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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 3, 2006, 5:19 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Hi mtclimber:

I think you need to be more clear when saying iso1600 is usable on the S9500. It's not very usable beyond 4x6 prints, even that may be a stretch unless you perform some post-filtering. The same goes for iso1600 on the S5200 unless you shoot in RAW, which honestly no one does very often unless they have all the time in the world and have tons of memory card space. If you try to shoot RAW in a concert, you will miss so many opportunities waiting for the camera to write to flash card (9 seconds for S9500, 6 seconds for S5200)

Besides iso, the speed of the lens is also very important. You have the S9500, which close down to around f4.5 at 300mm, that is a full-stop slower than the S5200 at full-telephoto 380mm (f3.2), so you would need to bump the iso sensitivities up a notch to achieve the same shutter speed.

For dSLR, obviously it has superior iso performance, but the user may be disappointed with the results if you just use the kit lens. For example, the E500's telephoto kit lens, similar to the S9500, close down to f4.5 at full zoom, not very fast for sure. So the user have to invest in some serious cash for a good telephoto lens to get the most out of the dSLR.

curtis







mtclimber wrote:
Quote:


On the Fuji S-9000, I can use ISO 1600 ( 4 times faster than any of the cameras you listed) and ISO 3200 on the Pentax 1st DS ( 8 times faster than the cameras that you listed). The ISO makes ALL the difference!

I will attach a Fuji S-9000 sample photo to this post.

MT
curtisfun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2006, 5:25 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 21
Default

WOW those pictures are beautiful. You guys are getting WAY to technical for this novice. All I'm looking for is the best point and shoot camera, as I can't bring changable lenses or professional cameras into a concert. I would like to know what would also make the picture taking faster. Like it seems like I shoot when the lead singer is almost posing for me but the camera is too slow and I miss out on that shot. The FZ30 is too big from what I understand. I also like to take video clips with the camera. So if any of this information helps in what you think I need I would love to hear what you have to say. Thanks for your help thus far.
Deb308 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2006, 5:47 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

If the FZ30 is too big, check out its little brother FZ5, it has very fast focusing. Iso400 performance however, is marginal at best. Unfortunately iso400 is probably the minimum setting required to freeze action at a concert. And I believe you can only record 320x240 movies with the FZ5.

The S5200 has a good video mode, it can take full-frame 640x480 30fps video with sound until the card fills up, but you can't use zoom during recording. If you overlook the lack of zoom in video mode, then give the S5200 a seriously look, you can get decent 8x10 print at iso800 and 4x6 print at iso1600 after some post-filtering.

There really aren't too many choices out there when it comes to decent low-light performance cameras, especially when it comes to ultrazooms. I think the S5200 is the best all-around ultrazoom camera out there. At $300 it's an incredible bargain.

curtis
curtisfun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2006, 5:56 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 21
Default

Thank you SO MUCH.
Deb308 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2006, 6:52 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Curtis-

You might not have noticed:

1. That I very carefully stated specifically which lens I used on each dSLR.

2. I never suggested using the kit lens on any dSLR I posted about.

3. I have been doing this for a long time, and it is my business.

4. I clearly indicated that the Fuji S-9000/S-9500 was not my best nor my #1 digital camera for taking concert and stage photos.

5. I have reviewed everyone of your photos that are posted on the internet.

6. I understand the equipment, the techniques, and feel that I have results that bear that out.

Any photo taken at high ISO setting, and when pushing any digital camera to its limits or near its limits will require some post processing. All of my photos are copyrighted and I think they speak for themselves in terms of quality, clarity, and proper exposure.

What is it exactly that you find wrong with my photos? My customers like my photos a lot.

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2006, 8:12 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 141
Default

Deb, you've received a lot of good advice, even if it's not all in agreement. Now you just have to decide which advice is relevant to you!

If you want to capture the kind of stunning images that mtclimber displays, then you can't settle for anything less than the best. Be prepared to spend a lot of money, and understand too that equipment alone won't do it. You'll also have to spend 40+ years as a working photographer, learning how to deal with every possible situation and training your eye to find compelling compositions. If that's what you want, it'll be well worth the expense and the effort.

But as long as your goals are more modest, there are other options available. I'm partial to Panasonic cameras, but I think Curtis's recommendation of the Fuji 5200 might be more appropriate for you. You can see his examples, and if check out the Panasonic forum, you can find some examples of concert photos taken in those settings. Several experts have already told you that these cameras are inadequate for the task... at least, by their standards. You'll have to decide whether or not they meet your standards.

