Now I have a question about cameras
Mar 15th, 2007, 03:55 PM
#81
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monopods are good for getting a little bit extra shutter length, but not for going really long. If you brace the monopod against a railing or something, you can go even longer, but you're still talking about maybe a second or so. And of course you can't use it to get around and be in the picture yourself. If you're taking landscapes and want lots of depth of field a monopod can help a lot.
If you want to go longer, though, you need a proper tripod, which you can set up and go as long as your camera will allow -- 12 hours if you're taking pictures of stars tracks or something.
If you're going to be someplace where you can use one, there are a number of mini-tripods that work great, especially for small cameras. My experience has been that the ones with stiff fold-out legs, work better than the ones with bendy legs, as the bendy legs get soft with use and start drooping when under load. There's a new kind of sturdier bendy tripod called a GorillaPod that I haven't tried, but looks interesting; you can bend it around things like fence wires as well as standing it up like a tripod.
If you're going to be someplace where there's nothing to put a mini on -- a table, a big rock, a mailbox -- you need an almost-full-size travel tripod. I have a little Velbon Ultra-Max that I love to pieces -- it's barely a foot long, weighs less than two pounds, has quick twist-lock legs. Sunpak makes some neat ones too. There are loads of others; check here for some statistical comparisons:
http://tinyurl.com/2y6j6m
and here:
http://tinyurl.com/2cmqqw
Some of these look better than my Velbon.
There's also the intriguing MonsterPod, which a friend has and loves, and which uses freaky sticky technology from "the future": http://tinyurl.com/y85psy
If you want to go longer, though, you need a proper tripod, which you can set up and go as long as your camera will allow -- 12 hours if you're taking pictures of stars tracks or something.
If you're going to be someplace where you can use one, there are a number of mini-tripods that work great, especially for small cameras. My experience has been that the ones with stiff fold-out legs, work better than the ones with bendy legs, as the bendy legs get soft with use and start drooping when under load. There's a new kind of sturdier bendy tripod called a GorillaPod that I haven't tried, but looks interesting; you can bend it around things like fence wires as well as standing it up like a tripod.
If you're going to be someplace where there's nothing to put a mini on -- a table, a big rock, a mailbox -- you need an almost-full-size travel tripod. I have a little Velbon Ultra-Max that I love to pieces -- it's barely a foot long, weighs less than two pounds, has quick twist-lock legs. Sunpak makes some neat ones too. There are loads of others; check here for some statistical comparisons:
http://tinyurl.com/2y6j6m
and here:
http://tinyurl.com/2cmqqw
Some of these look better than my Velbon.
There's also the intriguing MonsterPod, which a friend has and loves, and which uses freaky sticky technology from "the future": http://tinyurl.com/y85psy
Mar 15th, 2007, 04:12 PM
#82
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Idnas - Do you really need a tripod or monopod? Your S2 has IS and should be quite effective, at least for most traveling needs. And many older IS systems will not work with tripod use, so you may need to turn it off completely or you actually get a worse picture.
You may want to investigate a little before buying the tripod or monopod.
You may want to investigate a little before buying the tripod or monopod.
Mar 16th, 2007, 05:33 AM
#83
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks so much for sharing that spreadsheet with all the tripod info. I've got to study that a bit.
I also use my camera at a lot of baseball games and when I use the zoom to the full extension, even with the IS, my hands are just a little too unsteady to get clear shots sometimes. I think a monopod would be great to have standing in front of me at a baseball game, at the appropriate height, of course. I don't know if it would be ridiculous of me to haul something like that on a 3-week vacation, though. I do love to get night pictures of beautiful illuminated churches and castles, and I thought a little extra steadiness might make a difference in the quality of my pictures. I'm just an amateur who enjoys having nice pictures to remember my travels.
Thanks for the replies.
I also use my camera at a lot of baseball games and when I use the zoom to the full extension, even with the IS, my hands are just a little too unsteady to get clear shots sometimes. I think a monopod would be great to have standing in front of me at a baseball game, at the appropriate height, of course. I don't know if it would be ridiculous of me to haul something like that on a 3-week vacation, though. I do love to get night pictures of beautiful illuminated churches and castles, and I thought a little extra steadiness might make a difference in the quality of my pictures. I'm just an amateur who enjoys having nice pictures to remember my travels.
Thanks for the replies.
Mar 16th, 2007, 05:56 AM
#84
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Idnas - You need to differentiate motion blur due to camera shake and motion blur due to action.
In your baseball pictures, if it's just the players being blurry, but the background (the stadium, the foul posts) are sharp, then the camera is working fine and <b>a tripod will not help you</b>.
It's because at that particular ISO and aperture setting, the shutter speed just have to be slow enough to capture enough light. And slow shutter + moving objects = motion blur.
Things you can do include bumping up the ISO to maximum, and make sure the aperture setting is at the widest (like using Av mode and set aperture yourself).
If they still give you blurry subjects but sharp background, there's nothing you can do to improve it with your camera. Just need one with a higher sensitivity (ISO) and/or wider aperture (like switching to a dSLR with a big lens).
