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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 28, 2007, 12:05 PM   #31
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 978
Default

That's quite a nice list and lots of information compiled by Ken.

Ihave the S9100. I like it. However, I think the S6000fd is better than it at higher ISO's and probably significantly better than the other ultrazooms listed. If low light shots at less than full zoom are intended, it might be at the top of your digicam list.
robbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2007, 1:24 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Portraits, Landscapes, Children, Light-weight, Low-cost & possibly able to handle low light photography as that may interest you. I think that was your shopping list ?

Ken made some good suggestions above - as did one or two others - mentioning that maybe a more advanced digicam was what you may need.

Let me offer another suggestion that I've been hands-on with: Olympus SP550UZ

7.1 MP
US$450 - 499
4.3" x 3.1" x 3.1" (should fit your hands well)
28 - 504mm (x18 and f2.8 - 4.5 means great for your landscape photography & portraits. Add one of two conversion lens to widen or lengthen (up to 850mm) :?
365g - Lightweight
ca 600 shot on 2700mAh (class leading)
AF Assist lamp (low-light help)
IS (Image Stabilisation) (low light help)
10 x ISO settings covering 50 thru 5000 (yes really ! At 5000 it drops to 3 MP and probably the noise will obscur the photo - still it's there to be used in an emergency :O
20 different image resolutions (inc. 3 Raw plus jpeg+raw) (+ in-camera editing of Jpeg & Raw)
2.5" LCD and EVF - both auto adjusting
Full Manual Mode - bulb to 8 mins (however fastest shutter is only 1/2000)
pre-capture (5 frames) and up to 7 fps burst rate for 15 frames (really ! However that's at a lower resolution of 3 mp - still great for the children's & dog's action photos)/ It actually does 15fps at 1.2 MP but not so great for prints although OK for emailing.
AF Predict (good for moving children)
Multiple WB modes (inc. custom) and also WB compensation (adjust red / blue)
20+ scene modes (inc. 2 x underwater)
Underwater housing available
Movie mode (30fps 640 x 480)
Histograms
and so on and so on, there are many more features.

Obviously none of the features of the 550 on their own will match the equivilant feature on a DSLR, but it is such a feature packed package, that covers all your bases, so it may be just what you are looking for.


Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2007, 1:30 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
DigitalGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 696
Default

Hmm.. Hi guys again!

I have read very carefully what you are saying.. I have another question to ask now..

First I d like to thank Ken for the list sent for to explore.. I ll do this ASAP..

The question is about ehmm.. well.. dSLR or another compact digicam?

TCav has been keeping up saying that I dont need a dSLR.. I need another compact digicam.. I dont understand the reason - why?

An acquiring a dSLR I am considering as the best way to impove my skills and knowledge in photography, with a posibility to add new features - lenses etc. (as soon I am ready for more). I have posted to this forum only a few pictures, which do not describe all my interests at all..

So - Why don't I need a dSLR and why it should be enough with another compact digicam?

I hope someone is going to clear out this mess from my head, which I can feel growing..

Oh.. while I was writing.. there is one more thing to read.. - from a Frogfish.. ok.. reading.
DigitalGal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2007, 1:55 PM   #34
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I believe the recommendation to stay with a digicam is based upon your repeated assertions the solution MUST BE LIGHT. LIGHT and DSLR aren't necessarily associated together. Now, light is a relative thing - so it's open to interpretation how LIGHT you need the solution to be.

You should also realize that the lenses used add significantly to the weight of a DSLR. A DSLR with 50mm lens has a much different weight than a DSLR with a 70-200 2.8 lens on it. So, I think it is this requirement - a light solution which has him spooked. And for good reason - a camera is only good if you're willing to use it. Back in the film days I eventually abandoned my film SLR and just stuck with a zoom film camera because I didn't want to carry around an SLR and lenses - too much trouble. Now I've come full circle and want/require the quality a DSLR can provide but I'm also willing to incur the penalty of bigger camera and more gear to carry around.

So - if you could give a little more precise definition of 'light' I think that would help. How heavy are you willing to incur?
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2007, 2:32 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
DigitalGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 696
Default



Well.. Let's say, I am ready to grow up some muscles too (this can be included in the package of skills I am going to develop in me.. .. )

I have tried a Nikon 50D with a kit lens (18-55mm) on - this is a weight which I can handle without a trouble.. and the size is quite ok also..

After all I am not a tiny one.. my hands are quite big.. only consideration has been that until now I havent been using tripod in any light situations.. but since I have it already.. no problems to use it when needed.. compact digicam (my sony is not a small one - when i bought it I was looking for one not too small actually, to feel it in hand) - i use to put in my handbag..

So my 'lightweight'can be equal to Nikon 50D (40D is even lighter).. and if I ll decide to get one of these I have to consider another lens.. this is what I understood already.. up to 200mm zoom.. I dont believe I ll need ever more..
[line][line][line]Thank you so far sharing your experience and knowledge!


PS. In addition I have got also Olympus C-4000 ZOOM digicam to play with.. I have made just a few shots last week.. but I am going to explore it more.. I am bored a bit with mine..