I think it's certainly possible to improve on your Bon Jovi photos with one of these cameras. Not radically, but enough that you will enjoy and take pleasure in the improvement.

And that is the point, isn't it?
Robb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2006, 8:47 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Robb-

Thanks for a very well balanced and fair post. You are very correct. To get really good concert or on stage photos takes both an investment in equipment, and years of experience. I actually have almost 14 years more than your post describes.

Again, thanks for the post. I personally think that my pictures speak for themselves.

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2006, 9:09 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Sorry, I can't seem to put anything after the quotes on my browser:


1 & 2. the dSLR reference was not specifically addressed to you, I am just writing abouts beginners who dive into dSLR will generally start with the kit-lens, thinking they can get incredible quality image, but will end up disappointed. Just want to let Deb308 be aware of that.

3.
The only dSLR I have experience with are the Nikon D70 and I had a chance to play with the Olympus E500 for a few days. The Pentax DS picture of the Chinese lions looks sharp, but is quite noisy along the columns, or it could just be stucco texture, I can't tell which is which. A 100% crop of just the column itself may be helpful I have no experience with the Pentax dSLR, I didn't even know it offer iso3200, how well does it hold up? What is the EXIF on that picture?

4. well, you try to compare the S9500, saying that it's 4 times faster than other ultrazooms, which is a little bit misleading to a reader unless you've clarify iso1600 is barely usable in the S9500. It's similar to the Kodak p850, it has iso800, but you can only achieve it at 1MP resolution, good for web display only. Just want to make sure Deb308 has realistic expectation of the camera and not be disappointed when she finds out iso1600 image is like watercolor painting right out of the camera.

5. None of your pics have anything wrong with them, the color and exposure look good, and due to copyright reasons, it's understandable you can't post any bigger versions of them for closer evaluations, but 100% crop of a small portion of each image would've been helpful. None of my concert pics look too good at 5MP, big after I resized them to 3MP, they look much better, with just enough pixels left for a decent 8x10 print. BTW most of the pics I took at iso1600 with the S5200 looks sharp and clear as well after I resized them to 1024x768, I even shot an iso3200 equivalent and it looks good small:


This was shot at iso400 in jpeg mode but underexposed by 3 fstops to achieve iso3200 equivalent (click on image for full res which looks crap).


http://curtisfun.myphotoalbum.com/vi...7_400_100_full


6. It's true that experienced photographers see post-processing as a routine, but most users who just want a simple point- and shoot do not have much experience with PP and would most likely just send the picture direct to a Walmart, Target, etc to get the pictures develop.

curtis


mtclimber wrote:
Quote:
Curtis-

You might not have noticed:

1. That I very carefully stated specifically which lens I used on each dSLR.

2. I never suggested using the kit lens on any dSLR I posted about.

3. I have been doing this for a long time, and it is my business.

4. I clearly indicated that the Fuji S-9000/S-9500 was not my best nor my #1 digital camera for taking concert and stage photos.

5. I have reviewed everyone of your photos that are posted on the internet.

6. I understand the equipment, the techniques, and feel that I have results that bear that out.

Any photo taken at high ISO setting, and when pushing any digital camera to its limits or near its limits will require some post processing. All of my photos are copyrighted and I think they speak for themselves in terms of quality, clarity, and proper exposure.

What is it exactly that you find wrong with my photos? My customers like my photos a lot.

MT
curtisfun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2006, 9:04 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Curtis-

The bottom line, I am afraid, is simply that the S-5200 is actually better that the much hearlded, and supposedly betterS-9000.

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2006, 11:05 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
toshi43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vernon BC Canada
Posts: 1,618
Default

Let's keep things in perspective, shall we? Putting a camera like the Fuji S9000 in the same competitve class as a DSLR islike comparing a Honda Civic to an S-Class Mercedes. They both have engines and four wheels, but they're targeted at a slightly different kind of consumer.

Just because a person can't afford the so-called 'best' doesn't mean he or she is any less capable or less enthusiastic about their hobby. The solution to what camera to buy is simple - buy the best you can afford and enjoy it. You'll be amazed at what you can do, even on a very limited budget.


toshi43 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 2:59 AM.