In your baseball pictures, if it's just the players being blurry, but the background (the stadium, the foul posts) are sharp, then the camera is working fine and <b>a tripod will not help you</b>.
It's because at that particular ISO and aperture setting, the shutter speed just have to be slow enough to capture enough light. And slow shutter + moving objects = motion blur.
Things you can do include bumping up the ISO to maximum, and make sure the aperture setting is at the widest (like using Av mode and set aperture yourself).
If they still give you blurry subjects but sharp background, there's nothing you can do to improve it with your camera. Just need one with a higher sensitivity (ISO) and/or wider aperture (like switching to a dSLR with a big lens).
Mar 23rd, 2007, 09:27 PM
#86
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The G7 is a nicer camera with a more advanced and higher pixel sensor, higher ISO sensitivity, more compact and lighter. You loses some of the zoom range, but in reality it doesn't matter because with the G7's higher pixel count, you can just crop your photo to get the same results.
The biggest problem is its price. I don't think it's worth the $150 extra over the S3.
The biggest problem is its price. I don't think it's worth the $150 extra over the S3.
Mar 23rd, 2007, 09:38 PM
#87
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the Sony DSC-H5? Anyone have any comments on this camera as it compares to the Canon S3 IS which is also a 12x optical zoom?
I don't necessarily need a 12x zoom, which is why I was also looking into the G7.
I don't necessarily need a 12x zoom, which is why I was also looking into the G7.
Mar 24th, 2007, 04:03 AM
#88
www.Image-Resource.com give the Sony H2 the edge over the H5 and even the Canon S3. Also look at the Kodak Z612 and coming out next month the Kodak Z712. I have the 612 and it continues to impress at a considerably lower price that the others. The Canon S2 is also worth looking into and can be found at reduced prices.
Mar 26th, 2007, 01:26 PM
#89
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, after reading everyone's helpful input on this thread, along with several reviews on the websites mentioned, I decided that the Canon S3 IS was probably the best bet for me. (I also had checked it out at the camera store and liked it!) So I went out and bought one today and actually think I got a pretty good deal. I paid $309 for it and most places around here are advertising it for $349 or more. I'm in the Los Angeles area. Anyway, just wanted to thank everyone for the time you put into helping out some of us. Now I'll have plenty of time to get used to the camera before our summer trip to Greece and Switzerland.
Apr 17th, 2007, 06:43 PM
#93
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Take a look at this review:
www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympussp550uz/
Especially the "Conclusion" page. They don't like it that much, since it only gets an "above average" rating when almost everything they review gets "recommended" or better.
Having said that, the 28mm equivalent wide-angle coverage looks pretty good. But $500? I don't think so.
www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympussp550uz/
Especially the "Conclusion" page. They don't like it that much, since it only gets an "above average" rating when almost everything they review gets "recommended" or better.
Having said that, the 28mm equivalent wide-angle coverage looks pretty good. But $500? I don't think so.
Apr 18th, 2007, 07:53 AM
#94
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until the reviews are in on the yet-to-be-released Sony H9 & H7, the best deal on an excellent and versatile
digicam is the Canon S3IS.
If I HAD to buy a camera today that's the one I'd get. For the prices it is going for right now, I'm tempted to get one anyway and get the H9 later too
gt
digicam is the Canon S3IS.
If I HAD to buy a camera today that's the one I'd get. For the prices it is going for right now, I'm tempted to get one anyway and get the H9 later too
gt
Apr 19th, 2007, 06:41 AM
#96
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably at about the same time.
That would be any day now.
Here's Sony's page on the H9:
http://www.sony.co.th/cybershot/dsc-H9_H7/index.html
and you can go here for a look at
the instruction manual to get a head start on the "learning curve".
http://esupport.sony.com/US/perl/mod...s.pl?mdl=DSCH9
That would be any day now.
Here's Sony's page on the H9:
http://www.sony.co.th/cybershot/dsc-H9_H7/index.html
and you can go here for a look at
the instruction manual to get a head start on the "learning curve".
http://esupport.sony.com/US/perl/mod...s.pl?mdl=DSCH9
Jun 18th, 2007, 03:51 PM
#98
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi everibody, I’m almost new to the Fodor’s forums, and found very interesting the discussion (mainlly between rkkwan, maria H, peterboy and others) about a 12x zoom compact camera or a dSLR for travel shooting.
I will use a mail from ‘rkkwan’ (dated 02/22/2007), on the Fuji S6000fd (S6500fd here in Portugal), and its statement “I will say that at least half of the shots I take when traveling are at focal length <35mm.”
Here is my situation and dilemma. I intend (with some friends, 3 couples, aged about the fifties), to do, next August, a nice trip to Italy and Austria. We will fly from Lisbon to Milano, rent there a small van, cross the Dolomites west to east during the first two days, in our way to Bruck (am der Grossglockner) where we will stay one week. On the return, we will cross againn the Dolomites (now driving east to west), during more two days, to get in Milano the flight back to Lisbon.
