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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 21, 2009, 2:51 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8
Default

Thank you guys for the advice. I was hoping I would get just this type of feedback! I shot that picture in shutter priority mode at 1/1000. I'll try to really get in and play with full manual mode next game.
CDaq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2009, 9:49 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
TCav wrote:
Quote:
Generally, especially for Baseball, you don't want to use a shutter speed quite that fast. Most sports photos look better with a little motion blur on pitched balls and swung bats. For the focal length you were using, you had a maximum aperture of f/2.8 yet you shot this at f/5.6.

You could have doubled the ISO from 100 to 200 so the shutter speed would have been halved from 1/1000 to1/500. You could also have opened the aperture from f/5.6 to f/4.0 to halve the shutter speed. Byincreasing the aperture (selecting a numerically lower number), you'd have gotten less depth of field so the background would have been blurry. A blurry background is a way to accentuate the subject in the foreground.
I'm a bit surprised at this advice.

Quote:
You could have doubled the ISO from 100 to 200 so the shutter speed would have been halved from 1/1000 to1/500.
Doubling the ISO would double, not halve the shutter speed. So shutter speed would go from 1/1000 to 1/2000

Quote:
You could also have opened the aperture from f/5.6 to f/4.0 to halve the shutter speed.
Again, opening the aperture would have the opposite affect. Shutter speed would double, not halve.

Quote:
you'd have gotten less depth of field so the background would have been blurry.
The part about less DOF is true. But it would not really blur the background a whole lot more. It's still true you want to get as much blur as possible but with that camera you won't achieve a blurred background.

Quote:
Generally, especially for Baseball, you don't want to use a shutter speed quite that fast. Most sports photos look better with a little motion blur on pitched balls and swung bats.
I'll definitely disagree with this advice. 1/1000 is a slow shutter speed for pitches / bats. You don't want a slower speed as you'll get blur in the head. And you'll still get plenty of bat blur at 1/1000.
You are absolutely correct. I apologize for my previous post. I don't know what I was thinking. Thank you, John, for catching my screw-up.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2009, 10:15 PM   #13
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

no worries tcav - we all have a brain fart now and then
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2009, 1:44 AM   #14
SVO
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1
Default

I am facing this choice right now and thought I would chime in...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biro View Post
Most of the superzoom cameras don't tend to be fast enough for serious sports shooting - both in terms of frames-per-second speed while shooting in burst mode and in terms of general response (taking into account auto focusing, metering, etc).
I think that is to the point: most people are not "serious" shooters who ask for this type of advice. They are not looking for 10 frames per second for three seconds and then sorting through hundreds or even thousands of exposures from a single event. They want to get some good captures that would look nice on a screen or at 8x10, with minimal cost & hassle.

The FZ28 has a shutter lag, with prefocus, of 0.08 seconds- plenty fast. Still, a superzoom falls far shy of a good DSLR in IQ under other than ideal conditions.

But "sports-appropriate" lenses are REAL expensive. Personally, I think 300mm equiv. is the minimum for most outdoor sports. If you have a DX sensored camera you could in theory use a 70-200 f/2.8, but they tend to have the weakest performance at the top end- especially the third-party brands that are under $1k. You really need a lens around the 100-300mm (150-450 equiv.) range, I'd say f/4 minimum. These sorts of lenses start at around $1.5k for third-party products, so just one would bring the body/lens cost to about $2k, min.

Another option: A third-party 70-200 f/2.8 + 1.4x teleconverter. Total cost under $1k, plus a lot of flexibility. With DX body combines for a 147-420mm (effec) f/4 and moves it out of its weakest range optically for use around 300-350mm (effec). Plus you have a 105-300 (effec) f/2.8 for indoor sports & other applications. Just have to be careful about matching lens/TC/Body to ensure they all play nice.

My 2 cents.
SVO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2009, 1:04 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Having bought the Sony HX1 a couple of weeks ago I'll just mention the burst rate & zoom since these are topical in this thread. BTW the cost is not $600 as someone mentioned in the thread but on Amazon currently $490.

