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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 18, 2009, 9:20 PM   #251
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Sorry if I've dampened your enthusiasm. During this entire post, you've made it clear as to what your image quality expectations were. That, and the fact that the primary purpose of this new camera was to photograph your daughter involved in indoor gymnastics. I thought it important that you know that there are better choices out there. I just don't believe you'll be happy with the results using the E-620.

Unless, of course you attach a 90-250mm 2.8 SWD Olympus lens to it. But then that sells for around 5,000bucks. On second thought.............. forget I said that.

Zig
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2009, 10:35 PM   #252
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

javacleve-

I would not be depressed about your possible camera choices. We have yet to see results from the new Pentax KX, but samples I have seen in other Forums look very positive. The KX handles ISO 3200 with ease and can be pressed to ISO 6400 when needed. That means that you can get by with F 2.8 lenses. We will certainly know a lot more in the next two weeks or so.

Have a great tomorrow.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2009, 2:56 AM   #253
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fldspringer View Post
I'm going to agree on this one. I love my Oly, but indoor sports are NOT its thing. Low light autofocus struggles and there are others better at high ISO image quality. If indoor sports are a main consideration, especially poorly lit HS gyms, there are better choices.

Greg

I am finding that too.. its annoying to press the shutter and nothing happens. I am assuming that because AF can't focus...yet I know the sony 230 would..
littlejohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2009, 7:25 AM   #254
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

TCav-

A tip of the hat to you, sir. You have it figured out.
After a bit of research last night, it was obvious! There is not enough "fast glass" available to support the Pentax KX. On the Olympus E-620, it is a two way problem. A lack of "fast glass" and a lack of usable high ISO speeds. The Canon XSi with only ISO 1600 also get eliminated.

So you are 100% correct on the Canon 500D/T-1. Therein lies the availability of "fast glass" and the needed ISO speed. I moved quickly, thinking I had discovered a "solution," as I was incorrect. Well done!

Have a great day.

Sarah Joyce

Last edited by mtclimber; Oct 19, 2009 at 7:27 AM.
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2009, 7:32 AM   #255
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Good Morning, littlejohn-

I agree with you. The Olympus E-620 is a great DSLR camera. However, it does have some limitations. One is the ability to lock focus in some low light photo environments. And the other, at least for me is two fold. The ISO limitation, and the availability of "fast glass" to reach out to 400mm.

The E-620 will do fine in a 28mm to 300mm, environment, in 35mm terms, but from there onward the glass becomes very expensive, and there are not many choices.

Have a great day.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2009, 8:01 AM   #256
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Also in the T1i's favor is the fast AF system for sports/action shooting.

Canon and Nikon are the only brands that have reasonably priced large aperture medium telephoto lenses, and Canon's selection is better than Nikon's. While I really like my Nikon D90 and 85/1.8, I'm shooting horses, not little girls, and Nikon's 100/2.0 and 135/2.0 are intended for other things.

And if the 50D is too large, that leaves the T1i. It doesn't really matter if javacleve likes it or not, it's all that's left that can do the job.

I hope she likes it.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.

Last edited by TCav; Oct 19, 2009 at 8:03 AM.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2009, 8:05 AM   #257
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

That is an excellent analysis, TCav-

The Canon 50D is a large camera, there is no doubt about that. When you look at the specifications and compare those dimensions to other DSLR cameras, it all becomes quite clear. The 50D would do the job rather nicely, except for the size priority.

Have a good day.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2009, 8:12 AM   #258
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtclimber View Post
... The 50D would do the job rather nicely, except for the size priority.
And I don't know if it's an issue or not, but it's also over $300 more expensive.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2009, 8:16 AM   #259
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

TCav-

But based on the www.dpreview.com review of the Canon 500D/T-1. That review, essentially says, forget about anything over ISO 3200. With that 15mp imager used on both the T-1 and the 50D, pixel density is the increasing problem above ISO 3200.

And that takes us back to square #1. The Sony 12mp imager, used on the Nikon D-5000/D-90, the Pentax KX, and the Sony A-500 will most probably produce cleaner images, but the lack of "fast glass" once again rears it ugly head, and throws us back at the Canon 500D/T-1.

The whole problem becomes somewhat circular!

Sarah Joyce

Last edited by mtclimber; Oct 19, 2009 at 8:25 AM.
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 19, 2009, 8:42 AM   #260
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtclimber View Post
TCav-

But based on the www.dpreview.com review of the Canon 500D/T-1. That review, essentially says, forget about anything over ISO 3200. ...
That's over 3200.

If javacleve can do what she wants with f/2.0 at 1600, or f/2.8 at 3200, she's golden!

And nothing else can touch it.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav 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 9:21 AM.