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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 26, 2007, 9:31 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Davenport, IA
Posts: 2,093
Default

fldspringer wrote:
Quote:
Point and shoot cameras have two "lags" to contend with. The shutter lag is one, but the one that drives me nuts is the video lag for the viewfinder.
I have not observed video lag usingmy Kodak Z612. I normally use the EVF rather than LCD. My original problem was that by default the Z612 show the just taken image for 5 sec. after exposure which really delays repeat shots. Needless to say I switched that feature off after the first set of test shots.
ac.smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 10:31 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

EVF lag runs about 1/10 second. It won't be a huge factor if the subject isn't moving rapidly such as a child on a bike or a dog running. The info in the EVF is 1/10 second old and if your panning as a child is riding past on a bike, the photo will not be as you thought it would be. I had better luck holding the camera with both hands, arms at full extention and ignoring the display altogether when panning.

The Olympus I shoot with has no stabilization. I tend to shoot with very fast shutter in daylight with fast moving subjects. In those situations it hasn't been a problem. Interior existing light photography is another story. You have to be careful how you release the shutter. Other manufacturers do have stabilization. Rumor has it that Oly will anounce it Mar 5.

Below is a photo that I feel would be nearly impossibe with a point and shoot type camera because of the viewfinder lag. When I take the photo, I know the composition and where the bird will be in the photo without having to see the display of the photo.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/399308322/

Greg
fldspringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 11:15 AM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5
Default

Awesome photo, Greg! I wondered if fldspringer = Field Springers, and see that it does. I really like #220742, also. Beautiful dogs -- great to see someone using all that energy as it was meant to be used!

I can see how 1/20th of a second would have made a huge difference in the ability to get dog and bird in the same frame and still be close enough to have any detail. I do have that problem A LOT. The attached was a spontaneous eruption and I was lucky to get anything on it at all.

What lens were you using on these shots, i.e. how far away are you from the subject? These would appear to be in direct contrast with what we call my "footstool" pictures: "Look, I got this great picture of wild turkeys!" and all you can see is what might be a collection of brown footstools out in the field. My livestock and larger game pictures are locally referred to as "the pommel horse collection," i.e. four legs with a brown body of some sort. Fast shutter and big zoom -- I'm droolin', here.


Attached Images
 
prairillon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 12:49 PM   #14
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

OK,

First off there is no doubt the responsiveness of a DSLR (start up time, focus time, shutter lag and tracking ability) are going to be much better than the superzooms. You also have the benefit of shallow DOF because of the larger sensor:









And yes the other attributes allow for much better capture of action:



BUT, and this is a big BUT - you're talking a lot more expense to go with a DSLR. Want the reach of a superzoom? Then you're looking at a 300mm lens to mount on a DSLR. A good quality consumer 300mm zoom lens is around $550 (for say the Canon or Nikon 70-300 - both of which have IS/VR).

If you want good action performance that means the lens should have a fast focus motor in it - like Canon's USM or Sigma's HSM. So, I would warn you that buying a DSLR with kit lens - you're not going to get as much reach and any telephoto lens included in a kit is likely to be fairly low in quality. So, you're looking at spending quite a bit more money to get a half-way decent telephoto lens to compliment the benefits the camer body provdes.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 1:18 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

The photo I linked to was taken at 60mm. The Olympus 4/3 sensor has a 2x multiplier so its 120mm in 35mm equivalent. The photo you picked out was taken at the full reach of that lens of 150mm (300mm equiv) and is not cropped.

The lens is one of the kit lenses is the 40-150 f3.5-f4.5 and is might be the best kit lens available in the entry level DSLRs. To be honest it rarely comes off my camera.

A better example of the real sharpness of the same lens at its near end :

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne...947&size=l

ant at its 150mm limit (300mm equiv) wide open iso400 (about as bad as it gets):

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne...285&size=l

Also enjoyed your photo. Nice to be there when special things happen.

Greg


fldspringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 3:26 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

JohnG,

While I think anyone knows you don't get a $800 lens as a kit lens in a $650 camera kit. That said, not all kit lenses are created equal. I've tried supplying information in the form of photos taken with the camera to give some idea as to what can be done with the camera.

The lense used IS a kit lens and OLY makes far better. On the other hand, the 40-150mm f3.5-4.5 does quite well and does reach 80-300mm in 35mm terms. It isn't known as the fastest in the autofocus arena, but I'm satisfied with what I can do here too. The two pics are of my boy Dox as he is running full speed toward me.

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne...947&size=l

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8350892...7594523802947/

$650 will buy the camera and the lens that all these photos were taken with (40-150mm) and a 14-45mm f3.5-5.6 lens. Thats a 35mm range of 28-300mm or as known as 10x zoom range. Keep in mind that the results are from a rookie too.

By the way, NICE pics!

Greg


fldspringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 3:42 PM   #17
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Greg - not saying the oly lenses are bad. I agree, they're probably the best kit lenses offered. But superzooms are up to 12x - I merely pointed out that to get the same range you would need a 300mm lens on a Canon/Nikon/Pentax or 200mm on an oly. So, yes the lens you mentioned produces good images - for 300mm equiv. But if you want the same reach - 400mm equiv then the lens isn't long enough.

So it all depends what the OP believes is an acceptable amount of reach. "More Reach" is certainly open to interpretation.

