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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 16, 2009, 9:03 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtclimber View Post
javacleve-

I can only speak for myself. However, I will be very interested to learn of the Panasonic Camera model being used and to see some photo results.

I have used Panasonic cameras for years and I can tell you that the FZ-28 model is capable of fairly good photos at an ISO setting of ISO 800. I will post ISO 800 samples. However, based on my reading of the discussion you have had with JohnG, I was under the impression that at least ISO 1600 would be needed under the typical gym lighting conditions.

Sarah Joyce
yes, I was under the same impression, and I will be excited to see the samples if she sends them!
Our gym could possibly be a well-lit one, also, compared to others, so that's another factor. I know my niece's gym is definitely darker...
very nice photo, btw
javacleve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2009, 9:06 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ginaflav View Post
javacleve - thanks so much - I'll look forward to seeing the picture if you get it. Did they say anything about the shutter lag/delay? That's my biggest issue, I've missed so many moments - it's frustrating! Thanks again.
I think no matter what P&S you buy, shutter lag could be a concern (the only way around that is a dSLR), and I feel your pain, believe me! I didn't specifically ask about it, but they were getting shots of the girls on bars, so I am guessing it couldn't be a huge problem.
Another mom there uses a Nikon D40, as well, and she is also happy (that's an SLR though)...but she said the lag can be affected by certain conditions, also. I believe that in a darker situation, you might be more likely to notice it??
javacleve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2009, 9:25 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

javacleve-

Did you click on all of the links that TCav so kindly provided? PhotoDad was using, I believe a Sony A-700, and Moderator Mark was using a camera that is way up there in the camera food chain with ISO settings varying between 1600 to 6400.

I am getting the impression, that camera gear like that might be budget breaking for you, while I do own a Sony A-700, Mark's cameras are well beyond the limits of my budget. So that budget determination has to be factored into this discussion.

Regarding the Mom with the Nikon D-40, I also own a Nikon D-40, and I have a lot of experience with that D-40 DSLR, and like the Olympus E-620, I would not characterize it as a high ISO capable camera.

I guess it comes down to this: if you can accept a bit less in terms of image quality, than we see in JohnG's and Mark's photos, you might be able to find a workable DSLR camera, providing we can get a workable lens match. However, the package might not be as small as the Olympus E-620 with its kit lens. That is the reality.

You have to decide what image quality is acceptable to you.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2009, 9:29 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
See National Gym Challenge

See Daughters gymnastics compitition

See Gymnastics

See Gymnastics Event (2 tiring days)

And don't just look at the photos. Read the comments.
not all of those mentioned the equipment, and those that DID, were using a MkIII --- QUITE a jump up the chain of quality and price! So, those were fabulous photos, of course...but the question still remains, what does lesser equipment do for the gymnastics photographer?
javacleve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2009, 9:32 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtclimber View Post
javacleve-

Did you click on all of the links that TCav so kindly provided? PhotoDad was using, I believe a Sony A-700, and Moderator Mark was using a camera that is way up there in the camera food chain with ISO settings varying between 1600 to 6400.

I am getting the impression, that camera gear like that might be budget breaking for you, while I do own a Sony A-700, Mark's cameras are well beyond the limits of my budget. So that budget determination has to be factored into this discussion.

Regarding the Mom with the Nikon D-40, I also own a Nikon D-40, and I have a lot of experience with that D-40 DSLR, and like the Olympus E-620, I would not characterize it as a high ISO capable camera.

I guess it comes down to this: if you can accept a bit less in terms of image quality, than we see in JohnG's and Mark's photos, you might be able to find a workable DSLR camera, providing we can get a workable lens match. However, the package might not be as small as the Olympus E-620 with its kit lens. That is the reality.

You have to decide what image quality is acceptable to you.

Sarah Joyce
Hi Sarah! I was checking out those links and posting my reply as you were replying, apparently! I agree with your assessment, completely. The A700 is possibly a choice for me (and if that's what the first guy was using, GREAT!)--I don't know about the OP, though (she's looking for a P&S).
But you are absolutely correct, the question is, can we live with the loss of quality?
I didn't get to try out the Sony A700 because the store didn't have it in stock, so that's still a possibility (for me, anyway), but the manager did say it was comparable in size to the Canon T1i (which was better than the Nikon but still quite large).
javacleve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2009, 9:53 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by javacleve View Post
not all of those mentioned the equipment, and those that DID, were using a MkIII --- QUITE a jump up the chain of quality and price! So, those were fabulous photos, of course...but the question still remains, what does lesser equipment do for the gymnastics photographer?
Some of those were shot with top of the line cameras, but the key elements were the lenses, which all had apertures of f/1.8 and f/2.0. In the one thread where the photographer used a lens with a maximum aperture of f/2.8, he was asking what he could do to get better results.

It takes both high ISO settings and large apertures to get shutter speeds fast enough to shoot indoor sports. If you can shoot at ISO 1600, but can only get an aperture of f/2.8, you're not going to get shutter speeds fast enough to prevent motion blur.

If you get a lens with a maximum aperture of f/1.8 or f/2.0, and put it on a camera with a good AF system and can shoot at high ISOs, you can get good results with practice. The Canon XSi is the lowest priced camera that falls into that category.
__________________
  • 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 16, 2009, 10:06 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

And as I recall, javacleve, you want image stabilization. That narrows your choices, and increases the system price unfortuantely.

The only dSLRs with sensor shift image stabilization and an AF system good enough for sports are the Sony A700 ($900 if you can find one) and the Pentax K7 ($1,200). As for lenses, Sony has the 85mm f/1.4 ($1,370) and 135mm f/1.8 ($1,480), and Pentax has the 77mm f/1.8 ($1,050).

I remind you that the purpose of all this is to get the shutter speeds fast enough to prevent motion blur, and if you can do that, you don't really need image stabilization.
__________________
  • 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 16, 2009, 10:08 PM   #18
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

so sony or pentax doesnt have anything that competes with canon's 85 1.8 / 100 f2.0 in the same price range?
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2009, 10:11 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hards80 View Post
so sony or pentax doesnt have anything that competes with canon's 85 1.8 / 100 f2.0 in the same price range?
Nope.
__________________
  • 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 16, 2009, 10:12 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hards80 View Post
so sony or pentax doesnt have anything that competes with canon's 85 1.8 / 100 f2.0 in the same price range?
If they did, I wouldn't have switched to a Nikon D90 so I could get an 85/1.8.
__________________
  • 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 2:45 PM.