Camera Help - Page 2

Matblack · 30-11-2006, 16:41

Thanks Pete

I 'think' I am settling on the Fuji S9600, its a big camera and not far off the price of a dSLR but I think it will be more suited to my style, despite the low level light performance not being that good.

To get a decent zoom along with a dSLR I'd be looking at big money and without it I don't think I'd get the kind of pics I want to be taking the 350D or equivilant seem very limited in terms of zoom.

Anyone got any final thoughts?

MB

Matblack · 30-11-2006, 16:43

I've been looking at the Panasonic like you suggested Pete and it seems to have more issues with noise in low light than the Fuji equivilant although the Panasonic has got IS :/

MB

petemc · 30-11-2006, 17:26

Its tricky really. DPReview say that the Panasonic FZ50 pushes the sensor close to breaking point and above ISO400 the noise reduction makes the images far too soft. However they highly recommend it.

Unfortunately I can't find any reviews of the Fuji S9600.

Matblack · 30-11-2006, 17:40

OK

'if' I decided to go with a relatively inexpensive dSLR ie 350D would the lens I get with it have any form of zoom? It says 18-55mm in the standard kit, which is wide angle to some zoom I think? How does this equate to the idiots x2, x3, x4 I am used to?

MB

MB

Flibster · 30-11-2006, 20:50

To give you an idea of zoom equivilance - a 3x optical zoom is roughly the equivilent of a 35-100mm lens.

It does vary though depending on the camera in question. I'd go with 'around 2x'

Have you looked at the S9500 - thats now available much cheaper as it's the outgoing model.

The Fuji S9600 is very very new. My local camera place doesn't have one yet. Not entirely sure whats different about it compared to the S9500. I think it's got the next gen sensor... MP is unchanged and so is the zoom.

The S9500 has very little noise reduction which is good, but has a bad amount of noise at ISO 800 and higher. It's managable at ISO400

Can I pimp my S9500 a little now?

Simon/~Flibster

Matblack · 30-11-2006, 20:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flibster

Can I pimp my S9500 a little now?

Yes you may, show me more photos and explain to me that it will be easy to use in auto (when I am lazy) and will encourage me to try the manual modes (which the A80 doesn't)

MB

Mondo · 01-12-2006, 00:37

The difference between 6x zoom to 10x zoom might not be as big as you think due to the way it is calculated.

It is calculated from the longest focal length divided by the shortest.

Hence

A 50mm Prime lens is a 1X zoom

A 500mm Prime lens is also a 1X zoom

Since 50/1 and 500/1 both = 1

But as you probably can guess the 500mm has a hell of a reach where the 50mm is practically the same as your normal view of vision.

So a 70-200mm is a 2.8X zoom

where a 70-300mm = 4.2X zoom

but a 28-135mm is a 4.8X zoom

The 28-135 has a bigger zoom but it won't magnify as well as the 70-300mm. So 10x zoom compared to a 6X zoom is often misleading and a GREAT way to fool general consumers who thinks the bigger the number is better.

The way to check is just ignore that zoom number and look at the focal length instead.

As for taking photos in dark conditions, you'll need a wide aperture and high ISO while maintaining at a shutter speed at least 1/60 if possible. Unless you use a flash (might need one the size of a house if you are sitting at the back row) or a tripod. With a point and zoon, often anything above 400ISO the noise is overwelming. Therefore you just have to either try your luck or get near the front as with most camera, at the longest focal length, the aperture is smaller = less light.

P.s. Take a closer look at the Canon G7 as well, it is getting rave reviews everywhere.

Mark · 01-12-2006, 00:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raymond Lin

Since 50/1 and 500/1 both = 1

[PEDANT] Oh no they don't [/PEDANT]

The rest of the post about focal lengths is factually correct though. Having said that, most of the bridge cameras in the 12x zoom range have similar telephoto focal lengths (somewhere close to 400mm). Now, that *is* expensive lens time for a dSLR.

Mondo · 01-12-2006, 01:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Indecisive

[PEDANT] Oh no they don't [/PEDANT]

The rest of the post about focal lengths is factually correct though. Having said that, most of the bridge cameras in the 12x zoom range have similar telephoto focal lengths (somewhere close to 400mm). Now, that *is* expensive lens time for a dSLR.

LOL...I realise what i said now...you are right, it should be 50/50 or 500/500. Since the front and end focal are the same.

Matblack · 01-12-2006, 09:55

OK that makes sense, so 50mm is about the same as I see with my eye, hence most of these kit lenses go from a mild wide angle up to about 'eye normal'? If I wanted to get something close to what I get with my A80 magnification wise (not quality) I would need a 300mm lens?

