I am going to pickup the K100D. I loved how I could take pcitures of cars driving by without any blur. I could take several pictures per second. The auto focus works very well compared to what I have used in the past. Really the only thing that I would prefer is if the k100d was a higher megapixel, but people say that unless your printing fairly large prints, it wont matter.

The D50 was my second favorite. Handling the ultrazooms after handling the DSLR made me feel like I was using a kids camera. It was night and day difference. The DSLR just felt solid and did what I wanted them too do.
Teecee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 2:31 PM   #44
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Well, TC-

The ultimate decision regarding the camera of your choice and the expense involved lies with you. We, have, in this discussion, just attempted to show all of the options available to you.

The Pentax K100D with the Pentax 18-55mm kit lens and the addition of the Pentax 50-200mm lens is an excellent package. However, you must keep in mind that these two lenses while being very good in quality, are not lenses with wide apertures. Thus they may hamper your existing light or low light level shooting, due to the fact that you may not be able to attain the faster shutter speeds you might desire to completely stop all action.

I own and use extensively both the Pentax K100D and the Nikon D-50. I honestly believe the SR feature of the Pentax pushes the camera ahead of the D-50. Third party 18-200mm lenses are available from both Tamron and Sigma. However, once again, they are not wide aperture lenses. Therefore, you might want to add a fast, wide aperture prime lens such as the Pentax 50mm F 1.4 or F 1.7.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 3:03 PM   #45
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 38
Default

Sarah,

Could you go into more detail about wide aperture lens and the F1.4 and F1.7? Maybe just steer me to a website that explains this stuff. Would a photography class teach me how to properly use a DSLR to get the best results?

I would prefer to have a really good all purpose lens. Then maybe get another lens or two for certain things. I loved the zoom of the 50-200mm lens but I would like to zoom out a bit more like the 18-55mm.
Teecee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 3:32 PM   #46
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Teecee,

Sarah/mt is right that a P&S is often all that is needed and should suffice in many situations. I have one myself that I carry everywhere with me, because it's not convenient to carry the SLR all the time.

But 95% of the shots of my daughter that I want to keep for posterity were taken with the SLR and all the advantages it confers. Better low-light performance, shallower DOF, better flash performance, better lenses both wide-angle and telephoto, etc, etc, etc.

The thing is that for you it will not simply be about the picture quality either, you are a person for whom technological complexity is interesting in itself. The DSLR will be far more rewarding in that respect. You are also not going to be afraid of learning to shoot in RAW format and get the best out of processing your images, you are not afraid of computers. So a significant number of the "disadvantages" of an SLR that are true for some people are not true for you.

This is why you want a DSLR.

#1. ISO 800 F1.8 28MM (No noise reduction).




#2. 50MM lens, F1.8




#3. Defocussed background even at f5.6 & 61mm focal length




#4. Defocussed background at f8, 300mm lens.



#5. Another ISO 800 f1.8 28mm lens. (no noise reduction)



All of the above photos have made very nice 8"x12" prints, and none of them could have been taken with a P&S.


peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 4:32 PM   #47
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

TC-

Peripatetic has certainly make aexcellent case for fast wide aperture zoom and prime lenses. His photos are wonderful and have in every instance, truly captured the moment with his unque series of photos of his very beautiful daughter.

Let take a few moments to explore why bright/wide aperture prime lenses are both important and work so very well. The terms "bright" or "wide aperture" are used to describe lenses that have maximum apertures as wide traditionally as F 1.4, F 1.7, or F1.8. When those lensesare wide open, they let in the very most light for your camera to utilize, and because they let in substantially MORE LIGHT than lenses with a F 2.8 or F 3.5 as their brightest aperture, they can give you much higher shutter speeds in low light level shooting conditions.

The so called "good, all purpose" lenses really are not all purpose lenses at all, due to their inability to transmit enough light to your DSLR camerauder certain low light level shooting conditions. The most common lenses that fall into the "good, all purpose category are the 18-200mm lenses. Those lenses will do quite wellunder good outdoor lighting conditions. However, where those lensesbegin to fail as good, all purpose lenses,n is when the light levels fallin your proposed photo enviornment. Then those "good, all purpose lenses" are sorely challenged. It would be much more definitive to call these lenses, "good, all purpose lenses under good to excellent outdoor light" lenses.

