|
I think the OP is a bit harsh about using auto mode. Cameras are getting better and better all the time at figuring out reasonable settings. I agree that auto mode used to suck badly a few years ago but it has evolved to the point where if you're out and about and the light is okay, auto isn't a bad option.
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2010 01:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 14:34 |
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Fair enough. I honestly haven't used a P&S newer then my wife's Powershot A570IS so my knowledge is a little outdated. The main things that infuriated me with the auto modes have been the inability to control turning off the flash or to control the ISO settings. Just about every newer P&S I've used lately has at least an option to not use flash in full auto mode.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2010 18:56
|
|
|
tonelok posted:In addition to the compact zooms, DPR posted their superzoom review: Some of those cameras are horrible. They're about the same size as a Rebel. What's the point? Even a Rebel XTi + 18-200 would be better, but I guess those superzooms are cheaper than that combo.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2010 01:06
|
|
|
I want the Samsung EX1/TL500. A fast lens even when zoomed in (f/1.8-2.4), S90-sized sensor and lots of controls. The S90 can only go to about 45mm at f/2.8 and then it slows down considerably past that.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2010 20:18
|
|
|
LuisX posted:Small enough so security does not think I am a photog. Probably an LX3.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2010 23:42
|
|
|
RoflcopterPilot posted:I really want an s90 because carrying around my xti is such a pain in the rear end. However, I've been really looking at getting a ricoh gr digital so now I'm kind of torn between the two. I don't know what it is, but I have this strange fascination with the ricoh. Check out the Samsung EX1. It has the best lens among point and shoots to date. It's not a superzoom, but it should be serviceable with a rough equivalent of a 17-50 on your XTi. It's funny to say it, but it's actually a faster lens than anything zoom you can get for a regular DSLR because like I said, it's roughly equivalent to 17-50 on an APS-C sensor, but it's f/1.8-2.4 which would be fast prime territory on APS-C or full frame.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2010 06:12
|
|
|
qirex posted:The one killer feature of Samsungs is the fact that they can charge by USB, I've never really been impressed by their pictures though. That said I was reading reviews of the EX1 and why are camera reviewers so clueless about what people want to see? 3 pages of daytime city shots and 100% ISO crop comparisons and not a single picture taken indoors in dim lighting. The only time I've seen an appropriate review for a low light camera was when Engadget reviewed the D3S, odd as that sounds. The reviewer went and shot a boxing match and a concert with it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2010 15:44
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Yeah but a D3s review focused on low light can be summed up by "everything else is worse" so eh. True, but at least the reviewer did something that actually taxed the D3S as opposed to taking a shot of a bridge in broad daylight.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2010 17:48
|
|
|
I've been mulling over a NEX camera or m4/3 or even a Samsung NX camera for the last while as a travel camera and I keep going back to the fact that if I did buy in to those systems I'd have to buy all new lenses too which leads me back to looking at the Samsung EX1. It's far from perfect, but it fits the bill of not costing an arm and a leg, decent glass and compact form factor. Anything with an interchangeable lens would cost at least two or three times more and be much bulkier with a lens of similar range (28-70ish).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2010 19:38
|
|
|
Dongsmith posted:Yeah, I can second that. I'm getting used to it, but I don't think it really gets "worked in" like a pair of boots or whatever. It should get smoother as the detents in the plastic dial get worn down. Faceless Clock posted:The Canon pointed out in this thread looks very nice, but since I have such specific needs I thought I'd post and see if this changes the recommendation at all. My number one piece of advice would be to get a tripod. It sounds like you're shooting handheld, which is not a great idea for quality macro shots where precision matters.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2010 09:35
|
|
|
What kind of photos will you mostly be taking? If you're taking shots mostly in good light, you won't be missing much by going with the S95. Low light is where larger sensors shine. Even if you do get a DSLR later, the S95 is still good to have as a second camera or one to keep in your pocket.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2010 23:06
|
|
|
Rated PG-34 posted:I want to upgrade my G9 to an S95 as not being able to push past ISO 200 sucks, but I can't bring myself to after the Fujifilm X100 was announced Trust me, you ain't getting an X100 for the price of an S95.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2010 00:31
|
|
|
"Buy.com has the recently released Canon PowerShot S95 10MP 3.8X Digital Camera for $363.99 Free Shipping." http://www.techbargains.com/news_displayItem.cfm/229785?f=f
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2010 20:44
|
|
|
hairysammoth posted:Just got sent this from Fuji: Well that pretty much kills most of the appeal of the X100.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2010 16:20
|
|
|
hairysammoth posted:For some, certainly. I'm not hugely surprised though. I think Fuji is making a major mistake here. You don't make a camera look like that and charge that much without having rangefinder focusing, even if it's just a simulated mode that uses the AF sensors for data. Sony or Samsung could easily release something very comparable stylistically and wipe the X100 off the map in a second. If the X100 were $500 I would say it's fine but if they're going to be getting up in the $1000+ territory, they had better be bringing something awesome to the table to compete with the other APS-C and m4/3 mirrorless camera systems otherwise they're competing against the likes of the GF1 with the 20mm f/1.7.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2010 17:17
