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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 8, 2006, 11:25 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 49
Default

If I used a KM7D with auto mode, would the image quality be better than if I used the Sony H2 in auto mode? I'm a novice, P&S person, but willing to learn.

Eventually I would like to take photos in a school gym, where there will be very low light, plus I will need a zoom lens. Would the KM7D with the Tamron lens that I've read about on other threads (28-300 I think) give me what I'm looking for? Will I be able to use the auto mode for this?

All advice will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
techaide2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 8, 2006, 12:07 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

The bargain priced Tamron 28-300mm lens for the KM 7D being sold by Cord Camera and Cameta Camera are not bright enough (do not have a sufficiently wide enough aperture to take good photos without flash) in a conventionally lighted gym.

You would need something like a F 2.8 aperture when at your desired zoom to get what you want.

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2006, 10:33 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 49
Default

Approximately how much would a lens like that cost?

Also, getting back to leaving the DSLR in auto mode, will those pictures be better than a P&S camera in auto mode?

The prices are coming down so much on the entry level DSLRs. I'm trying to decide if I should get a better camera and hope that I can learn to use it - even though I know it's too much camera for me right now. At the same time, I hate to spend twice as much money and not see a big difference in the image quality.:?

Thanks again for your help.

techaide2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2006, 11:45 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

techaide2 wrote:
Quote:
Approximately how much would a lens like that cost?

Also, getting back to leaving the DSLR in auto mode, will those pictures be better than a P&S camera in auto mode?

The prices are coming down so much on the entry level DSLRs. I'm trying to decide if I should get a better camera and hope that I can learn to use it - even though I know it's too much camera for me right now. At the same time, I hate to spend twice as much money and not see a big difference in the image quality.:?

Thanks again for your help.
The DSLR will always win out especially in low light. The P&S camera pictures will appear to have more vibrant colors because the in-camera processing boosts the color. With a 7D you can program the camera to do basically the same. I boost my color and sharpness up with the 28-300mm Tamron and get good results. You can also edit the images with software to do the same. Most P&S owners want results out of the box and can't be bothered with post processing. I agree that the Tamron 28-300mm may have trouble with indoors sports unless you have great lighting, though I have never had the opportunity to try it under those circumstances. The lens I rely on when the lighting is limited and I need to capture fast action is the 28-75mm 2.8 KM lens. The range may not be good enough depending on what you are shooting and how close you are, but it does a heck of a job in low light.

In all honesty, from what I have seen in this forum it seems anyone who has ever been on the fence about a P&S verses DSLR either buys a DSLR right off the bat or ends up buying it later on. I learned it through personal experience and was fortunate enough that I was able to return my ultra-zoom P&S. It just couldn't cut it when it came to taking serious pictures unless under well lit conditions. Most people who claim they are happy with the results are kidding themselves. Ask anyone who has had one and ended up with a DSLR. Don't get me wrong, there is a time and a place to use a point & shoot, but there is no such thing as a one-size fits all camera. I intend on purchasing an Fuji F30 very shortly for those situations where carrying a DSLR is not convenient.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2006, 12:27 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

meanstreak's reply is a good one. DSLR cameras will take measurably better photos than a P&S camera under the same circumstances because the average DSLR imager is substantially larger than any P&S camera's CCDand because, generally speaking, and of course, there are exceptions, DSLR cameras use measurably better lenses to record the photo.

With careful shopping you should be able to find a consumer DSLR camera that will meet your needs. Please tell us more about the lighting situation in your example gym, and how far away from the subject you will hypothetically be when taking the photo.

Here is a no flash/existing lightexample. This was taken with a Nikon refurbished D-50 ($399) and a Sigma 30mm lens ($320).

MT
Attached Images
 
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2006, 12:30 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 49
Default

Thank you for the replies. The biggest drawback of the DSLR for me is that I will really miss the 10-12X optical zoom of the P&S cameras.:sad:
techaide2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2006, 12:55 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 49
Default

Mtclimber, I didn't see your post before I replied. We have an old gym so lighting is not the best. For sports photos I would be close to the action (we only have 3 rows of bleachers :lol: (very small school with very small gym). For school plays I would be further away, the stage would be lit, with the rest of the gym dark.The stage curtains are black. I've gotten some photos with a P&S by getting close and using the flash, but I really hate to use the flash as it could bother the kids. I work for the school and like to forward the photos to our local newpaper. The photos don't have to be professional quality as it's just a small-town, local newspaper.