Therefore, to overcome the negative qualities of these good, all purpose lenses, it is wise to carry a good prime lens (or several)in your kit. Prime lenses do NOT zoom, they only haveONE focal length. And their maximum (brightest) apertures are usually F 1.4, F 1.7, or F 1.8 so they can get more light to your camera and use higher shutter speeds, when you encounter a low light level shooting circumstances such as we have seen demonstrated so very clearly in Peripatetic's posted photos. keep in mind as well that prime lenses have a very shallow DOF, sometimes measuered in just inches.

When you use a DSLR camera in widely varying lighting conditions, you have to have the necessary lenses to cope expertly with whatever lighting conditions you choose to shoot your photos in, day in and day out.

MT/Sarah

mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 4:46 PM   #48
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Teecee wrote:
Quote:
I am pretty sure I am going to pickup the K100D. I loved how I could take pcitures of cars driving by without any blur. I could take several pictures per second. The auto focus works very well compared to what I have used in the past. Really the only thing that I would prefer is if the k100d was a higher megapixel, but people say that unless your printing fairly large prints, it wont matter.
To give you a demonstration to back up what others say about not needing more than the 6 mp of the K100D, here are two pictures. I was out evaluating 2 very similar 50mm lenses, a 1.7 and a 1.4, I really should sell one of them now that my hubby bought me a Pentax K10D for Christmas. The pictures aren't interesting (looking for sharpness mostly,) but theyconvinced me that at this aperture setting (2.8 -they are both manual lenses)there is no difference between them. This is the full-frame picture (no cropping), all I did was reduce the size to post them here.

One of the pictures was taken with the 6 mp K100D and one was taken with the 10 mp K10D.The focus wasn't at the same point, and the white balance is slightly different so you can tell theyaren't the same picture. Can you tell just by looking at them which was taken by the 6 mp camera and which one by the 10 mp camera? The exif information is still there.

1.7:



1.4:



This isn't quite the same thing as printing a 10 mp file and a 6 mp file, but gives you the idea.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 4:58 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

OK, Harriet-

I am with you on this one. Based on my computer screen, photo#1 is from the K10D, and photo #2 is from the K100D. The basis of my judgement was the upper rght hand corner of the photos.

That is my shot at it. Please be sure to tell us the answer.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2006, 5:13 PM   #50
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 38
Default

mtclimber wrote:
Quote:
TC-

Peripatetic has certainly make aexcellent case for fast wide aperture zoom and prime lenses. His photos are wonderful and have in every instance, truly captured the moment with his unque series of photos.

Let take a few moments to explore why bright/wide aperture prime lenses are both important and work so very well. The terms "bright" or "wide aperture" are used to describe lenses that have apertures as wide traditionally as F 1.4, F 1.7, or F1.8. When those lensesare wide open, they let in the very most light for your camera to utilize, and because they let in substantially MORE LIGHT than lenses with a F 2.8 or F 3.5 as their brightest aperture, they can give you much highest shutter speeds in low light level shooting conditions.

The so called "good, all purpose" lenses really are really not all purpose lenses at all, due to their inability to transmit enough light to your DSLR camera in certain low light level shooting. The most common lenses that fall into the "good, all purpose category are the 18-200mm lenses. Those lenses will do quite wellunder good outdoor light conditions. However, where those lensesbegin to fail as good, all purpose lenses is when the light levels fallin your proposed photo enviornment. The they are sorely challenged. It would be much more definitive to call these lenses, "good, all purpose lenses under good to excellent outdoor light" lenses.

Therefore, to overcome the negative qualities of these good, all purpose lenses, it is wise to carry a good prime lens (or several)in your kit. Prime lenses do NOT zoom, they only haveONE focal length. And their maximum (brightest) apertures are usually F 1.4, F 1.7, or F 1.8 so they can get more light to your camera and use higher shutter speeds, when you encounter a low light level shooting circumstances such as we have seen demonstrated so very clearly in Peripatetic's posted photos.

MT/Sarah
Hmmm. That all makes sense but I dont want to have to carry several lens with me for the average day. I doubt I will be going out in the woods just to take pictures of bugs and flowers, atleast not yet. What sort of lens should I get for everyday pictures around the house, inside or outside the house? I can handle having 1 lens on the camera and 1 or 2 more lens in the bag but I dont want to carry around my camera luggage if you know what I mean. Does this make sense? I hope I am not being too picky.
Teecee 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 3:46 PM.