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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 7, 2007, 11:26 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
monx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 107
Default

To mtclimber on the discussion of crop factor

eventhough i would have loved the lower noise of FF i still feel that the 1.5x crop factor is quite suitable for my kind of shooting. I shoot mainly people and for me getting the extra reach of the 1.5x is just great. Brings me closer without having toinvest inextreme lenses.

Now if they could just bring out a chip that produces iso6400 spot clear and i will be a happy man.

Of course talking about the wide end the 1.5x cropfactor does have its limitations. Recently i was doing a cruise on the yangzi river, and the sudden need for avery wide angle popped up, but you cant have everythingi guess......

i ended up making a stitched photo out of10 (Not 27 as i first wrote .The 27 picture one actually ended upless interesting,it will be posteton request though :-))normal pictures. Not a pro solution but hey landscape is not my game....



Attached Images
 
monx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2007, 12:15 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
flippedgazelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 930
Default

Well, Sarah, now you've called us out, and yet unlike TCav, I am ill-educated to make an informed, experienced decision.

As you know, I have little DSLR experience, having played with one briefly but that is it - ony a few snaps. For the nonce I've cast my lot with the non-DSLR superzoom crowd. I realize that I lose some of the artistic expression possible with a DSLR, certainly from having only marginal control over DOF.I still need to work so much on my composition and technique, it seems odd to me to complain about my Fuji S6000fd's limitations when I have my own to work thru.

As a matter of both practicality and budget, the S6000 works very well for me, and (probably) primarily because of the Fuji's 1/1.7" "Super CCD" sensor. The greater usable ISO range compared with other superzoom cameras on the market is a huge boon, and quite possibly if I were using a Canon S3 or Panny FZ30 I would be chomping at the bit to foolishly disregard budgetary considerations and splurge on the DSLR. I've also recently begun shooting primarily RAW, and now could not do without it.

At my stage of experience, my goal is simply to "get the shot", and that is something I am still working on. I am able to somewhat manage DOF through use of zoom, but of course not any real bokeh.

I imagine if/when I migrate to DSLR, I will join the 1.5x crop crowd...

Monx, that is a great scene!

flippedgazelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2007, 12:19 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Hi Monx-

Thanks for the post. Yes, I really do agree with you. The Crop Format seems to be the best all around choice. An ISO 6400 capabilty would be nice, but its lack is not life threatening, at least for me.

You did a really excellent job with the photo stitch panorama. Congratulations!

Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2007, 12:25 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

flippedgazelle-

Thanks for chimming in on the discussion. As a Fuji S-6000fd user myself, I agree thatthe S-6000offers a lot of advantages. However, when the is right, you might opt for a DSLR, and your choice of the Crop format is understandable. It is a great beginning format and it allows you to get into the DSLR camera realm at a lower initial cost.

Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2007, 2:27 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

mtclimber wrote:
Quote:
How about you Meanstreak? What will it be?
I don't think there is a clear choice for anyone because we generally have different wants, needs andbudgetaryconstraints, though some people, including myself, at times have trouble distinguishing between needs, wantsand what they reallycan afford as well as what they will end up spending.

In my case, I currently own an APS-C, or 1.5 crop factor camera. I have both KM 5D and 7Ds. I think they do any excellent job and the low prices I paid for those cameras by KM selling out to Sony,along with the quality KM glass still floating around out there,more than keeps me happy at present.I think the APS-C format is the way to go, but ifmoney were no object or my professional needs dictated something better,a full frame sensorwouldbe my weapon of choice despite the bigger package.I would still keepan APS-Cbodyfor the convenience factor.

If I were to go full frame I would wait to see what the offerings are from Sony since there is much anticipation that a Pro model is in the works and for the obvious reason thatshould they introduce afull frame,thatall of my35mm filmlenses would still work withSony since they now own the KM mount. The idea of owning both formatswith one set of lenses is very appealing to me. It would be really nice because then some of my brighter lenses likemy 20-40mm,28-75mmwould once again be considered wide angle on the full framand I won't have to rely on a much slower 11-18mm Digital only lensto get wide shots. The current blend of superwide zooms do a nice job with landscape or closeup work, but the indooror fast action capability just isn't there without adding light.A full frame also make my 50mm 1.8 a nicerlens to work with in close quarters andmy 35-105mm 2.8more viable without a crop facor. In fact, it would make someof myother longer lensalso more viable andenjoyable. Yes I would lose the 1.5 crop factor at the long end but as long as I keep at least one APS-C body, I am good to go. In addition,my existing firepower at the long endis sufficient for my immediate needs even at full frame format. Plus,I can also make up for the long end by cropping since a fullformat sensor will be probably 12 megapixel or higher and that should leave plenty ofpixels left over for cropping.

Despite the fact that APS-C is a great formatand at this point probably more marketable, at this point in time, I still believe in using the largest medium practical to get great results. I saythis especially since the trend seems to be to squeeze and more more pixels into the same amount of real estate and most of us know what that means..... more resolution with more noise.It's no secret that pound for pound larger pixels capture more light and exhibit less noise. Unless they come out with new technology that does a better job of gathering light, a larger sensor is the way to go, however it's just not for everyone and at the moment not for me, but at some point I want the best of both worlds and whenneither world is convenient,I will break out the pocket Fuji.

Despite some advandtages, I'm not a fan of the4/3 systems out there. In all fairness that may be because I already havean APS-C system. Perhaps if I had gone that route initially I would feel differently. Yes they are nice and compact andsome feel thatthat thehigher crop factorof 4/3 is an advantage over the APS-Cbecausegets them moreapparent focal length for less dollars in a smallerpackage. I feel that there is alwaysprice to pay when croppingand I'm not willing topay the price ifI don't have too.I see the 4/3 formatas a betterchoice than APS-C for those on the fence about super zoom verses DSLR especially when they aren't certain about how far they will go with a DSLR system, but would like to keep some options open with a minimal investment, instead of limiting themselves to a super zoom. Having said that, a superzoom also has it's place in the market and so do the compacts. I have enough firepower between the DSLRs and my compact didgcam that there is no need for me to own a superzoom but if I did, I would choose Fuji.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.... at leastuntil Sony comes out with a 3CCD CMOS DSLR.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2007, 3:04 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
.... at leastuntil Sony comes out with a 3CCD CMOS DSLR.
WOW! A 3CCD CMOS DLSR with Super SteadyShot and Anti-dust vibration!

Just what everyone needs: a camera with a built-in vibrator.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2007, 3:07 PM   #37
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

However, the 3 ccd Sony solution comes with a high price tag. This is technology carried over from their video camera line.

Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2007, 3:39 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

TCav wrote:
Quote:
meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
.... at leastuntil Sony comes out with a 3CCD CMOS DSLR.
WOW! A 3CCD CMOS DLSR with Super SteadyShot and Anti-dust vibration!

Just what everyone needs: a camera with a built-in vibrator.
Just is case you get blurry pictures even with the Super SteadyShot, I understand that they are workning on a chip that will captureimagesin layers andthen automaticallyre-align the pixels to eliminate blurry picturesduringpost processing.
meanstreak 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 10:57 PM.