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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 10, 2010, 8:25 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

A DSLR will give you much better results then the FZ35, especially when the lighting is not great. There is no question about that. It will certain give you better depth of field results then FZ in good lighting.

The DSLR with all the lens option, is the product line for more photography growth.

But it is impossible to get one perfect camera. I have a dslr, an EVIL camera, and 2 point and shoots.
__________________
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; Jun 10, 2010 at 8:31 PM.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 2010, 2:15 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Alicia-

Are the M-42 lens valuable enough that the must be preserved and used? It would seem that a good entry level DSLR would give you the increased image quality under a variety of conditions that you desire.

While I also own a Panasonic FZ-35, I also shoot with DSLR cameras as well. And yes, even an entry level DSLR will produce better image quality under a variety of lighting conditions.

The DSLRs have the advantage because they have much larger (roughly 15 to 20X the size) imagers than P+S cameras like the FZ-35. That is a substantial advantage. The downside is that DSLR camera don't do as much in camera processing of the images. So with a DSLR expect to do some photo editing.

Sarah Joyce

Last edited by mtclimber; Jun 11, 2010 at 4:43 PM.
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 2010, 3:09 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

I had an FZ30 for a month and sold it at a loss to get a Pentax dSLR because I was disappointed with the results. Yes, an entry level dSLR is capable of giving you significantly better results (but its also easier to get things really wrong, too). Since you are familiar with film slr cameras you shouldn't have that much trouble with much of the transition. I do a lot of landscapes and macro and am still shooting with a Pentax dSLR (I sold my first one and am now shooting with the K7).
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 2010, 4:00 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

well with a dslr, you get to use the kit lenses for convenience, and get a m42 adapter. And you can play with the older lenses when you want to. Some of those older lenses are very very good. The older vivtar series 1 and some of the german lenses are exceptional. That is one more plus in getting a dslr vs a megazoom like the FZ. Also it is not that much more for a pentax k-x with just one kit lens. 520 dollars right now at adorama, vs 340-370 for a FZ 35.
__________________
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 Jun 11, 2010, 5:32 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
... The older vivtar series 1 ... are exceptional. ...
Some of those Vivitar Series 1 lenses were very good, but some were not. Each year, Vivitar selected the lowest bidder to make them, and some were better than others.
__________________
  • 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 Jun 11, 2010, 5:40 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Not the ones made back in the 80's, allot of them were way better then the oem lenses. The more modern ones do get crappy.
__________________
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 Jun 11, 2010, 8:44 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 114
Default

About my lenses- no, I'm not so sure they're worth working with. I expect I would have to shell out for modern lenses within pretty short order. Here's what I have:
Toshiba 49 mm S L39-3
Asahi Super Takumar 1:35/28 and 1:1.4/50
Under_rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 2010, 9:15 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
Not the ones made back in the 80's, allot of them were way better then the oem lenses. The more modern ones do get crappy.
Even back then, some of them were superb, but some of them were mediocre, and you really couldn't tell the difference, without putting it through it's paces. For instance, there were 8 different versions of the Vivitar Series 1 70-210. A few were outstanding, but some were unremarkable.

See:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/856452/0#8010361
http://www.robertstech.com/vivitar.htm

And the Series 1 70-210 was one of their premier lenses, along with their 90-180/4.5 and 105/2.5 macro. Some of the other Series 1 lenses were actually pretty bad.
__________________
  • 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; Jun 11, 2010 at 9:22 PM.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 12, 2010, 1:12 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

I don't know about your Toshiba, but the Super Takumar 50mm 1.4 has a good reputation. I don't have any M42 lenses because they always seemed to me more work than I wanted to deal with but I've seen others post pictures with the Tak 50 that were very good. I have a number of manual K-mount lenses and enjoy using them. However, I'm not sure I'm willing to give up having the camera be able to stop down the lens. With the M42 lenses you either have to focus and then set the aperture/stop down the lens or try to focus through a possibly dark viewfinder if you are using a small aperture.
mtngal 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 11:52 PM.