| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/17/2005 12:32:18 PM · #1 |
I went to the Smokies Mid- July, and unlike many years in the past I came home with few acceptable images. The reason was I think I̢۪m getting old.
I used to carry 30 or so pounds of camera gear in addition to other stuff such as tent, sleeping bags, etc. This year with my two kids in tow I spent more time panting on the trails than taking photos. It was not fair to my kids having to wait on pops either. They are patient enough with the time I take photographing.
My backpacking gear is as light as possible so I must wean the camera gear.
The first thing I did was to sell the sigma 135-400 and Nikon 70-210 f4. Now I have to make some decisions. I̢۪m obsessed with sensor dust so I have three D70s one with the Nikon DX12-24 (that has never been removed since I bought them) one with the Nikon 28-105. The other I use for macro & telephotos.
After reading great reviews, and although it something that I would have never done in the past (I like primes), I just ordered the wide coverage Nikon 28-200. So I plan to sell my 28-105 and a D70 (or maybe two) when the lens arrives.
But that still leaves me with a gap in extreme telephoto range. So I̢۪ve been thinking that since there is no way I̢۪m buying another 3-4 lb lens, so why not consider an all-in one? Optically stabilized lens & another camera for less weight and a heck of a lot more compact than a telephoto alone.
I looked at the Coolpix 8800, but it has several features I̢۪m not willing to settle with such as lever zoom and no manual focus ring (I never shoot AF with telephotos). So after studying the limited range of choices I thinking about the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ30.
It has a 35mm - 420mm equivalent OS lens and seems to be exactly what I̢۪m looking for. It will not be released in the States till the end of September so I̢۪m sure no one has had any experiences with it yet, but what about DMC-FZ20 users? Opinions? Also I̢۪m open to other suggestions (that̢۪s why all the long background info, sorry). Mega pixels aren̢۪t a big deal as long as it is at least 5 mega pixels.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 01:32:59 PM · #2 |
| Have you considered the Olympus E-1 DSLR? It's 5 mps, weather sealed and built like a tank (great for outdoor use); the sensor never accumulates dust due to a supersonic wave dust shaker that cleans dust off the sensor at startup or when applied manually. The lens offerings are high quality and you can get an entire range from 28mm-400mm with just two lenses! A 1.4 teleconverter is available to extend that range, as is macro and other specialty lenses. The sensor delivers very high dynamic range, and highlights rarely get blown out; People rave about the colors and tones it produces and prices on the body are coming down with the coming of the new Olympus DSLR (expected to be announced in early 2006). //www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse1/ |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 01:46:22 PM · #3 |
One body, a 28-300 lens. most do macro.
Unless you take the inventory of b&h with you, you wil be making compromises of one kind or another.
You like primes, but don't mention that you have any. You mention lots of zooms. Good ones at that.
ANY prosumer camera will be an image and optic let down from a dSLR. A great weight savings, but make sure you can live with teh images you'll be getting.
Get over the dust issue and change lenses. Or get teh Oly Olyuzi recomends.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 02:49:57 PM · #4 |
I did consider the e-1, in fact I used to shoot the OM system. I really miss my macros. The reason I decided against the e systems because of the focusing. Isn't it focus by wire? I know you manually turn a ring but isn't it controlled manually? |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 02:59:17 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by hyperfocal:
I went to the Smokies Mid- July, and unlike many years in the past I came home with few acceptable images. The reason was I think I̢۪m getting old.
I used to carry 30 or so pounds of camera gear in addition to other stuff such as tent, sleeping bags, etc. This year with my two kids in tow I spent more time panting on the trails than taking photos. It was not fair to my kids having to wait on pops either. They are patient enough with the time I take photographing.
|
I dunno about just getting old, out of shape maybe. I've been backpacking with 70 year olds who can carry as much as me and could certinly keep up with me (and this was when I was in my 20's)
I don't disagree with paring down the camera gear tho.
What about the Canon S2IS?
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 03:32:12 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
You like primes, but don't mention that you have any. You mention lots of zooms. Good ones at that.
|
My current lenses (all Nikon) .
MF
70-150e
85mm f1.8
105mm f2.5
200mm f4
35 f2.5E
500 f8
50 f1.8
135mm f2.8
55 f2.8 macro
105 f4 macro
24 f2.8
AF
12-24 DX
18-35
28-200G
50f1.8d
28-105
The 18-35 I use with my underwater housing and infrared, but seldom take it backpacking.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 03:46:01 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by hyperfocal:
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
You like primes, but don't mention that you have any. You mention lots of zooms. Good ones at that.
|
My current lenses ... |
Yeah, definitely looks like time to switch to Canon ... : ) |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 04:16:18 PM · #8 |
Having used a dSLR i think you will be very very dissappointed with the image quality of a prosumer camera. They are certainly not built as well as dSLRs and things such as noise, distortion, chromatic aberation and purple fringing are almost a given.
Personally I would say that the best thing would be to change some of your shooting habits. For example carry only one body and maybe two lenses, one on the camera and one in a bag on hikes. Maybe a wideangle for landscapes and a telephoto for far away and macro. And also overcome your fear of sensor dust, worst comes to worst and you clone out the dust in photoshop and have to get your camera cleaned. Its not the end of the world :-)
On the topic of interesting prosumer cams, take a look at this one...
//www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05060202samsung_pro815.asp
8 megapixels
15X zoom (including a 28mm wideangle at 35mm equivalent)
and a 3.5inch lcd screen
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 04:19:22 PM · #9 |
While you are checking out prosumers, have a look at the Fuji 9000/9500, available in Sept. 9 megapixel, 10.7x zoom.
