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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 14, 2006, 5:24 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
algold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Israel
Posts: 369
Default

As they say, it's not a camera, it's a man behind it that counts.

artiemagee
If you are into sports and/or low-light photography, or just THINKING about buying additional/special lenses or bodiesand building a system - go for a DSLR.

If you are like me and just need a resonably good-quality camera for the time being, you can get any one of them in your list, it depends on your budget and personal preferences.

The ideal digicam for me (and for me only) would be an all-in-one 10-12 MP DSLR with a large sensor anda good quality fixed fast 24-200 mm lens with good macro, flash connector that syncs up to at least 1/1000 sec and a live LCD in addition to large and bright OVF. - sounds like a next generation Olympus E20.

Good luck wit your choice, whatever it will be - just enjoy it and shoot some pics, instead of overanalysing the "+" and "-" of different models and features that nobody ever uses.:-)






algold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2006, 12:42 PM   #22
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 10
Default

Hi Algold thanks for your comments,

I would'nt be much into sport photogrphy,be more into landscape, macro and general holiday snaps, but i want a camera also capable of taking good indoor shots like live music shows, parties, restaurants, family get togethers etc where 95% of the time use of a flash would'nt cause any objection.

Did you find it hard to get used to the evf on the 9500 and do you have problems with it hunting for focus, and what pp do you recommend thats effective butquite easy to use Thanks artie magee




artiemagee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2006, 1:19 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
tmoreau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 477
Default

There are two points that I think deserve the most attention, DOF and iso400-1600 performance (noise).

I've found that a fair amount of my photography requires at least iso800 (even when light appears good, and even when using flash... if you want pleasing results), and also that I really like using shallow DOF. Digicams (superzoom or otherwize) just can't do that. Price is obviously something to worry about, as an SLR system tends to get quite expensive as you add all the lenses it takes to replicate the purpose built one attached to a digicam. Perhaps you prefer a deep DOF where everything is always in focus, in which case you'd favor the superzoom.

DLSR's are photographic speed machines ala ferrari. Everything is about taking the photo, and doing it your way. The viewfinder is so much easier to use (I say this having switched to a DSLR from a superzoom type digicam) and manual focus is actually possible. The way the camera reacts to you is worlds better with a dslr versus any digicam I've used, and thats an important trait to me. I havent used the fz30 though, and I'm sure they are making progress in this area.

All-in-one lenses like a 28-300 are a compromise, and you wont be getting the best images that the D50 is capable of, BUT will they be better than the fz30? I can't answer that, but I'd say its worthwhile to consider, since the extra quality will always be just a lens change away. Also, 300mm on a dlsr is a very long lens, maybe you dont need that much reach?

Be weary about the macro designation on a lens, when its a zoom lens that often (usually!) means 1:4 which isnt neccasarily that close. A "true" macro lens goes to 1:1 where you can focus several inches away and fill the viewfinder with a bug or flower or whatever. Just make sure you know what your comparing, thats a silly trick they play.

Overall digicams are cheaper (until you consider future upgrades...), lighter, and more portable. They are also more inflexible, and seem to have a lot of say in the photographic process (such as when the shutter released, how long it takes to get through this or that menu, image processing for color/sharpness). For the snapshooter, its not really something to worry about.

I'm also very sensetive to the effects of noise, it bugs me more than it should. Even with a DSLR I use noise reduction software on all my favorite shots. With a digicam though, I find the noise deplorable and constantly struggling with it. With a dslr I can set iso800 and forget it, knowing the results will be fine.
tmoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2006, 4:30 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
algold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Israel
Posts: 369
Default

Hello, Artie Magee.

Please, keep in mind that I am no expert on digicams and photography and I still have a lot to learn .

tmoreau has covered all the major points already and there is not much Ican add.

To answer your questions:

The EVF on 9500 is very good with high resolution and refresh rate and a short lag. It's not anOVF of my old Nikon though, but I did not have any problems to get used to it and it is much better than EVF of my S5500. The tilting LCD is also useful for framing.

AF is good and fast, it hunts occasionally in low light at tele end of the zoom.

Up to ISO 400 noise is very low, you can hardly see it on A4 (8x10) prints, although it is visible on screen at a 100% magnification. It doesn't really mean much, because to see it in print you have to blow your images up to about 1mx1.5m - and you don't usually look at a picture of this size from a 30 cm distance. I still have to check ISO800 and 1600.

Hooking up my 10 years old Vivitar 283 flash gives me a working distance of about 15 meters.

Fuji's colours are very natural and you won't need much PP. My routine is simple: backing up the images (I never work on an original image), cropping, brightness and contrast adjustment, retouching if needed (cloning out small annoying elements, selective blur etc.), a little bit of sharpening (just go easy on it) and, finally, saving and archiving. I use Paint Shop Pro 9, but almost any image editor can do the same. Again, I am no expert here and just learning the ropes.

All in all, S9500 can do almost anything you can throw at it and do it well. Just don't rush it, it's not a simple and easy to start with camera. This is a compromise, as tmoreausaid, but this is the best in it's category compromise. For me this is the best (IMO) compromise I could have made until I'll be finally ready to invest in a DSLR system camera and lenses.

