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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 1, 2006, 8:27 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Terry-

I love your many replies. However, all you can talk about are C. cameras. There are many more cameras out there in the marketplace that folks ought to look at for their needs, other than just Canon all by itself.

In this case, the man is really interested in the Sony R-1. The R-1 is a ground breaking digital camera. It has a fantastic lens, it has received great reviews, why not let the gentleman at least consider the Sony R-1, rather than keep shoving the Canon line (not a bad line, but there are others out there!) down his throat.

Please take a break and come up for a breath of fresh air, Terry!

MT
Attached Images
 
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2006, 8:48 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

MTClimber,

The Canon Rebel XT was one of the cam's the gentleman mentioned.

I do push Canon at the DSLR level because they use the CMOS sensor rather than the CCD's.

I personally like the output of the CMOS sensor, especially at high ISO's.

I noticed the R1 is using a CMOS sensor which is a good thing.

The fact is, other manufacturers are trying to catch up to Canon (they own 60 percent of the DSLR market, then comes Nikon, then comes everbody else).

Just about every pro in the newspaper racket that I've met uses a Canon DSLR, with a few exceptions to a few Nikons out there.

So, if Canons are good enough for the pro's, it's not a bad recommendation for amateurs, in my opinion.

I am very open minded to other manufacturers and cameras.

I just wish they made better DSLR's generally better than Canon is currently producing.

Perhaps you could tell me what the pro's are using in your area of photographic interest?

-- Terry
terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2006, 3:55 AM   #13
E.T
Senior Member
 
E.T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 921
Default

[email protected] wrote:
Quote:
I'm not sure why Phil Askey would indicate that an R-1's lens, a 28mm-120 F2.8*to F4.8 lens would be worith $1,000.
I doubt anyone would pay $1,000 for a lens with a spec like that.
Because if you are serious about that best quality generic/standard kit lenses aren't equivalent to highest quality dedicated (&fixed) lenses.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A6.HTM


lord_ultra wrote:
Quote:
It would be great if there was an affordable lens that covered the range I'm after (really wide angle to mild telephoto).
One of the biggest downsides of bigger sensor size, convenient size/consumer price tag and (especially fast) lens with bigger zoom are mutually exclusive.
E.T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2006, 6:49 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

Interesting article, ET.

One thing they didn't mention in their article, is that DSLR's apply crop factor to a standard lens, which I think means removing the edges from the presented image from the lens.

Therefore, corner softness is removed, in a sense, because the sensor never sees the true corners of the lens (iit crops them).

However, it is true that a purpose built lens can be bulit less expensively to achieve the same or better result.

The R1 is a definitely a compelling offer.

I just wonder about it's poor low light performance (too many photo sites tacked on to too small a sensor size?) and the 20mb RAW files that take 9 seconds to write to the storage medium (too largeRAW size and too small buffer?)

The other problem is 120mm. Sometimes I shoot at 200mm and likewise plan to get a 300mm lens soom (400mm with crop factor).

You can't buy any lens for the R1 that takes you beyond 120mm, unless it's an attachment lens (yuck).

I would say if someone wanted a prosumer cam, the R1 is the best that's out there, and certainly challenges most people's need fo a DSLR.

-- Terry



terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2006, 9:45 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Hi Terry-

Believe me I was not attempting to be impolite at all. The broader perspective that you have adopted is much appreciated. Thank you! BTW at yesterday's football game I found Canon, Nikon, K-M, and Olympus being used. It seems that the pro's use whichever brand that they prefer.

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2006, 9:00 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14
Default

I think by now you are pretty confused about what to buy.I reviewed the Sony R1 and think its a darn good camera,but I remembered you mention your one month old son and placed myself in your position.
Besides taking some magnificent shots of his first steps,a movie clip of this event would be treasurable,(theR1 does not have a movie mode)but its possible you already have a Camcorder.
Look and review cameras that fit your needs,and make your decision solely on that.
Les Swaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2006, 11:21 PM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 42
Default

I have a nice camcorder. Panasonic GS120, 3CCD, with permanently attached wide angle converter. Very happy with it. It is fancier than the norm, but cheaper than the R1!

Someone mentioned in another post that the R1 does not have good bokeh. I Googled what that meant and apparently it is the blurry out of focus background effect. I do like that look, so that is a concern. I have seen some photos on pbase from the R1 that seem to have great bokeh, however.

Another concern is the exposure bracketing. I have been reading about blending two photos at different exposure extremes to get good detail in the land and sky on a landscape shot. The best way to get the exposures is to pick an aperture and use bracketing. The R1 seems to only do +1 and -1, but I have read that you should get the two exposures around 3.5 stops apart. So that would need roughly +2 and -2.

I think I will take another look at all the DSLRs, and the lenses that are available. I do like the idea of a really fast fixed focal length lens. And even a lens that goes greater than 24mm. or a stablised 400mm lens. for 90% of my needs, the R1 will be fine, although I'm not sure I should limit myself. Having a camera that goes click click click three times a second for as long as you want does look impressive.
lord_ultra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2006, 4:36 AM   #18
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Read this article about the R1...

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re.../sony-r1.shtml

I think the summary should give you a very good idea of whether it's the right camera for you.


peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2006, 3:58 AM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 42
Default

I read a review on the Olympus E500 and it sounds very impressive. I really like all the scene modes that expose what settings the camera recommends.

I can the E500 with the 14-45mm3.5-5.6 for $1199 AU, which is around $500 cheaper than the R1. There is a faster lens, but that would set me back another $800; the 14-54mm f2.8-3.5. I expect that would give better bokeh.

this chap seems smitten by Olympus also..

http://www.ayton.id.au/gary/photo/Dig_SLRs_table.htm

Well, will now have to wait till I get to play with the E500 *and* the R1.
lord_ultra 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 11:36 PM.