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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 18, 2005, 9:51 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 34
Default

Hi All,

I recently sold my Canon G5 intending to get a G6. But, for a little more, the Nikon 8800 has every feature I want in a camera, except for a 28mm wide-angle. Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that no matter what review site you visit, sample pictures from a Nikon are never quite as sharp as a Canon, nor is the color as vivid. I know some will argue that the Nikon color is more realistic, but it's hard to arguewith the beautiful colors a Canon can get.

So, having never owned a Nikon, can the sharpening and color saturation controls in it approach or equal the quality of the Canon Digic processor? If so, the 8800 and a wide-angle lens might be the ticket.

I was a little diasappointed when I physically played with the G6. Pictue quality is great, and in fact I think the 8 Meg cameras should all be refitted with the 7.1 CCD since it clearly is sharper and exhibits much less CA, but something just didn't "feel" right about the G6. It certainly wasn't as comfy as my G5.:sad:

Then again, with the price drop and the 1.0.1.0 firmware update, the Canon Pro 1 comes into consideration. I wonder how Steve's review would rate it with the new upgrade?

Has anyone tried these cameres side by side? Which has better shot to shot times? If I'm at an air show and the Blue Angels come flying overhead, which can capture that, then go home and take macros of an ant's feet? Which can take excellent photos of a band playing in a dark room with only their own light show?

The perfect camera for me would have a 2-2.5" 270 degree swivel LCD, self-timer, 28mm or better wide-angle, 10x zoom with IS, at least 5 MP, fast auto focus, competentcy in the dark, 640 x 480 movie mode @ 30 ips, great Macro capability, and of course, wash the dishes and mow my yard. Other cameras will be considerd if anybody knows of something coming close to this description.

If you've read this far, thank you for putting up with it all. Like eveyone else, I'm just trying to get something close to that imaginary "perfect " camera. All of your comments are greatly appreciated, and I especially thank Steve for hosting this forum.
Scrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 18, 2005, 10:37 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Scrench wrote:
Quote:
Which can take excellent photos of a band playing in a dark room with only their own light show?
None of them.

The 8MP models have higher noise than the 5MP models (which is saying a lot, since the 5MP models are not known for low noise). So, for club lighting without a flash, you'd have high noise (from trying to increase ISO speeds), and/or motion blur from slow shutter speeds.

Also, keep in mind that the lens on your G5 was brighter than the lenses on these models, allowing faster shutter speeds for the same lighting and ISO speed. For example, f/2.0 (the maximum aperture at wide angle on the G5) is exactly twice as bright as f/2.8 (the maximum aperture at wide angle on the Nikon you're looking at).

If you were unable to get acceptable quality photos of a band playing using your G5, you'renot going to be able to get them with the models you're looking at. The Nikon's VR won't help reduce motion blur for moving subjects (and band members aren't going to be motionless). You need faster shutter speeds for that (which requires a brighter lens, shooting at higher ISO speeds).

The G5, usinghigher ISO speeds may be able to pull it off, if you stay at wider focal lengths, and hold the camera steady (using Noise Removal Tools to clean them up later). But, don't expect to ge able to do this with camera having slower lenses and higher noise levels.

The G6 may be an improvement in this area (noise), and has a lens rated the same as your G5 (f/2.0 at wide angle, stopping down to f/3.0 at full zoom). But, it would be "borderline" in this type of environment, too.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 19, 2005, 5:46 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 34
Default

Jim,

Thanks for your reply, and you know, that's kind of the bad news I expected. I'm thinking that out of the group I mentioned, the G6 would probably be the best "all-around" camera. I really had no complaints about my G5 except I wish it had more at wide-angle and zoom.

I'm starting to consider the Canon Rebel SLR or Nikon D70. Would this be more in the ballpark I want to be in?

Thank You.


Scrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2005, 7:44 AM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Scrench wrote:
Quote:
Thanks for your reply, and you know, that's kind of the bad news I expected. I'm thinking that out of the group I mentioned, the G6 would probably be the best "all-around" camera. I really had no complaints about my G5 except I wish it had more at wide-angle and zoom.

I'm starting to consider the Canon Rebel SLR or Nikon D70. Would this be more in the ballpark I want to be in?

Well, you'll need to decide what conditions you'll use a model in more often, and try to match up the camera that fits those needs best. The G6 would probably be better suited to existing light shooting compared to the others, because it's got a brighter lens, and the newer 7MP CCD has better noise characterstics as ISO speeds are increased compared to the 8MP models. But, if you need more optical zoom, one of the other models may be best.

No one model is going to be perfect for all shootingconditions, just as no one vehicle is perfect for all road conditions. So, you have to make tradeoffs.

As far as as DSLR, these are faster, and can shoot at higher ISO speeds with lower noise. But, for existing light shooting, you'll still need a brighter lens to go with one (although a 50mm f/1.8 is small and inexpensive for this purpose). Since you asked about macros, this in an area that would be more difficult with a DSLR model, since they have a much shallower depth of field for any given 35mm focal length and aperture. So, you'll need a decent macro lens to go with one, and will need to use much smaller apertures for some subjects (which can mean longer shutter speeds). You would also not have the ability to frame using the LCD, and would give up video recording ability (something else you sounded interested in).

This would also be a larger, heavier, and more expensive solution (especially if you need a brighter lens with longer focal lengths).

Again, each type of camera has it's own strengths and weaknesses. None are going to be perfect for all users and all conditions.


JimC 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 11:12 PM.