This would be my personal camera. I'd like to stay around $1,000, and have no brand preference at this point. I questioned the KM7D because I had seen it mentioned on other threads and the anti-shake seems like a very good idea. My local stores carry the Olympus E500, Canon Rebel XT (I think that's it), and the Nikon D50. They also carry the Sony H2, Kodak P850, and the Canon S2IS.

The ultra zoom cameras are so convenient and more affordable, but I'm afraid I won't get the results that I want. On the other hand, I don't know that I can get the results that I want for $1,000 either.

techaide2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2006, 12:58 PM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 49
Default

Sorry, one more question. Mtclimber, how close were you in your example photo of no flash, existing light? This looks fantastic to me. Thanks again.
techaide2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2006, 2:58 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

techaide-

You see, I can really personally relate to your desires because 40 years ago I was attempting to do the very same kind of photos, and not having any sucess. Today I conduct Digital Camera Workshops all over the world.

So, if you can bear with the slowness of posting on a forum, let's start from ground zero and build up your knowledge a bit.

(1) The P for program mode on any digital camera, including P&S cameras and DSLR's, does the very same thing as "AUTO." However, there is a huge advantage to be gained by using the "P" mode instead of the "AUTO" mode. That advantage is this: now you can use more of the features that are thereand easily available on your camera.

Here a few of those features, that in most cameras, you cannot use when in the "AUTO" mode.

a) you can increase the ISO or ability of the camera to take good photos with less light.

(b) you can now gain access to all of your camera's flash modes. There are as many as five modes!

(c) you can now use exposure compensation, a great feature.

(d) you can now use flash compensation, another excellent feature.

When taking the kind of photos (on stage photos) that you asking about, you can easily see that ISO is going to be the most important feature that you cannot use, in most cameras when in the "auto" mode.

So, even if you areusing a P&S camera getting out of the "auto" mode is really important! When you use the Program (P) mode and go to ISO in you menu, you will find that you will see ISO settings such as 64, 100, 200, and 400.

Here is what you can do with a P&S camera when simply increasing your ISO to ISO 400. My sample did not load the first time so I will try again.

OK, now we have the sample in place. You will notice that it is not as good as my Nikon D-50 sample, but its not too bad except it shows some noise and lacks some quality. It was taken with a Kodak P-850 at ISO 400.

So, my point is simply this: even a P&S camera can take no flash/existing light photos if it is set correctly. Do you want to learn more, or am I boring everyone?

MT

MT

Attached Images
 
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2006, 3:07 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 139
Default

These comments are not necessarily on point, but thought I'd throw in a little 2cents as an 'ordinary' non-photographer person.

1. I am not the expert or highly talented member here, but I can tell you of my experience and give you my opinion which 2nds or 3rds everything already said. DSLR hands down. P&S has a place and the portability even pocketability can't be beat, but there are 'inexpensive' ways to reach out and touch someone with a DSLR. I don't shoot much in low light so the expert advice here will help. Both have their place and I have seen some awesome shots from p&s, but I just enjoy the fun factor of the DSLR.

2. Personal preference will still dictate which camera (weight, feel, etc.) but I recently sent my dad down the wallyworld deal for the KM 7d. See this thread. No, his low light won't be action like a sports setting, but rduve posted some available light shots from the Vivitar 70-210 f2.8-4.

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...=84&page=1

3. As does mtclimber, I own the Nikon D50 (just the basic 2 lens kit). I don't have the great lens shown here, but I love the camera.

4. You'll just never have more fun than picking up the DSLR banner. Soon you'll experience the joys of what you can do with what you get, learn the limitations and realize that you need a so-and-so lens to perform exactly as you want in 'that' situation. Seeing the possibilities in putting together a 'starter' kit for my dad with the KM 7d, I am excited for him. You may end up like me and be happy with what you start with. Sure, I'd like a this or a that, but I'm happy. Or, maybe you'll find that you found a niche and want to grow and build. Either way, you will probably feel like the investment in DSLR was worth it.

5. You don't mention whether you are interested in post processing, (which I am not), but I think in general, the D50 will do more in camera processing than the KM 7d. Check out steve's reviews and forum posts for more on that. The KM deal wasn't out there when I bought and I sort of lucked into what I got, but if I had it to do again today, I'd probably go KM/Sony for anti-shake. Then again...I sure do love my Nikon. (Of course, the Canon, etc. folks will chime in too, which is as it should be.)

6. Battery life seems to be almost unlimited on my D50. I love that.

Good luck and jump on in, the water's warm!

M

p.s. the $699 wallyworld deal is now up to $724, sostockmay begetting low.
melt1109 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 4:58 AM.