Our intention is to do the more sightseing possible, and take the more number of nice photos of the “incredible” Dolomites and also from the idylic scenery of the Salzkammergut, as well of the cities of Salzburg and Insbruck.
We are just very amateur photographers, “boosting” cameras like a Canos S1 IS, a Canon S2 IS, a Sony H1 (or a H5), besides an old Sony V1. The only one with a camera with some more professional look will be me, with my beloved Konica-Minolta A200!
And now my dilemma. May be many of the (may be thousands) photos I intend to do will be wide-angle landscapes, and for those my A200, beginning at 28 mm (and ending at 200 mm, so a 7x optical zoom) will be perfect.
But I also KNOW that there will be hundreds of situations where I will feel the NEED for more zoom ( to get those far peaks, lakes, litthe chappels, etc, etc). And then, with the 12x zooms of my companions, I’m affraid I get really frustrated!
Of course this is not a really dilema on quality, nor between a compact camera and a dSLR. If I had lots of money, I would buy an S3 IS (in fact this is the camera I was thinking of, after some research against the sonys), and taking it I would be certain of “catching” every far away peak, castle or little church! But I would then “miss” my very “sexy” A200, and its 28 mm wide-angle.
To take both can be very “exasperating”, always trying to determine which camera to use!
So here is my dilemma, adiferent one from the ones you describe. Anyway a dilemma! Sometimes I think the right thing to do is to take just my A200 (saving around 400 euros), and then, when at home , may be crop some of its 8 MB jpejs on Photoshop (I still have to learn it!). But in the next moment I feel I will miss lots of far away scenes (caught by some of my companions).
So please may I have your thoughts/opinions on this “terrible” dilemma?
Sorry for the long text. And I promise I’ll share with impressions/infromation from my trip.
Best regards. Manuel.
I will use a mail from ‘rkkwan’ (dated 02/22/2007), on the Fuji S6000fd (S6500fd here in Portugal), and its statement “I will say that at least half of the shots I take when traveling are at focal length <35mm.”
Here is my situation and dilemma. I intend (with some friends, 3 couples, aged about the fifties), to do, next August, a nice trip to Italy and Austria. We will fly from Lisbon to Milano, rent there a small van, cross the Dolomites west to east during the first two days, in our way to Bruck (am der Grossglockner) where we will stay one week. On the return, we will cross againn the Dolomites (now driving east to west), during more two days, to get in Milano the flight back to Lisbon.
Our intention is to do the more sightseing possible, and take the more number of nice photos of the “incredible” Dolomites and also from the idylic scenery of the Salzkammergut, as well of the cities of Salzburg and Insbruck.
We are just very amateur photographers, “boosting” cameras like a Canos S1 IS, a Canon S2 IS, a Sony H1 (or a H5), besides an old Sony V1. The only one with a camera with some more professional look will be me, with my beloved Konica-Minolta A200!
And now my dilemma. May be many of the (may be thousands) photos I intend to do will be wide-angle landscapes, and for those my A200, beginning at 28 mm (and ending at 200 mm, so a 7x optical zoom) will be perfect.
But I also KNOW that there will be hundreds of situations where I will feel the NEED for more zoom ( to get those far peaks, lakes, litthe chappels, etc, etc). And then, with the 12x zooms of my companions, I’m affraid I get really frustrated!
Of course this is not a really dilema on quality, nor between a compact camera and a dSLR. If I had lots of money, I would buy an S3 IS (in fact this is the camera I was thinking of, after some research against the sonys), and taking it I would be certain of “catching” every far away peak, castle or little church! But I would then “miss” my very “sexy” A200, and its 28 mm wide-angle.
To take both can be very “exasperating”, always trying to determine which camera to use!
So here is my dilemma, adiferent one from the ones you describe. Anyway a dilemma! Sometimes I think the right thing to do is to take just my A200 (saving around 400 euros), and then, when at home , may be crop some of its 8 MB jpejs on Photoshop (I still have to learn it!). But in the next moment I feel I will miss lots of far away scenes (caught by some of my companions).
So please may I have your thoughts/opinions on this “terrible” dilemma?
Sorry for the long text. And I promise I’ll share with impressions/infromation from my trip.
Best regards. Manuel.
Jun 18th, 2007, 05:10 PM
#99
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can simply crop down your picture for more reach. Your camera has 8MP, which you can crop down a whole lot and still be okay to view on screen or produce anything but large prints.
On the other hand, those other cameras will never capture the 28mm wide angle shot you get on your camera.
On the other hand, those other cameras will never capture the 28mm wide angle shot you get on your camera.
Jun 19th, 2007, 02:42 AM
#100
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Out of interest, Canon have now released the S5 IS, (no s4, as I believe 4 is an unlucky number?). It has 8mp and other tweaks but no extra at the wide angle end. I won't be upgrading yet, still happy with the S3. The lack of wide angle hasn't been a major issue to me. I occasionally use the stitch mode for panoramas though I might consider getting the wide angle lens adaptor.
