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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 31, 2007, 6:20 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
I personally find IS to be mildly useful on my standard zoom, but to be honest only really for snapshots.

If I want to make sure I'm getting a sharp shot then I adjust my shutter speed or use a tripod.

And when I'm shooting in low light I use primes or flash anyway.
Nice your subjects sit around for you and you have the space and time for all that... let along hauling it all over.

Personally my interests go beyond rocks and snails.

The world does not just sit around and wait for you, and your tripod set up, 10 changes of lenses, and provide custom lighting.... even a sunset moves and changes much faster than most realise until they get to HUNH??? where did it go? (Plus rapidly moving west to east close to the horizon if you are interested in keeping a subject in front of the sun for a sillohette.)
Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 6:36 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

jpmann66 wrote:
Quote:
Are shake reduction and dust reduction technologies gimmicks, or something I really should look for in a new entry level DSLR?
As has been stated WHY NOT????? You really want to convince me there is a good reason to buy a (aging) Canon 30D for a $500 more than a more capable Pentax K10D..... no 40D even on the horizon?.... let alone they or Nikon will ever do in cam ANY lesns even antique manuals IS.

Doesn't really matter already done.... fortunately selling off even inexpensive Canon lenses is easy.... the Rebel 300D is used enough I'd feel guilty selling it almost 4x past it MTBF shutter rating.

More worth it to me as a who cares what happens to it extra body still with Kit and Sigma 70-300mm. (other lenses sold)
Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 6:53 AM   #23
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Gozinta wrote:
Quote:
Since your verdict on IS is based on your needs and your needs are limited by the type of shooting you do, your analysis of the value or IS or return on investment is considerably flawed, although it may be less flawed if we are talking about Canon or Nikon lens based IS, which translates into a more expensive investment if a consumer tries to buy mostly IS lenses.

Gozinta - this is a rather silly statement. My opinion is not flawed. Based on my experience I don't find IS as that critical of a feature. There is nothing flawed in that. Just like there is nothing flawed in people that do find it useful. Just about every post in this forum is someone's OPINION. My opinion is no less valid than yours just because it is different than yours. The question was - is it useful. Based on my experience alone I stated I don't believe it's as useful as other features. Nothing more, nothing less. I've used IS and I haven't. I've shot over 40,000 shots with my DSLRs in the last 4 years. So, I think it's safe to say I have an idea of whether it's been useful to me.

As to the IS devoted I refer to posts scattered about where the entire selling point for trying to convince someone to buy a camera IS. As an example - in the Canon lens forum someone asked about a comparison of specific lenses. Someone chimed in that since they had a Pentax camera with built-in IS the one third party consumer grade lens was great. That's the type of thing I'm talking about. It's like an Olympus owner stating in every thread - with our smaller sensor and 2x crop you'll get more reach OUT OF EVERY LENS YOU OWN. Yes it's true, but hardly the only or even most important reason for most people to buy that system. Or a Canon user stating in every thread you'll get better HIGH ISO performanc out of every shot. That's great if you use high ISO. So, if I hammer that into people's head in every post I could confuse them into thinking they need it. And they could make the wrong choice in camera systems. I think IS is the same way. It's simply one of many attributes to consider.

I chose the system I chose because of other features that, to me, were more important. If IS is the most important feature to you or anyone else then by all means choose a camera based on that. And yes I agree, buying Canon lenses with IS can be more expensive - but they are also some of the finest optics out there. And there are also some quality third party optics that are very readily available for Canon and Nikon that are difficult to find for Pentax and not available for Olympus. The third party lensesdon't have IS, yet thousands of photographers still manage to take wonderful pictures with them.

In the end an intelligent buyer considers ALL features and weighs them against their needs. I bought the camera and system that best matched my needs. Presumably you did the same. Our needs are different and that's OK. It's good for new people here to see many sides of the discussion. And all I'm saying is: to the OP, don't get confused by people that you need a given feature. Understand the feature and when it is useful and when it's not.


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 7:00 AM   #24
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Hayward wrote:
Quote:
As has been stated WHY NOT????? You really want to convince me there is a good reason to buy a (aging) Canon 30D for a $500 more than a more capable Pentax K10D..... no 40D even on the horizon?.... let alone they or Nikon will ever do in cam ANY lesns even antique manuals IS.

OK, here's a given example of WHY NOT. You carried forward your choice of Sigma 70-300 when you went to Pentax. I love my Sigma 120-300. Let's say I want to buy the wonderful 10d. What reputable dealers can sell me my wonderful 120-300 in a pentax mount?