By all means, if you can afford it go for a DSLR. There used to be several good photo stores in Belfast, just go there and play with several cameras, see which one feels better for you. Have a look at Minolta 5D (I almost bought one with a kit 18-70mm lens). It is very good, has IS, ISO3200 and you can get second-hand Minolta AF lenses really cheap and they are good quality.

Best of luck,

Alex




algold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2006, 5:21 PM   #25
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 10
Default

Thanks to both of you for your comments / advice

i just didn't want to buy a digicam and regret not going that extra bit and getting an dslr, but on my budget it would have been an entry level , I think by what you have said a good digicam would prob be more than adequate for a beginner , but i will go into a good camera shop againand get the feel for the 9500 and a dslr (D10 beyond my budget ) either of yous used the E500 ?

Thanks again

artie magee
artiemagee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2006, 7:18 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
algold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Israel
Posts: 369
Default

artiemagee wrote:
Quote:
i just didn't want to buy a digicam and regret not going that extra bit and getting an dslr... artie magee
This reason alone is enough to go the DSLR route, IMO.

I have no personal experience with E500. It seems to be a nice budget DSLR, although a bit slow to start up, higher noise level than it's competition and Oly's lenses are good but tend to be quite expensive. I have no idea what your budget is, but with the prices I've seen on the www.firstcall-photographic.co.ukI would have bought Nikon D50 with a kit lens, which would be about £50 more than Fuji 9500, and start building a system from there. I don't know what the price of E500 is. Over here the price of E500 with a kit lens is almost x2 of Fuji's.

To be completely honest, I've sold my Nikon SLR film body and 3 zoom lenses that ranged from 24mm to 210mm and that I used only twice for the last year, and bought 9500. - Call me stupid, but it was just too heavy for me to lug it around:lol:


algold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2006, 7:46 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

algold-

You are surely not alone in your dilema. I too, convinced/hyptoized myself that the S-9000 would be a very viable, all in one alternative, to going dSLR. I purchased the S-9000 in early October 2005, and began kicking myself almost immediately. By the first week in December I had purchased a dSLR camera, and the quality of my photos skyrocketed. Don't we do strange things to ourselves?

I firstwent withthe Olympus E-300 because I found a real deal on E-Bay. The E-300 is a wonderful camera, and best of all it opened my eyes to the high quality of the so called Olympus kit lenses. The are indeed very high quality surpassing both the Canon and Nikon "kit lenses" by a wide margin. I then added the E-500 as soon as it was available, and found an even better dSLR.

In retrospect, I must say that due to the much greater capability ofconsumer dSLR cameras, that most users are very pleasantly surprised by the huge increase in the quality of their photos, when they compare their dSLRimages, side by side, to their old P&S images. The difference is dramatic!

Get a dslr and enjoy much higher quality images!

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 14, 2006, 10:13 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
tmoreau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 477
Default

To add a bit, I think that the difference from the cheapest DSLR to the most expensive is only in how you use it (controls, frames per second, flexibility in autofocus modes) and not in image quality. There are exceptions, but overall they are all very similar when your comparing to digicams. When people argue about the differences between DSLR models, its good to keep in mind how small these relative differences are.

Lens selection on a DSLR will have a big effect on image quality, more than about anything else, but this is rarely mentioned since there are lenses availible to do whatever you want.

I really cant give advice on the specific models your interested in, but if you can get your hands on them in a store you'll probably get pretty strong and immediate impressions about them. Try to pay attention to how long it takes to snap that impromptu photo, camera responsiveness (or lack of) can be frustrating. So can huge camera size, or oddly placed buttons. In the end its all about the photos, but you have to have a camera that lets you make them without causing too many missed opertunities and frustration. I've regretted not having a better camera before, when I caught a great shot and the quality was limited by my equipment, but I've also regretted not having my big camera with me on plenty of occasions. (That dosent help much, does it?) I'm not happy with anything short of a dslr, out of what I've used. But thats in my circumstances, not yours.

I guess the point is, each person needs to prioritize the compromizes and find a camera that fits, cause it'll be different for everyone. If you do go with a digicam, dont fall into the rut of feeling like you cant make a great picture because of your equipment. There are sites that allow you to search users photos by camera model, and you'll find some amazing work done with, in some cases, very poor equipment. In these cases you might find that the 'poor equipment' was not used in certain circumstances (like low light, or fast action, or whatever), that is, the photographers worked within thier limits. That difference can be one of art versus snapshooting to document an event....
tmoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2006, 1:28 AM   #29
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 52
Default

Once you use a TTL view finder (DSLR's) there is no going back to EVF.....lol, I had a FUji S5000, Olympus C-770 and walked in to the store to get the Fuji S9000 but bought the Rebel XT with the Sigma 18-200, My other camera is a small NIkon 7600,I use it when I don't want to cary around my canon, good luck to you all:|
ht770 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 15, 2006, 1:31 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

audioedge wrote:
Quote:
What I mean is, with a Superzoom there really isnt anything else worth buying for it (stay clear of 'adapter lens' things).
What is wrong with adding conversion lenses to a Superzoom?


meanstreak 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 8:44 PM.