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:The main draws are: So does the Samsung NX100. You can get a hot shoe EVF for it. Like I said, it wouldn't take much for the competition to slap a built-in viewfinder on the corner of their mirrorless APS-C cameras to match the X100. I'll stand by my point that I think Fuji is making a tactical error. Either that or they're biting off more than they can chew.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2010 22:18
|
|
|
DreadCthulhu posted:So basically try to avoid 800+ iso if possible, as the camera doesn't handle them too well? How high you go with ISO with any camera is as much dependent on how good you are at dealing with it in post-processing as much as it is dependent on sensor quality.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2010 09:58
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:* lack of blurry backgrounds killed several images for me. My favorites I'm going to manually go in and do some photoshop lens blur to isolate the subject I've found with the S90 you're better off zooming in and shooting at f/4.9 (max aperture at that length) than going wide and hoping f/2 will do it for you if you want blurred background. Have you looked at the Samsung EX1? It uses the same sensor as the S90 and LX3 but it has a much faster lens, especially at the longer end. Also, if you're not adverse to film, there are lots of great cameras like the Contax T2 or Ricoh GR1s.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2010 17:08
|
|
|
caberham posted:Speaking of film P&S, any recommendations to take snap shots of people and landscapes? I think a roll of velvia might be nice but it has been ages since I have handled a film P&S? Heck with film cameras so cheap, I might as well buy both. Use the s95/digital as a party camera and the film as my main. However, I'm not so sure about the lenses in the film point and shoots. I have a friend who recommended a Leica CL but I think that's a bit too expensive.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2010 05:51
|
|
|
caberham posted:Just got the s95, hopefully won't lose it this time, but I did have a slight buyer's remorse as I played with the Samsung EX 1 afterwards. Very nice UI, bright LCD screen, and a fast 1.8 lens. According to the sales staff though, macro function is limited compared to other p&s. Film point and shoots also have the size advantage since they can do all sort of crazy things like retracting lenses and lenses that go to within millimeters of the film. I agree that the GR1s is hard to find and can be pricey. The only reason I have one is because I got a good deal on Craigslist from some pro that was dumping his film gear. The only downside is that a 28mm lens isn't good for everything. A 35mm or 40mm lens is a far better universal lens. I prefer the GR1s over the T2 as far as controls, ergonomics, weight and size go, but the lens on the T2 is fantastic. If you can't spend a lot of money, try an Olympus Stylus, the older one with the black body and the f/3.5 lens. They're dirt cheap and as long as you don't need the f/2.8 of the Stylus Epic, they're just as good as the Epic. The downside with the Styluses is that there's very little control or information so you don't know exactly what the camera is focusing on or what shutter speed it's using and you can't pick aperture like you can on the better point and shoots.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2010 17:35
|
|
|
Fiannaiocht posted:The only thing I hate about my S90 is the lack of a viewfinder. If a point and shoot with a good viewfinder exists I would consider trading for it. What would you believe to be the point and shoot with the best viewfinder? Canon G12? It actually has a viewfinder, so that kind of automatically puts it ahead of the pack. The Samsung EX1 has an add-on viewfinder, but it's a fixed focal length one, so it won't zoom with the lens like the G12's. I think you're going to have to venture into m4/3 type of territory if you want an actual EVF.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2010 20:26
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:Personally I have the S90 and I like it very much. But sometimes I wish, especially in low light, that it was a bit easier to grip/more substantial. http://www.lensmateonline.com/store...__utmk=24703418
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2010 15:21
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:This too: That actually looks pretty snazzy with the front leatherette. The other pads ruin it aesthetically, though I'm sure it makes it more functional.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2010 15:40
|
|
|
Olympus XZ-1 is looking like it might be a nifty camera. 10MP LX5 sensor, 28-112mm equivalent f/1.8-2.5 lens, HD video. Sort of like a one-up on the Samsung EX1. http://www.engadget.com/tag/XZ1/
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2011 01:36
|
|
|
More XZ-1 info: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympusXZ1/ http://www.photographyblog.com/news/olympus_xz-1_hands-on_photos/
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2011 17:26
|
|
|
john ashpool posted:Any word on price? Roughly $500.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 06:15
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:I really want to see if that f/2.2 at 100mm is enough to give a blurry background with a portrait. That camera looks soo nice. You have to remember that that 100mm is roughly 22mm in actual lens real estate so you're not going to get melty bokeh like an actual DSLR. I've messed around with an s90 zoomed all the way in at max aperture (f/4.9) and you can get somewhat of a blurry background, but only if you're doing macro type shots.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 18:13
|
|
|