Also remember, while the 2x crop factor of the oly bodies works for getting more reach you pay the prrice of the smaller sensor when you have to use higher ISOs (compared to Canon, Nikon and Pentax). So, as the old adage goes - you don't get something for nothing. And should the buyer wish to venture beyond the kit lenses in the future, the Oly system has a very small selection of AF lenses both OEM and 3rd party( a recent article in PC Photo indicated Oly has 16 lenses in their current new-market offering compared to 40 for Nikon and 60 for Canon - none of which includes all the 3rd party lenses available for Canon or Nikon and to a lesser extent Pentax). So, while you get a better kit lens with the camera you have a much more limited system to grow beyond the kit lens. It may not be important to the OP - but it's why I suggest looking at the big picture when buying a DSLR. It's perfectly valid to say - no I will never want another lens - the 2 kit lenses are all I'll ever need. And I think there is a small subset of users that fall into this category. Now compare that to canon say - that has a pretty pathetic kit lens by comparison. You have a lot more options to buy both Canon and third party telephoto lenses but it'll cost you more. So you don't get as much bang-for-the-buck out of a canon kit but you get a more versatile system. It's why there are several manufacturers in DSLR now - each has their pros and cons.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 4:56 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

I agree that every system has its advantages and disadvantages. Olympus introduced its first 4/3 camera in 2003 as a brand new, start from scratch system. Four years later there are 14 lenses manufactured by them and they are releasing them in a fairly intelegent manner. Olympus glass has a reputation of being without peer at the various price points. I would encourage anyone to examine what is available to determine if there is room to expand in the future. My problem isn't choices. Its resources to buy the ones I really want.

http://www.olympusamerica.com/e1/zuiko_roadmap_eng.pdf

Noise is an issue but in comparison to what? A superzoom? I included an ISO400 pic taken on an overcast day and there is noise in it. Its the "bad as it gets" pic taken at 150mm wide open. I find ISO800 usable, but thats the limit with the e500 camera as far as I'm concerned. From my understanding, the E400 is about a stop better, but I can't confirm that since the camera isn't available in the USA. I want a consumer to shop and compare systems to find what fits. You put a bunch of photos up to show what a DSLR can do, but warned of the cost. The shot with the eagle is taken with what? $3000 lens, $3000 body?

I agree that upgrading the DSLR is more common than living the kit lenses until the cam dies. For the consumer considering an upgrade from the point and shoot, the DSLR offers a more capable, though less convienent alternative. I mentioned the one I purchased. If such a person chooses it based on their criteria, I'd say its a good choice. If they choose another because it suits them better, that's a good choice also. My post was to show an alternative to the point and shoot that may or may not be better suited to the consumer and I supplied the results I was getting for visual evidence.

I showed what $650 can do so they could compare. I don't need 60 lenses to choose from. I warned the fever to upgrade will bite. You showed how bad that fever can get:-)
fldspringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 6:15 PM   #19
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Shot with eagle was with $1200 camera and $1600 lens. But you also help bolster my point - olympus glass can get pretty pricey. That's why having selections from third party manufacturers like Sigma, Tamron and Tokina is a bonus. When I needed a longer zoom for my sports photography I had to choose between Canon's $4000 300mm 2.8 lens and sigma's 120-300 2.8 lens. If I owned an Olympus that 300mm 2.8 lens would not have been an option.

Also a number of oem and third party lenses (across multiple price levels) to get a wide angle lens (24-26mm equiv). What are your choices in Oly if you want wide angle? That's my point . And you're right OLy will have better noise performance than a superzoom - just worse than other DSLRs. So that's the trade-off for such a low price point. So while the initial low price point is nice it can be difficult or very expensive to get lenses you need later because you don't have several lenses to choose from at a given focal length - there's no competition (or little anyway - some are producing 4:3 lenses now). I merely point this out because I think it's only part of the story to tout initial price point when buying into a DSLR system. It's only one factor. Nothing wrong with looking at all these other factors and still deciding Oly is the system for you - but at least the OP has some additional info about pros/cons of OLY and as I mentioned other DSLR systems as well.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 8:38 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,241
Default

You were a bit more careful in your choice of "ya but what about this lens" than you were last time where you chose two lenses that totaled $3000 and one oly lens just about took care of with one. You also took care to stop 2mm away from the kit lens as well as the midgrade alternative.

The answer is the 11-22 that runs $629. I don't have one, but those that do love it. There is also a top grade lens that will run $1000 more.

I can find lenses that Oly has that you can't touch with any of the 60 some Canon lenses in 35mm equivalence. Mostly long and mostly bright and yes, mostly expensive. I just think its not to benefit those inquiring in this post. That and I'm growing weary of it. I've posted to this forem twice and it comes down to you and I discussing lens availability in absurd terms. Not everyone sticks with the kit lenses, but fewer yet become as obsessed as you seem to be.Most DSLR users will upgrade as needs and finances allow, and dare I saya quality zoom in their most used range and maybe a macro will cover most people that upgrade. Geez. The post started as an inquiry deciding P&S vs DSLR and here we are again, debating lens options.

I enjoy my E500 Olympus Camera and I'm using the kit lenses. The quality of those kit lenses will exceed my capabilities for quite a while, but I'm already wanting a 50-200 f2.8-3.5. Some day I'll buy one. The quality of the 40-150mm f3.5-4.5 is allowing me to put that decision off until I'm ready. I love the idea of Olympus 4/3 System which allows lighter, more portable equipment, especially when focal lengths get large. It comes with trade offs. The ISO is about 1 stop less usuable. I can get along with that. The 50-200 gives a reach of 100-400 f2.8-3.5 and a teleconverter that is designed for that lens gives a 560mm reach in 35mm terms at1 stop dimmer. Sharpness at the long end with the teleconverter is fantastic. I'll be able to carry it all day without a problem. Both the lens and converter will total about $1100. I don't think I'd be able to carry a Canon/Nikon setup with the same ease and I don't thing they can match the price/performance of the above setup. But hey, I only have 13 lens choices left. Now I AM up a creek.

I've posted to this forem twice and the results were the same each time. This is getting carried away. I'll just read the posts from now on to spare the rest of the readers from this.
fldspringer 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 10:20 AM.