Here are those images.. made without any knowledge about this cam.. one is selfportrait.. also another one.. then there is unexpected shot of my kids.. and a few more on my terrasse..
[line]
[line][line]


Out of focus totally.. but I saw them and just grabbed the cam as it was.. no time for settings..[line][line][line]
[line][line]This one is a bit modified.. I do this rarely, only for fun..
DigitalGal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2007, 2:40 PM   #36
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

DigitalGal,

Since the weight of a D50 is acceptable I would suggest you stick with the plan to get a DSLR. I don't think you'll ultimately be happy until you do have one. So if cost/weight are not an issue there is no reason for your stated requirements to stick with a digicam solution. Now you just need to re-read the discussions regarding which DSLR to go with :G
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2007, 2:57 PM   #37
Senior Member
 
DigitalGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 696
Default

Yes, John! You are abxolutely right! I really won't stop until I'll get a dSLR. Because I rthink the images you can get with any of them are much more interesting than those with compact digicams.. With mine, for example, I am not able to get a sufficient DOF.. and when I ll have one, I have to be ready to use it.. reading reading reading is a solution..

Thank you! Have a great day!
DigitalGal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2007, 3:33 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
DigitalGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 696
Default

Ken.. I have read a review of Olympus E-400 here:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/digita...ympus-E-400/p1


Very interesting option. And since I dont have any lenses, I don't have to worry about which camera is going to be my 1st dSLR.. no compability issues..

The lens of Olympus OM10 (which I could use, but I find this too expensive for learning purposes).. I love digicams.. and it is not going to fit anyway..
DigitalGal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2007, 3:42 PM   #39
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

DigitalGal wrote:
Quote:
Very interesting option. And since I dont have any lenses, I don't have to worry about which camera is going to be my 1st dSLR.. no compability issues..
Compatibility is only part of it. The other part is - when you want to buy a lens now or a year from now or 2 years from now, does the system have the lens you need available. There have been a lot of threads lately discussing this issue - and I think Ken had a nice summary in another thread. But, one of the drawbacks to Olympus is there aren't many lenses out there that autofocus with their DSLRs. Whereas with Nikon & Canon and to a lesser extent Pentax you have a vast array of THEIR lenses to choose from PLUS third party lenses from Sigma/Tamron/Tokina. With Olympus, all those lenses aren't available to you a year from now when you want to buy a new lens. That's what you have to balance against their low price point and exceptional kit lenses
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2007, 5:55 PM   #40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

D.G:
I'll point out that I'm not sure I trust the "trusted reviews" site on the issue of high ISO noise. The samples they posted are all crops of a well lit, and well exposed door. This doesn't show the noise problems that tend to occur in more poorly exposed shadow areas, and the natural graininess of the wood may hide a bit of the grain as well.

For more reviews look here:
http://www.dcviews.com/_olympus/e400.htm

Here's a couple which I think provide a more balanced view:
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ol...00/page6.shtml
http://www.ephotozine.com/equipment/...fm?test_id=490

The CAmeralabs review provides a nice summary of the differences with the Canon 400D:
"The Canon EOS 400D / XTi is already the best-selling 10 Megapixel DSLR and arguably the E-400's biggest rival. Interestingly though, two of the aspects the 400D / XTi sells itself on – compact size and anti-dust – are both bettered by the Olympus. The 400D / XTi may also offer a wide variety of anti-dust options, but in our tests they were less effective the E-400. The Olympus body is also noticeably smaller than the 400D without compromising comfort. The E-400's kit lens is additionally superior in many optical respects, and unlike the Canon kit, features internal focusing and a lens hood.

So far it sounds like the E-400's winning hands down, but the Canon 400D / XTi delivers lower apparent noise, especially at higher sensitivities and fractionally out-resolves it in technical charts; the view through the viewfinder is also wider. So if you demand silky-smooth JPEGs out of the camera at high sensitivities and prefer a bigger grip to wrap your fingers around, go for the Canon. Crucially, the 400D / XTi is also working out cheaper from internet dealers."

All of the four-thirds lenses will autofocus. The biggest problem with the lineup is the lack of fast prime lenses for more challenging lighting conditions. You can only use older manual focus prime lenses with an adaptor. The Sigma 30mm f1.4 I mentioned earlier may be all you need to adress this.

That tradeoff may be worth your while. For the subjects you so far have expressed an interest in shooting you would do well with the Olympus. And it is about 20% lighter than the XT when loaded with a lens. And the second kit lens, the 40-150, also is very light at only about 220g, and with the 2X factor provides a 80-300mm equivalent zoom range.

Also keep an eye out for new models introduced next week. It is rumoured that Olympus might intoduce in-body stabilization, but I think that might be only in a larger higher priced model. There is a good chance however, that the E-400 replacement might get "live view" - the ability to use the LCD for composing shots. This would be very useful for your macro shots, as it allows you to fine tune the manual focus more easily (using the tripod is also recommended).

The Canon 400D in contrast would be more versatile in challenging lighting conditions. It would easily beat the Olympus in situations like shooting indoor sports, or concert and theatre type shots without flash. The combination of a more usable ISO 1600 and fast prime lenses will give a notable advantage there. Autofocus may be quicker as well.


kenbalbari 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 3:26 AM.