MMD3 posted:So now that CES has wrapped up does anybody feel like the S95 has been dethroned as the best pocketable P&S? The S95 is still a strong package as it combines a relatively large sensor with a relatively fast lens and a relatively small camera body. Don't sweat about low light focus speed too much. Most cameras are slower on the draw in low light with the exception of higher end stuff like the D700. The XZ-1 looks like it will be good but it is larger and will probably be roughly $100 or so more than the S95.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2011 19:56
|
|
|
taqueso posted:Budget is around $200. I've been looking at the Panasonic DMC-ZS5 (http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMC-ZS5-Digital-Stabilized-2-7-Inch/dp/B00395YA90/). I have the TZ5 which is similar to that. Overall it is a good camera but the downsides are that the lens isn't that fast at f/3.3 compared to f/2.8 of a lot of other cameras and the flash isn't super powerful so if your production facility is large and kind of dark, that may be an issue. Also, one big annoyance of the design of the camera is that the flash is where you put your fingers to grip the camera so you have to be really mindful about it if you're taking photos with flash.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2011 21:13
|
|
|
taqueso posted:Thanks for the quick reply. We have some hotlights and a lightbox that she uses as long as the item will fit inside the box. Most of the photos are taken without on-camera flash. You might want to look at a camera with a hot shoe then. It'll make triggering the remote flash a lot easier. Also, you might want to see if the ZS5 has manual exposure controls. If you have to shoot at a set aperture and shutter speed because of the remote flashes, a simpler camera may not be enough because it will expose for what it sees rather than what the light will be at the time of exposure. EDIT: Ah. HPL fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Jan 10, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2011 21:45
|
|
|
taqueso posted:We got the ZS5 and there is an issue I didn't think about at all. The memory card is stored inside a door on the underside of the camera. This means that the memory card can't come out of the camera when it is mounted on the tripod. It's a common problem with P&S cameras. They can only do so much with the camera being so small. You could try a quick-release plate but it might block the battery door too. If it's really a problem, you might want to think about going with a DSLR like an old Rebel XTi. If you're planning on making a stand-off yourself, the tripod is regular 1/4-20 thread, same as most 1/4" bolts and screws. HPL fucked around with this message at 18:06 on Jan 14, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2011 18:03
|
|
|
That's why god gave us the green rectangle.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2011 21:39
|
|
|
The S95 will be money better spent. If you buy the SD1300, you'll end up chucking it sooner than later. The S95 will be your good buddy for years to come even if you do end up getting a DSLR and all that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2011 16:39
|
|
|
qirex posted:No, it's not which sucks, everything else I take on a trip charges by USB. I've seen occasional USB Canon battery chargers on sketchy HK websites but they look really dodgy. Not much to it, really. As long as the battery will charge with 5VDC, it should be fine. The big thing is if the transformer in the charger is poo poo or not. On the other hand, if you're charging $5 no-name batteries in them, it doesn't matter much in the grand scheme. I have this neat battery charger at home which clips onto batteries and you can move the two poles to wherever they are on the battery itself. The whole works plugs into a USB port or USB wall adapter.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 00:01
|
|
|
The Canon G7 can do raw with CHDK and has an f/2.8 lens, but honestly, having seen the raw files coming out of it, you're not missing anything. EDIT: Oh wait, you wanted FASTER than f/2.8? Haha.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2011 02:48
|
|
|
Nothing is going to give you great photos at concerts unless the lights are very bright because most point and shoots are designed to use slow shutter speeds in lower light conditions while relying on image stabilization which is great for posed photos, but isn't so great when you're trying to photograph someone jumping around. Also, point and shoots in general aren't great in low light conditions because the sensors are very noisy compared to a DSLR sensor which is much larger. When you use a point and shoot camera at 10x zoom while trying to photograph in low light, you're fighting a slow lens (usually around f/5.6 by the time you're zoomed all the way in), a weak sensor and a moving subject. It's a losing battle unless you get lucky. If it's a club environment, just get closer to the front and use a point and shoot like an Olympus XZ-1 which is not optimal, but much better suited for low light photography than a superzoom.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2011 20:53
|
|
|
There are probably a bunch of Olympus XZ-1 owners that are wishing they had held out a little longer.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2011 21:38
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:My cousin asked me about buying a camera to shoot her son at school events (on stage). If she wanted a DSLR I could help her, but she doesn't want to spend more than $200 and I know jack about point and shoots. A Pentax ME Super with 50mm f/1.7, a developing tank, reels and chemicals. And lots of Tri-X.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2011 18:24
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Looks good. I wish they had kept the lens reach but improved the max aperture at the end, but not sure how possible that is. The silver version looks better than I thought it would.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2011 15:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 14:34 |
|
|
I'm kind of getting psyched up for the Fuji X10. It seems like a good compromise between quality and size. I could see it being my "go everywhere" camera.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2011 21:14
|
|