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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 26, 2010, 7:23 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
skylark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FiveO View Post
As I said, the sensor has already been used in at least 5 different cameras, not to mention a number of camcorders. There is no need to believe me nor Samsung as you can see with your own eyes that there is not a 50% improvement. As a matter of fact, you can read it in a large number of pro reviews also. Use your head for once.

... and you are free to post whatever you like and if it is incorrect, i will say so. It is you who needs to "grow up" if you can't defend your own position or take offense when someone disagrees with you.
FiveO,

Please do everyone a favor and stop policing their posts! And stop policing my posts! You only THINK that you're always right. In this case there's proof that what I posted is what Samsung said and you disrupted this thread needlessly. See what I mean?

You are just hijacking other people's threads with your policing tactics and trying to put others down to make yourself look good. There has always been healthy discussion but your personal attacking way is not the right way. This will be my last post to you in this thread. I won't be a party in hijacking the question that the OP wanted help on.

To the original poster, sorry for this disruption.
Sky
skylark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2010, 11:46 AM   #22
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

OK everyone. It's OK to disagree and post conflicting opinions.

But, please don't let posts get personal.

In other words, let's be civil and stick to discussing the cameras and their technology, not throw "jabs" at each other when opinions on a subject differ.

Thanks

JimC
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2010, 4:52 PM   #23
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 12
Default

I went and checked out a whole bunch of the cameras at a few stores. I realized the 4-5x xoom is plenty fine for me so although those 10x zooms are great, I realize I can't have it all. So I narrowed down the 2 most important items I want.

1. Best automatic low light photos
I want some manual adjustments but with 2 kids and baby, I am realistic I will barely use it. My kids (and dog!) just take better pics with no flash.

2. Good HD video that I can zoom at least partially and again, is fairly good in low light.

Hoping this can be my camera/camcorder I can take with me on the go and have for those quick moments. Will use my Sony camcorder for extensive videotography.

I love how the Zs5 felt in my hand. Some of the others are so small with no grip that I felt like I was having a hard time keeping my hand steady to take a shot. That said, I believe the ZS are bad in low light, correct? The pictures I took were great but of course all the stores have super bright lighting.
Suzanne74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2010, 5:33 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Suzanne-

Yes, the Panasonic ZS series due to their small imager and slow lens are indeed pretty bad in really low light.

In terms of really low light either the Canon S-90, the SD-4000, or the Samsung EX-1 will give you that low light capability, but all except the SD-4000 have only standard video,the SD-4000 is the exception with HD video, and none have your desired 5X to 6X optical zoom, the closest thay can come is 3.8X optical zoom.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2010, 11:00 PM   #25
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 12
Default

Sarah - thank you for your help. I really appreciate it! I will look over these choices. Do you notice such a big difference in the standard and HD video that makes the SD4000 a must pic for good video and low light or should I not worry too much about the HD component. My current camera's video is grainy but it is a few years old - so outdated.
Suzanne74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2010, 1:56 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Suzanne-

The Sd-4000's video is quite acceptable. But not only that, it is a really fun camera as well. I returned my Canon S-90 to keep the SD-4000 for it high ISO still photos and its wonderful video. I don't take much video at all, and it is a new experience, but it works well.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 2010, 7:33 PM   #27
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suzanne74 View Post
Sarah - thank you for your help. I really appreciate it! I will look over these choices. Do you notice such a big difference in the standard and HD video that makes the SD4000 a must pic for good video and low light or should I not worry too much about the HD component. My current camera's video is grainy but it is a few years old - so outdated.
I would just like to second my interest in the features that Suzanne74 is looking for. Our baby is due in a few weeks.

Low light photos and good video in same indoor light. I have already decided that I don't need HD if the SD video, especially in low light, is of high quality. Zooming during video does seem trickier to find, and I've also read that the mechanical noises of the zooming motors get picked up by the microphones during filming. So I guess I'm willing to drop that.

For me that puts the Canon S90 on the map. I have also read that the Panazonic LX3 shoots good low light video and does so in HD.

The Fuji F80exr has good low light photos and HD video with zoom, so that is also worth investigating, I guess. However, I haven't read about any enthusiasm for the video quality of the HD video in low light. The Fuji F70exr also zooms during movie recording, but it does not record HD video.

I'll keep on researching and post here with more info or questions. I think I will also add links to reviews and video clips I come across.

Last edited by alcatholic; Jun 28, 2010 at 7:46 PM.
alcatholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 2010, 7:35 PM   #28
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtclimber View Post
Suzanne-

The Sd-4000's video is quite acceptable. But not only that, it is a really fun camera as well. I returned my Canon S-90 to keep the SD-4000 for it high ISO still photos and its wonderful video. I don't take much video at all, and it is a new experience, but it works well.

Sarah Joyce
Were the photos and video better on the SD-4000, or did you choose the SD-4000 over the S90 for other reasons?
alcatholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 28, 2010, 8:35 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

I felt at times that the fine details with the SD-4000 were occasionally a bit ill defined. But based on the fun factor, and the HD video, I kept the SD-4000, but I still have two weeks of trial time left on it..

I am also considering a m4/3 camera or something in that niche, as a more long term solution that would allow more lens flexibility. I would prefer not to have to change cameras every 12 to 18 months. It seem that is how the camera manufacturers have designed their marketing and technology advances. I really would like to break that cycle, by moving up a bit higher on the camera "food chain."

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 1:03 PM.