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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 14, 2005, 9:40 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 12
Default

I've been thinking about the CanonS1 and Lumix FZ3 for quite some time, but now the Fugi S5100 (does the S5100 really have bad macro?)and Kodak DX-7590 and the Kyocera M410Rare looking good too. I like the ultrazoom cameras, but I won't be using the 10x all of the time.I shoot mostly animals, scenery, and nature shots, butI also need a good burst mode. I've heard bad things about imagequality from Kyocera, is this true? So, for a casualphotographer who will use the big zoomnot every time, which is best? I've heard theimage stabilization is great, but is it really necessary for me? Thanks for any input.
ben4147 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 14, 2005, 10:44 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 440
Default

IS isn't necessary for anyone. There are people whohave stated here that IS will allow you to always get the shot, but that isn't true. It is just a nice feature to have, allowing you to shoot handheld at shutter speeds lower than what could be normally done.Lack of IS doesn't sound the death knell for your photography - you can compensate by using a tripod - although not everyone wants to mess with those.

The way I look at it - youcan spend $350 on a zoom with IS, or you can spend $350 on a zoom without IS. Might as well get it, and have it there when you need it.

The macro shots that I've seen from the 5100 seemed just fine. What do you mean by "bad macro"?

PhilR.
PhilR. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2005, 11:10 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 149
Default

I picked up the Fugi 5100 in the store, liked it so much all around, I couldn't put it down, so I bought it. It's been a great camera all around, butIkept thinking I was missing something without "IS", so a real good deal came around from Dell, andI bought the S1 to compare, head, to head, the Fugi had sharper pics, & video, then the S1, with alot less noise in low light. Plus the Canon would hunt for focus, or never focus, in low light,where theFugi had no problem, probably because it has a goodAFassist light. Even the EVF was clearer on the Fugi, I also noticed shot, to shot, times were faster on the Fugi, And to top it all off, I couldn't tell when I had the ISturned on with the Canon?,,, no indicator, except a pair of "shakyhands"?,,, I really didn't notice much difference with it either way! After 2 days, the Canon died??? so back it went to Dell Yeah, I know, no zoom in video, no in camera pic rotation, and no enhancedcolor, But,

Bottom line, Do ya want IS on a mediocre camera, or no IS on a good camera?

Only you can decide, personally considering the combination ofgood pics, &video, I think the S5100 is the best "Bang for the Buck" superzoomout there, until maybe an S2 comes along!
MikDee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2005, 11:49 PM   #4
KSV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
Default

I have FZ10. IMHO IS isindispensable feature for long zoom (say 150+ equivivalent) shooting - you can shoot with *MUCH* slower speed and therefore have a catch witch is impossible without IS. Also it is true that having IS will not deliver to you 100% success - my rating is about 70% or so. So if you more about macro that long zoom then you can easy survive without IS. But if so ask yourself why do you need big zoom? Hyperzoom cameras have smaller (and nosier) sensors plus you can not expect perfect optical performance from 10+ zoom lens - there *WILL* be more fringing and distortions then from say 3x optic.
KSV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2005, 7:36 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 436
Default

Image stabilized cameras are useful for handheld telephoto shots. As you zoomany smallamount ofhand movement is magnified and, unless you have a fast shutter speed, you are going to see the effects in the final shot.

What did people do before IS cameras?

They used a camera support like a tripod or a monopod or even a beanbag. Even now, a camera that does not have built-in IS can benefit just as much from using a tripod. But, people are lazy and don't want to carry the extra equipment around...and a good tripod can be heavy. However, I have had excellent results from using a small pocket tripod and my camera's self timer feature. This guarantees a stable base and the self timer eliminates any vibration from pressing the shutter button.

IS can gain you a few extra stops of handholding ability, but it doesn't guarantee a great shot.

This shot was done with the equivalent of 1000mm and used a simple monopod as a support. It was necessary to track the moving aircraft as they passed and eliminate camera shake. My shutter speed was almost fast enough to stop the propellors.