It seems to make sense, my only concerns with the bridge cameras are the size of the CCD in comparision to the dSLRs and the sharpness and noise of the photo. However I suspect that as I won't be using them for much arty stuff like tight depth of field, very low light, blowing up to large enlargements etc I don't suppose it really matters.

I'm still drawn to the Fujifilm 9500/9600 although I realise now I don't really need the massive zoom capability and that at more than 6x I will need excentionaly good light and a tripod to get sharp pics.

Thanks for all the help so far

MB

30-11-2006, 16:41	#11
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	Thanks Pete I 'think' I am settling on the Fuji S9600, its a big camera and not far off the price of a dSLR but I think it will be more suited to my style, despite the low level light performance not being that good. To get a decent zoom along with a dSLR I'd be looking at big money and without it I don't think I'd get the kind of pics I want to be taking the 350D or equivilant seem very limited in terms of zoom. Anyone got any final thoughts? MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

30-11-2006, 16:43	#12
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	I've been looking at the Panasonic like you suggested Pete and it seems to have more issues with noise in low light than the Fuji equivilant although the Panasonic has got IS :/ MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

30-11-2006, 17:40	#14
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	OK 'if' I decided to go with a relatively inexpensive dSLR ie 350D would the lens I get with it have any form of zoom? It says 18-55mm in the standard kit, which is wide angle to some zoom I think? How does this equate to the idiots x2, x3, x4 I am used to? MB MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

30-11-2006, 20:50	#15
Flibster Moonshine Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3,388	To give you an idea of zoom equivilance - a 3x optical zoom is roughly the equivilent of a 35-100mm lens. It does vary though depending on the camera in question. I'd go with 'around 2x' Have you looked at the S9500 - thats now available much cheaper as it's the outgoing model. The Fuji S9600 is very very new. My local camera place doesn't have one yet. Not entirely sure whats different about it compared to the S9500. I think it's got the next gen sensor... MP is unchanged and so is the zoom. The S9500 has very little noise reduction which is good, but has a bad amount of noise at ISO 800 and higher. It's managable at ISO400 Can I pimp my S9500 a little now? Simon/~Flibster __________________

01-12-2006, 00:37	#17
Mondo Absinthe Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,174	The difference between 6x zoom to 10x zoom might not be as big as you think due to the way it is calculated. It is calculated from the longest focal length divided by the shortest. Hence A 50mm Prime lens is a 1X zoom A 500mm Prime lens is also a 1X zoom Since 50/1 and 500/1 both = 1 But as you probably can guess the 500mm has a hell of a reach where the 50mm is practically the same as your normal view of vision. So a 70-200mm is a 2.8X zoom where a 70-300mm = 4.2X zoom but a 28-135mm is a 4.8X zoom The 28-135 has a bigger zoom but it won't magnify as well as the 70-300mm. So 10x zoom compared to a 6X zoom is often misleading and a GREAT way to fool general consumers who thinks the bigger the number is better. The way to check is just ignore that zoom number and look at the focal length instead. As for taking photos in dark conditions, you'll need a wide aperture and high ISO while maintaining at a shutter speed at least 1/60 if possible. Unless you use a flash (might need one the size of a house if you are sitting at the back row) or a tripod. With a point and zoon, often anything above 400ISO the noise is overwelming. Therefore you just have to either try your luck or get near the front as with most camera, at the longest focal length, the aperture is smaller = less light. P.s. Take a closer look at the Canon G7 as well, it is getting rave reviews everywhere. __________________ My Website / MSN / Email / Flickr / Blog

30-11-2006, 17:26	#13
petemc Moonshine Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Nr Liverpewl Posts: 4,371	Its tricky really. DPReview say that the Panasonic FZ50 pushes the sensor close to breaking point and above ISO400 the noise reduction makes the images far too soft. However they highly recommend it. Unfortunately I can't find any reviews of the Fuji S9600.

01-12-2006, 09:55	#20
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	OK that makes sense, so 50mm is about the same as I see with my eye, hence most of these kit lenses go from a mild wide angle up to about 'eye normal'? If I wanted to get something close to what I get with my A80 magnification wise (not quality) I would need a 300mm lens? It seems to make sense, my only concerns with the bridge cameras are the size of the CCD in comparision to the dSLRs and the sharpness and noise of the photo. However I suspect that as I won't be using them for much arty stuff like tight depth of field, very low light, blowing up to large enlargements etc I don't suppose it really matters. I'm still drawn to the Fujifilm 9500/9600 although I realise now I don't really need the massive zoom capability and that at more than 6x I will need excentionaly good light and a tripod to get sharp pics. Thanks for all the help so far MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"