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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 10, 2010, 10:29 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12
Default Are newly announced cameras worth waiting for?

I have been researching for a few months now and trying to decide on which new camera I want to buy. I kept hearing people suggest waiting until after the new cameras are announced. Now that it seems like they have been announced, have any of them really seemed that amazing or should I just go ahead and get a Panasonic FZ-35? It just doesn't seem like I have seen much talk about the new cameras on this board yet. Any idea when professional reviews will be out? Is that what people are waiting on?

I mainly shoot photos of my kids - inside (not always great light), outside, soccer games, etc. I think I want to stick with a point and shoot but part of me would love to make the jump to dSLR. Cost and size are the main things keeping me from wanting to take that step right now. Like everyone, I would like the dSLR image quality with the size and price of a p+s. I am trying to keep the cost under $400.

Thanks for your response and for all that I have learned through this board!
calmmom is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 10, 2010, 10:40 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

calmmom-

Welcome to the Forum. We're delighted that you dropped by.

The Sony A-230, a 10mp DSLR camera with the Sony 18-55mm (27mm to 80mm in 35mm terms) kit lens is now selling for around $370 to 380. So, the DSLR option is there, and available to you. A Sony 55-200mm lens (83mm to 300mm in 35mm terms) sells for around $100 0n E-Bay. It would have better image quality and a higher ISO capability than the FZ-35 camera.

However, the FZ-35 is tops among the super zoom cameras. We have a very active and very friendly FZ-35 group in our Panasonic P+S folder. Please take a look. There a lots of FZ-35 photo posted there as well as a lot of help.

Either option would seem to move you nicely toward your goal.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2010, 10:43 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

The FZ38/38 is a great camera. There is not much that has been announce that are better then it. If you need a camera now. I would get the FZ35/38. And the sooner you will be able records those moments for you to cherish.

If you want better low light performance. You would need to move to a dslr. Something like a pentax K-x if you really want great low light. But if you don't mind a bit less low light performance the 4/3 sensor dslr form olympus. The e520 and e620 are really small dslr. They will give much better results then the smaller sensor of a megazoom bridge camera. But not as good in low light like a aps-c dslr. The olympus dslr are very user friendly for new dslr owners. So is the pentax k-x.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Mar 10, 2010 at 10:50 PM.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2010, 8:19 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12
Default

Thanks for the input. I guess I'm still on the fence about a dSLR but I think I would be happy with the FZ-35 too. One thing I really like about the dSLR is the shallow depth of field or bokeh (I think is the official name) for portrait looking photos. Can the FZ get anywhere close to a dSLR on that? Also, I like to take soccer/action photos of my kids mainly outside. Would the Oly or Sony or Pentax do a whole lot better than the FZ? I guess I'm trying to see "how much" better a dSLR would be for me. The price on the FZ is just really nice as I can get it for under $300 now.
calmmom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2010, 9:03 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

For the sport shots, the dslr will be allot better because of the faster AF system and no shutter lag. But you will need to get a longer zoom.

You can get the Dof on the FZ, but you will need to get more speration between your subject and the background. With a DSLR you can do this easier by going with a big aperture prime. Something in the 1.4-1.8 range.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2010, 11:42 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

calmmom-

I think that it is time to actually come up with a percentile estimate of how many sport and low light photos you actually shoot. Those are the two areas where the entry level DSLR camera will overtake the FZ-35.

The FZ-35 can do well up to ISO 800, and then the noise becomes too much.In contrast, a DSLR like the Oly and the Sony can go to ISO 1600 and the Pentax KX can go to 3200 and 6400 when hard pressed with ease. So there is indeed a capability gap.

However, there is also a lens gap as well. The FZ-35 can zoom out to 500+mm (in 35mm terms) with ease as the lens is built-in. In contrast, depending on the brand you selected, zoom lenses with that kind of zoom are an additional expense.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2010, 1:03 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

If you get the 2 lens kit from pentax or sony you will reach out to 450mm with the 3 lens kit with the longer zoom lens. So the last 50mm is not that great.

But if you do not have the best light condition. The bigger sensor will give you better results if you can not use a flash. And on the long end of the zoom, the flash is pretty useless.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 11, 2010, 1:03 PM   #8
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calmmom View Post
Thanks for the input. I guess I'm still on the fence about a dSLR but I think I would be happy with the FZ-35 too. One thing I really like about the dSLR is the shallow depth of field or bokeh (I think is the official name) for portrait looking photos. Can the FZ get anywhere close to a dSLR on that? Also, I like to take soccer/action photos of my kids mainly outside. Would the Oly or Sony or Pentax do a whole lot better than the FZ? I guess I'm trying to see "how much" better a dSLR would be for me. The price on the FZ is just really nice as I can get it for under $300 now.

if you want shallow dof with nice smooth out of focus areas, you will need the larger sensor of the dlsrs. you can get some background blurring with a fz-35 if you are pretty close to your subject and your background is far away, but its difficult to achieve and rarely looks that good.

also action shots again are the realm of dslrs. for one it is very difficult to keep your subjects tracked with an evf or lcd. second the autofocus on a dlsr is far superior to any digicam and is required to keep focus tracking on a moving target. also to get shutter speeds you need to stop action in any dimmer light really requires the higher ISO performance of the dslr. also keep in mind you will need to purchase a sports capable lens, so again, adding money.

but then again, you have to ask yourself how often will you be doing these things, compared to your regular use. and whether the cost/benefit ratio is in favor of spending a considerable amount more money.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2010, 9:49 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 12
Default

It is sooo hard to decide! If I want to take shots with a shallow dof then would the kit lens do that for me or would I need to buy an additional lens for the Sony 230, Olympus E-620 or Pentax K-X or Canon XSi? These are probably the 4 DSLRs that I am considering.

Also I have read on here that Canon is best for sports/action shots. Would the XSi be much better that the other 3 I'm looking into or do you need to move up to the T1i or T2i? I'm just not sure I want to spend that much right now.

Any great deals out there now on entry DSLRs?

Thanks so much for your help.
calmmom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2010, 9:57 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

calmmom-

The reason to move up to the T-series from the XSi model would be if you needed a higher ISO capability and HD video. The XSi handles everything nice right through ISO 1600.

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 5:06 PM.