Meryl Arbing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2005, 10:43 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 238
Default

i have had no issues with image quality at all with the M410r.... see the kyocera forum on here for a few examples... we are all happy.

as far as image stabilisation goes i havent found it necessary at all.... i can get full zoom shots in dull conditions and the camera is still banging away with shutter speeds of 1/700 sec. in difficult conditions i use the continuous shot mode... and burst it for as long as required... i have very shakey hands, but with continuous mode at least 1 shot is in focus and without blur! a bit hit and miss but it gets you round it. bear in mind it shoots 3.3fps continuously... or 2 fps with cont auto focus until the card is full!.

there are a few good reviews on the net steves review was a good one of it too.

the proof tho is in the pictures and in the using of it. This is only my opinion and there are some other great cameras out there, however is suited my needs... a fast camera with bright big zoom lens oh and at a very good price. its surprising how often you use the lens!

the only downside is that Kyocera have just announced that they are pulling out of the market.... if it bothers you go with something else if it doesnt you should be able to get some stunning bargains around.... also rollei have taken the m410r as one of theirs so i assume that kyocera are going to continue making this for them? i may be wrong however.

if you ned any full size shots let me know and i can email them to you

Steve
5teve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2005, 11:12 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default

The camera companies are advertising 3 f-stops advantage with stabilization. That means you can take the same shot handheld with 1/8 the light. I think 3 f-stops is a bit optimistic, but it is over 2. It isn't necessary but IMO it is a desirable feature.

In a similar discussion last week I went out behind my house on a sunny day and metered on something in the shade. Not deep shade like a forest – something just not in the sun. The camera metered for 1/60 second at f2.8. Using good shooting technique the standard rule is that you need about 1/400 second to get a really sharp handheld shot at 12X. If there were a bird or animal in the shade you needed the zoom for you would also need a tripod. Good nature photographers carry a tripod, but it is nice to be able to grab a shot without one.

Stabilization gives the same advantage at wide angle. Where you would need enough light to generate 1/30 second for an available light you can shoot at 1/4 second handheld with stabilization if you accept the 3 f-stops. Many people claim they are getting sharp shots at 1/4 second but I am happier at 1/6. In any case, there are many shots you can take in available light with stabilization you need a tripod for without it.

I agree with MikDee that I would rather have a superior camera without stabilization than an inferior one with it. But that isn't necessarily your choice. I do agree that if you want good video and a long zoom your choices are limited. But if you are interested mainly in still pictures there are some good cameras with stabilization. The FZ3 is a competent camera with f2.8 at full zoom and an excellent burst mode. You might want to wait for some full tests on the FZ5 and see where Panasonic prices it if you want more pixels.

To answer your specific questions, the 5100 has very good macro except for the flash. It doesn't throttle down well and the lens blocks it. You have the same problem with most super-zooms – the FZ3 lens also blocks the flash for macro.

The M410R got mixed reviews. Jeff at DCTP had enough complaints to give me pause. It is frustrating to not be able to focus for a flash shot in dim light due to the omission of a focus assist. He didn't seem terribly pleased with the images either: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ky..._m410r-review/ Steve wasn't quite as critical, so Jeff might have gotten a bad sample. The lack of a focus assist is still true though.

slipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2005, 11:28 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 238
Default

i've not struggled too much without the focus assist, but generally they are only any good upto about 2 or 3 meters.... nothing more.

i think with most cameras at this price they all have their strengths and weakness's they probably decided to save money on the focus assist and go for the rather good EVF instead. the cost in the uk for one if these is now around £227 including VAT and a high speed card.

at the end of the day its what suits your needs... reviews are ok .... but like you say what if he had a dodgy camera... it ruins it all... there are i think more favourable reviews than bad ones the proof is in the pictures!

im happy with mine and thats whats important to me, plus i can only comment on my comparisons between what i have seen from a picture point of view with other cams and mine,i cant comment on the usabilityof others as i have no experience!

Steve
5teve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2005, 3:36 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 12
Default

on dcrp reviews the said that it was impossible to get a good shot with the macro.
ben4147 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2005, 4:00 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 238
Default

i'd suggest they had a very suspect camera

check out the threads here as there are several on macro shots

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_forum.php?id=19

there are lots of guys messing about with them and using aux lenses to get ridiculously close to things, i'm talking full frame shot of 1mm! bit of effort to do it tho :G

this thread is one of them

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...=19&page=1

hope this helps.... like i say check out the shots... not many people know about kyocera but are generally pleasantly surprised.

steve
5teve 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 2:41 PM.