How 'bout another example you say? Let's say I'm interested in eventually having the benefits a full frame sensor offers (more dynamic range, better quality photosites at more megapixels, better noise imagery). Tell me, which Pentax camera should I buy after my 10d to get that advantage?

There are two examples of: Why not?! Also two simple examples of why someone may decide the inferior Canon system might be a better choice for them.

JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 7:36 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

I don't think that anyone here is saying that the only reason to buy or not to buy into a dSLR system is the availability of IS/VR/AS/SR/Whatever, or even that it should be a major consideration for everyone.

It is a feature of some systems but not others, and for the systems that have it, it is implimented differently in different systems. But it is a feature that some of us feel we can do without, and that some of us feel we can't do without, and that still others of us are ambivolent to.

I believe that the advantages of shake reduction have been discussed thoroughly here, so that jpmann66has enough information to make an informed decision.

It is just one of many features. I would love to have the choice of quality lenses available to Canon and Nikon owners, but I'll just have to settle for the consumer grade lenses available for my KM5D because I can't afford the Zeiss offerings. But I've made my decision, and one of the factors in that decision is that I wanted Anti-Shake in the body. That's a compromise I was willing to make, and I'm comfortable with that compromise.

jpmann66must decide whether that is a compromise he or she is willing to make as well.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 8:49 AM   #26
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

TCAV,

Very well summarized and articulated! Couldn't agree more with your words!
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 9:43 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

I agree with JohnG and TCav-

IS or SR or OS whatever you prefer to call it is simply a matter of personal choice that can or cannot be tailored to the kind of photos that you like to take or just pure, plain, personal preference.

TCavstated the case very well.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 3:05 PM   #28
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Quote:
Nice your subjects sit around for you and you have the space and time for all that... let along hauling it all over.

Personally my interests go beyond rocks and snails.

The world does not just sit around and wait for you, and your tripod set up, 10 changes of lenses, and provide custom lighting.... even a sunset moves and changes much faster than most realise until they get to HUNH??? where did it go? (Plus rapidly moving west to east close to the horizon if you are interested in keeping a subject in front of the sun for a sillohette.)
Undoubtedly a stranger response than I could have imagined. I just checked my library and do you know I don't have a single shot of a snail, and only a couple of rocks.

You do realise that IS is useless for moving subjects? I find it hard to think what you could be talking about.

You'd be surprised what it is possible to capture with a little bit of forethought, and a tripod only makes a difference of a few seconds. Even so I don't use one much.

When I need to shoot in low light I mostly use fast lenses or flash, IS is a poor substitute for either of those.



peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 6:50 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
You do realise that IS is useless for moving subjects?
I disagree. Below is a shot I took while panning. I don't think it would have turned out as well with out Anti-Shake.

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
When I need to shoot in low light I mostly use fast lenses or flash, IS is a poor substitute for either of those.
Again, I disagree. I consider flash to be a poor substitute for available light. If Anti-Shake will allow me to reduce the shutter speed, then that's what I'll do. If Anti-Shake will let me take a slightly underexposed shot that I can push in post processing, then I'll take it.

But those are my choices to make. And maybe they'll bejpmann66's choices to make as well. But if he or she doesn't have Anti-Shake, then he orshe won't ever have the opportunity to make that choice. I simply suggest that jpmann66might want to make that opportunity available to him or her self.
Attached Images
 
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 7:26 PM   #30
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Quote:
I don't think it would have turned out as well with out Anti-Shake.
Give it a try you might surprise yourself. And if you don't have panning mode IS/AS you might find it a positive hindrance. Some people on this forum have their IS switched off when panning because they get better results without it. If I had tried that same shot I would most likely have used panning mode IS too.


Quote:
Again, I disagree. I consider flash to be a poor substitute for available light.
Fair enough. There is room for disagreement over these things, each has its own limitations and strengths. It all depends on what you are trying to achieve I suppose.


Quote:
But if he or she doesn't have Anti-Shake, then he or she won't ever have the opportunity to make that choice. I simply suggest that jpmann66 might want to make that opportunity available to him or her self.
Well it's hard to disagree with that. I have IS on 3 of my lenses and I have it turned on 99% of the time, I thought it was worth the cost.

However I agree with JohnG it's a nice feature but certainly not a must have and (not that too many people in this thread have evidenced it) there is a fanatical IS/AS fan base that seem to think that any camera/lens combo that doesn't have it is rubbish.

Take a look round a gallery and see how many of those shots you think had or would have benefitted from IS. Look at some books of your favourite photographers and ask the same question. Of course a great deal has to do with your photographic style and aspirations and your abilities, I have no doubt that it really is useful for some people.


peripatetic 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 4:31 AM.