Burst Rates
10 shots at 10 per sec. (3 MP)
10 shots at 5 per sec. (5 MP)
10 shots at 2 per sec. (9 MP)

They all produce very good photos and can be used in tele or macro (for photos of flighty insects for example).

Zoom
x20 in 9MP mode (very good photos)
x26 in 5MP mode (very good photos)
x33 in 3MP mode (occasionally useful)
x108 in VGA mode (useful only for identifying that bird in the distance) !!

You can now also buy the 1.7X conversion lens for $157 too. See picture here http://www.image-acquire.com/sony-vc...elephoto-lens/ (price is much lower on Amazon !)

The longer lens will make it easier to blur the background, even when the depth of field is the same. Say for that baseball photo !

EDIT : Biro. My apologies if I have misled you. Playing around with the settings on the HX1 today and there is no doubt you can select the resolution you want (maybe for writing times you can reduce the resolution on burst ?). I used the 10fps burst rate at the FULL 9MP ! So amazingly yes, this camera can do what pro cameras costing thousands of dollars can do 10 frames per second (for a maximum of ten frames) at it's maximum 9.1 MP resolution.

Last edited by Frogfish; May 18, 2009 at 4:22 PM.
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2009, 7:24 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Biro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 835
Default

Ah... thank you Frogfish for providing us with the continuous-shooting speed options for the HX1. It seemed to me (and I think many others) that Sony was implying that one could get 10fps - even if only for 10 shots - at full resolution (9mp). That certainly was the impression I got, especially after the big deal Sony has been making about the camera's mechanical shutter.
Biro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2009, 7:35 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biro View Post
Ah... thank you Frogfish for providing us with the continuous-shooting speed options for the HX1. It seemed to me (and I think many others) that Sony was implying that one could get 10fps - even if only for 10 shots - at full resolution (9mp). That certainly was the impression I got, especially after the big deal Sony has been making about the camera's mechanical shutter.
I think there are very very few pro cameras that can do that !

However even at 3MP it is very useful on occasion. I have that wonderful little beastie in my avatar proudly framed in an 8 x 10 and that was shot with an Oly 3040

EDIT : Biro. My apologies if I have misled you. Playing around with the settings on the HX1 today and there is no doubt you can select the resolution you want (maybe for writing times you can reduce the resolution on burst ?). I used the 10fps burst rate at the FULL 9MP ! So amazingly yes, this camera can do what pro cameras costing thousands of dollars can do 10 frames per second (for a maximum of ten frames) at it's maximum 9.1 MP resolution.

Last edited by Frogfish; May 18, 2009 at 4:16 PM.
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2009, 12:19 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Hi Biro-

Yes, if somebody was facing a budget crunch, the new Sony HX-1 might be a viable alternative choice in cameras, as it does have that ability to take 10fps, as well as doing a hand held panorama with the photo merge taking place in the camera. That might make the Sony HX-1 a possible choice.

However, you must keep in mind that fast action sports photos really seem to be the pervue of DSLR cameras.
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2009, 4:21 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Biro. My apologies if I have misled you. Playing around with the settings on the HX1 today and there is no doubt you can select the resolution you want (maybe for writing times you can reduce the resolution on burst ?). I used the 10fps burst rate at the FULL 9MP ! So amazingly yes, this camera can do what pro cameras costing thousands of dollars can do 10 frames per second (for a maximum of ten frames) at it's maximum 9.1 MP resolution.
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2009, 10:30 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Biro-

I honestly don't quite know how to translate/interpet your comments regarding the new Sony HX-1 camera.

No, the Sony HX-1 is not specifically a DSLR camera. And generally speaking, DSLR cameras do much better job with active sports photos. But, none the less, the fact remains. For Sony to come up with a burst speed of 10fps, is indeed rather impressive certainly for a digicam.

Yes, I would be the first to repeat, and re-affirm that a DSLR camera would even more effectively address the OP's photo situation. However, I do believe that Sony does indeed deserve a good tip of the hat for raising the bar rather substantially in the photos fps speed.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber 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 10:08 PM.