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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 12, 2009, 7:01 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7
Default Need for speed P90 vs SX10

I've read so many posts and reviews on the P90 and the SX10 that my head is spinning! I've owned canon in the past and am very happy, that may be the difference maker. I believe either will take amazing pictures if you kow what you're doing.

Now- the question. Frames per second on each? Anyone know for sure?

I'm taking alot of pictures at sporting events, mainly my sons, and need something that will not only provide a great zoom but a fast shutter so I can get these pictures without the blur. I'm currently using the Kodak easyshare z712. Great out of the pocket camera with great features but not too fast and my action shots are all blurred.

Any help or suggestions?
Thanks

Chris

Can anyone tell me the frames per second on the sx10? I want to take good action shots of the kids, sometimes at a distance. need something that wont be blurry.

thanks

chris

Last edited by Mark1616; Jun 13, 2009 at 12:57 AM. Reason: Duplicate
chrisbarth is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 13, 2009, 1:08 AM   #2
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Hi Chris,

I've merged your posts otherwise you will get duplicated answers so best to keep it all in the same place.

The SX10 has up to 1.4fps and the P90 1.8fps, however this is not really the the question you are asking or needing to ask. The fps will not freeze action. I have a Canon 1D mkIII that takes up to 10fps however if I don't use the right settings I will still get motion blur etc. The frames per second will obviously mean you get more shots which means there is a better chance of getting one you like if everything falls into place.

Now to get non blurry shots you need to have good focus and also enough shutter speed to freeze the action and remove any camera shake. With the sort of lenses we are talking about here you will be wanting at least 1/640s to help freeze everything. With focus you have 2 options, either use continuous focus so that the camera is always trying to keep up with the action or pre focus. The latter I have found works OK when shooting HD video on my SX1 when the subjects are a long way out, I've not tried it for stills as I don't use the SX1 for that often.

So basically both should be able to freeze action and give you sharp results if you get the above right.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 4:33 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Hi Chris.

As I have recently bought the Sony HX1 so you can imagine I was pouring over all the superzoom camera reviews for weeks before making a decision.

The Nikon has not received great press for the quality of it's photos whereas the Canon SX10 photo quality is supposedly better than the more expensive SX1 (which sports HD video) and superior to that of the P90. The SX10 was my second choice in the end, although it should be noted a lot of people prefer the Panasonic Z28 to either of those.

Personally, although the HX1 sports 10 fps, I have yet to get a photo from it, in 10 fps mode, that I would print larger than 7 x 5. Maybe a better photographer than I, or maybe when I have a little more experience with the camera, will be able to achieve it.

You don't say what type of sport, or whether it's indoors / outdoors / day / night or artificial / natural light - all of which will have a huge impact on the potential of these small sensor cameras to capture what you want.

There are a few people on here with the P90 / SX10 so maybe they can comment better on their experiences and Mark's comments hit the target right in the bullseye.
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 6:02 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7
Default sounds like sx10

Thanks guys. I would have thought frames per second was the key..
As for the types of sports, it's either football at night with the bright field lights, lacrosse during the day in natural light, or basketball using the lights in the gym.

I think the reason I am fixated on the FPS rating is so I can take continuous shots and then pick the best one.

I love taking pictures but I am not a pro by any means, I would fall into the intermediate category. Sounds like the SX10 is the right choice.
chrisbarth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 8:13 AM   #5
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisbarth View Post
Sounds like the SX10 is the right choice.
No, no and very much no...... did I mention no???!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisbarth View Post
As for the types of sports, it's either football at night with the bright field lights, lacrosse during the day in natural light, or basketball using the lights in the gym.
Sorry to say that football under the lights, and basketball will not be possible with ANY P&S/Superzoom out there currently and probably not for quite a long time. This due to the lenses not being bright enough and the high ISO sensitivity not being clean enough.

For basketball generally you need to be able to shoot at f2.8 and ISO 3200 to even get close and a focal length of about 100+mm is needed. For football under the lights you are talking a similar low light capability however you need at least 300mm to get a reasonable coverage of the game.

You will be OK for lacrosse with the SX10, you won't get the sort of results you see an a magazine but you will get shots.

If you really do want to shoot football and basketball in the discussed conditions then you will need to go to a dSLR and some quite expensive glass up front. If you want to consider this then I can give you some suggestions dependent on your budget.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 10:15 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7
Default

Thanks Mark- I'm hearing the answer is no? :-)

Budget is tight, I truthfully want to stay under $500 which is why the DSLRs have been out. I truthfully don't need to print large prints of the sports, just want a decent picture of my kid. My little Kodak Easyshare takes fantastic pictures with a decent zoom but action shots are just flat out the window, no chance. I can get to field level and courtside if needed so i don't typically need a ton of zoom for the sports, just want a decent picture thats not blurry. I truthfully don't expect to get professional grade action shots with a P&S but decent pictures would be nice. I like the quality of the SX10 for stills, landscapes, general purpose pics, etc...

In staying with the P&S, would the SX1 give me any advantage over the SX10 due to the faster shutter and higher FPS or am I splitting hairs? Is there a decent DSLR in my price range? I guess I'd rather have a GREAT P&S that gives me nice quality pictures than a cheap DSLR that doesn't give the all-around convenience and quality just to get a few action shots here and there. Make sense?

OK- I was going to add on here a question about the Nikon D40, Best Buy has one for $469. Now I see it does not shoot video. I don't shoot alot of video but would like the option when I want it.

I think I just need to accept the fact that without going WAY over budget and getting into more than I would really enjoy, I need to sacrifice some of the high speed action shots and just take what I can get for a good all-around camera.

I know this is long winded and I apologize. Wanting the ability to shoot video, good all-around family photos and some action shots, does the SX1 give an edge over the SX10? Is there a DSLR that will let me do all I want and stay in the price range?

Your help is so greatly appreciated.

Last edited by chrisbarth; Jun 13, 2009 at 10:50 AM.
chrisbarth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 11:27 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 77
Default

Entry level DSLRs are cheap, but lenses required are expensive. F2.8 300mm that Mark mentioned is over $1000++ (just the lens).
oneguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 11:42 AM   #8
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oneguy View Post
Entry level DSLRs are cheap, but lenses required are expensive. F2.8 300mm that Mark mentioned is over $1000++ (just the lens).
Actually you're looking at close to $3000 for anything in a 300mm 2.8 lens. The budget conscious route is a Sigma 70-200 2.8 lens for about $800. Paired with a Nikon D90 or a Canon T1i is about the least expensive option capable of decent night football shots.

I wish there were a cheap alternative. Any of the superzooms under discussion can get OK lax shots during the day assuming you're close enough. But under the lights for football or indoor basketball - sorry - you
're throwing money down the drain if you're buying a superzoom for those purposes.

And here's an important note to the OP - anyone who indicates otherwise - ask them to show you their indoor basketball or nighttime football photos with the camera. Every person I've ever run across in forums that suggests one of these cameras can do the job surprisingly has no photos to back that opinion up. This isn't about being a DSLR snob, it's about giving you honest advice based on actual experience shooting the sports you're interested in:


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 12:54 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7
Default

Very helpful guys, thank you.

For my needs, and budget, I'm going with the SX10. I may not get the sports shots I'd like but I think I'll do ok for what I'm looking to acheive which is basically some decent memories. The picture quality, macro, zoom, video...all play a part.
chrisbarth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 2009, 1:32 PM   #10
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

That's probably wise Chris, I would rather you go into this with your eyes open so that you are not disappointed with the outcome of the challenging sports shots.

Let us know how you get on and do post some photos once you get it.
Mark1616 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 11:05 PM.