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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 1, 2007, 8:13 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
Give it a try you might surprise yourself.
I'm not that steady. Trust me.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2007, 8:43 AM   #32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 824
Default

Bailey59 wrote:
Quote:
Norm in Fujino


Same person as @ BT3Central? The one who's helped so many there......and IIRC steered me here when I was looking for my 1st digi-cam? :-)
Wow, a blast from the past. Yes, none other. Thanks for remembering!
Norm in Fujino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2007, 3:09 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
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.
Now that is justv plain, rediculous.... galleries and books are not for diplaying your second rate work. Of course its going to look good.

Now the questions you can ask.... wonder what shots they didn't get?, or what if that shot didn't have to be flash exposed?, etc.

IS is of use for moving subject moving within a frame, in keeping the frame/background itself stable. And I have found the Pentax system works OK panning, or is not a detriment. seem to still keep things vertically stabilized. (for the record, Pentax says turn it off and I would if doing a series of pan shots vs say just a cool bird come flying by while shooting other stuff.

And really I meant more physically moving around in a situation where there are thing to shoot in many different directions, and need to quickly get to another angle. All fleeting time consumming, difficult, or just impossible with a tripod.

Tripods and flash are great when you can stage things, or interest is of things passing a fixed possition. But very cumbersome for on the fly/move stuff.
Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2007, 4:44 PM   #34
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Well obviously I wasn't referring to YOUR camera and YOUR IS system.

Which is of course the best on the market and it would be ridiculous to suggest otherwise. (Never mind what they say in the manual - it really works in EVERY situation.)


Quote:
And really I meant more physically moving around in a situation where there are thing to shoot in many different directions, and need to quickly get to another angle. All fleeting time consumming, difficult, or just impossible with a tripod.

Tripods and flash are great when you can stage things, or interest is of things passing a fixed possition. But very cumbersome for on the fly/move stuff.
It is a little known fact that the Magnum agency was one of the driving forces behind the development of Image Stabilisation and HCB himself would never use a camera without it. In fact Leica have secret M-series lenses with IS that they only allow Magnum to use.

If only they engineers could develop a portable flashgun I could attach to my camera that would move with it, or a lens with an aperture faster than f4. Never mind perhaps one day. For now we have IS and IS is FANTASTIC in fact they probably won't bother with those other things now that IS exists.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 9:04 AM   #35
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22
Default

Thanks! I've been reading in this forum for about12 months.I had no idea that this topic would be discussed so thoroughly. Everyone here is verypassionte about photography and I really appreciate it.MY DSC-S85 needs replacement. It is a feature packed little thing, but alas,is dying.I have the money for an entry level DSLR &, more importantly, wife's permission to spend it! I'm gathering that there is no really WRONG decision among the top brands.As a camp director, I take:cabin group portraits(we sell prints to parents)....then candid shots of staff and kids playing [action].....then nature shots [tele with IS]....then group shots in very big rooms [wide angle]....evening program shots in low light.The best photos end up in the next year's brochure

What I am wondering now is about the durability of "sensor shift" IS systems. Are they more likely to get knocked out of whack than fixed sensors?

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"John
jpmann66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 12:54 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

jpmann66 wrote:
Quote:
Thanks! I've been reading in this forum for about12 months.I had no idea that this topic would be discussed so thoroughly. Everyone here is verypassionte about photography and I really appreciate it.MY DSC-S85 needs replacement. It is a feature packed little thing, but alas,is dying.I have the money for an entry level DSLR &, more importantly, wife's permission to spend it! I'm gathering that there is no really WRONG decision among the top brands.As a camp director, I take:cabin group portraits (we sell prints to parents)....then candid shots of staff and kids playing [action].....then nature shots [tele with IS]....then group shots in very big rooms [wide angle]....evening program shots in low light.The best photos end up in the next year's brochure

What I am wondering now is about the durability of "sensor shift" IS systems. Are they more likely to get knocked out of whack than fixed sensors?

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"John
I'm not sure their is any reliable information out there about which one is more prone to break down if dropped or banged around. Assuming you own more than one lense it would be safe to say that a single lens may not see as much abuse as a camera body. I tend to be careful with my equipment but accidents do happens. One of my camera bodies fell off a chair a couple of times but it was in a small camera bag and it works fine. I am always more concerned with damage to the lens or knocking the optics out of alignment than anything else.

If I were in the market for a camera I would not by a system with IS in the lenses simply from the cost perspective. I would either by a system with IS in the camera body or just do without IS. Of course you can just limit how many IS lenses you buy. If money is no object, than the lens based IS system is probaly the way to go. I like the results I have gotten with IS and for my money IS built into the camera works out great for me.


meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 12:57 PM   #37
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
Well obviously I wasn't referring to YOUR camera and YOUR IS system.

Which is of course the best on the market and it would be ridiculous to suggest otherwise. (Never mind what they say in the manual - it really works in EVERY situation.)


Quote:
And really I meant more physically moving around in a situation where there are thing to shoot in many different directions, and need to quickly get to another angle. All fleeting time consumming, difficult, or just impossible with a tripod.

Tripods and flash are great when you can stage things, or interest is of things passing a fixed possition. But very cumbersome for on the fly/move stuff.
It is a little known fact that the Magnum agency was one of the driving forces behind the development of Image Stabilisation and HCB himself would never use a camera without it. In fact Leica have secret M-series lenses with IS that they only allow Magnum to use.

If only they engineers could develop a portable flashgun I could attach to my camera that would move with it, or a lens with an aperture faster than f4. Never mind perhaps one day. For now we have IS and IS is FANTASTIC in fact they probably won't bother with those other things now that IS exists.
I'm not sure I understood all that, but it's pretty funny. LOL
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 1:03 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

That is a nice shot
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 1:07 PM   #39
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

jpmann66 wrote:
Quote:
What I am wondering now is about the durability of "sensor shift" IS systems. Are they more likely to get knocked out of whack than fixed sensors?
Too early to tell. DSLRs with the technology have only been around for the last 12-18 months I believe. So from a mechanical failure perspective any comment regarding it's long term durability would be purely hypothetical.

Lens based IS has been around a while and it appears pretty stable. Not saying this to lead you that route or even insinuating in-body is less stable. Just that it's too early to say how durable the in-body stabalization is and what it costs to fix it when it breaks.

By the way, Peripatetic, too bad they don't have an icon that makes a statement appear to actually drip. That would be a cool affect for your post :G
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 1:42 PM   #40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 167
Default

Funny you should ask about dust reduction. Picked this story up from dcresources:

http://pixinfo.com/en/articles/ccd-dust-removal/
cgl88 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 4:57 AM.