Steve |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 04:27:40 PM · #10 |
| I learned your lession many years ago. 100+ pound pack at 12,000+ ft is killer. I'd take your 28-200mm zoom, add a set of extension tubes and a 2x converter. Should cover ya for landscape, macro and telephoto. That save my Rocky Mtn. backpacking weight problem. Van |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 04:31:35 PM · #11 |
If the image quality is any good, that's a pretty versatile piece of gear. Does seem a little odd that the aperture range is so narrow (2.8 - 2.6), and I'm not sure how much good the long zoom does if there's no image stabilization. |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 04:32:52 PM · #12 |
Having used a Canon EOS-350 XT, I can tell you, you are in for a downgrade...
I own a Canon PowerShot S1 IS. This camera has been discontinued, or rather, replaced, by... yes, that's right, PowerShot S2 IS.
Now let me tell you, I LIKE my camera. It just is not an dSLR. That's the only thing different. (only?!)
You have to shoot more carefuly, bracket a lot, and generally, live with shutter lag. But you will be a lot lighter, that's for sure!
The S2 is as nice as camera as prosumers get, with 5MP, 12x zoom and with a very nice manual mode. Image stabilization also. But alas, no manual focus (you can focus manually but with a "slider" - ugh). So I guess it is out of your plans... |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 04:34:39 PM · #13 |
| i also find a restriction in lenses just makes you think a little harder but can result in better shots. Try a trip with like a wide, the 85mm, and one telephoto zoom . I think that would be enough. |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 04:39:26 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by pacpinto:
I own a Canon PowerShot S1 IS. This camera has been discontinued, or rather, replaced, by... yes, that's right, PowerShot S2 IS.
Now let me tell you, I LIKE my camera. It just is not an dSLR. That's the only thing different. (only?!)
You have to shoot more carefuly, bracket a lot, and generally, live with shutter lag. |
I have one too ... sometimes it feels like you might die of old age trying to live with the shutter-lag : ( |
|
|
|
08/18/2005 08:24:13 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I have one too ... sometimes it feels like you might die of old age trying to live with the shutter-lag : ( |
Yeah, and you loose THAT expression on your 3 year old kid. :( |
|
|
|
08/18/2005 10:24:47 AM · #16 |
Hi. I just posted another thread regarding my experience with the S2 IS. I find that it is totally limited as to range. I am finding that the lens is really decent for closer stuff up to around a couple hundred feet, but after that, nothing is sharp. There is no true focus to infinity. If you do a lot of stuff where you need range, you are gonna be unhappy.
After doing a lot of reading, I feel I can fairly confidently say that this is a characteristic particularly of smaller sensor cameras. The lens on my camera is slated more to the close-up side of things than other big zoom P&S cams, so I think the lack of range is a problem more pronounced on the S2 than others. The sensor inside my camera is about the same size as the other big zoom cameras and I find that they are afflicted with similar problems - read:
- Noise in shadows even at iso 100 (and sometimes 50!)
- Autofocus problems at telephoto and in low light (although it's not terrible, you do end up using the manual focus somewhat often and that's not fun with arrow buttons and goofy preview squares with the Electronic viewfinders)
- Shutter lag (which isn't toooo terrible, although I have missed some shots.)
- far more pronounced dropoffs in quality at the edges of performance for the lens.
The lens on my camera is a true 6mm to 72mm with a ULD element. That having been said, because it is soooo small and the sensor is so small and unforgiving, any time you leave the Sweet spots, loss of image quality is quick to slap you on the wrist.
DPReview lists the S2 IS as their 2nd choice in that group just a little behind the FZ20. That says something about the other cameras in that range.
If you want to go the route of P&S, I would say your only choice would be the FZ30. As it hasn't been released yet, I can't speak much for it's abilities, but I can tell you that the basic reason for the problems with my camera are still there in the Panasonic. (noise is still visible in the shadows on a sample shot at ISO 50)
Check out the D50 and the TC's and extension tubes like vtruan said. |
|
|
|
08/18/2005 10:47:19 AM · #17 |
Thanks to everone for their suggestions. I'm definately going to look at both the samsung pro812 & panasonic FZ30, and if I don't like what i see I might just "chip" the 500f8 and make due with the 200-500 gap.
Of course neither the samsung or panasonic will be for sale in the next month, so if anyone else has any suggestions please let me know. |
|
|
|
08/18/2005 10:52:48 AM · #18 |
The image quality, especially int he telephoto range, on the P&S cameras is so much worse than your Nikon that you can do just as well by cropping in from your 200mm. Seriously. There's so much noise interference on those little units that pack tons of sensors close together that it's pathetic. I used a coolpix 5700, a very high-rated prosumer cam at 5mp, and I NEVER got a telephoto shot that pleased me. I get better results cropping in on my 70-200mm f/4L canon glass.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2005 10:59:24 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
I get better results cropping in on my 70-200mm f/4L canon glass. |
I agree. I have cropped images at 1:1 (ie. 100% zoom in Photoshop) from my 70-200L shots and they generally look excellent.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2005 01:51:46 PM · #20 |
Isn't what you're saying about lack of range true for all big zooms, regardless of the body they are on, DSLR or P&S? My understanding is that all telephoto zooms are going to be soft at their tele end, just from lack of deep DOF, for one. Maybe a telephoto prime lens would perform better, but at the price of weight and bulk, and money.
Originally posted by eschelar:
Hi. I just posted another thread regarding my experience with the S2 IS. I find that it is totally limited as to range. I am finding that the lens is really decent for closer stuff up to around a couple hundred feet, but after that, nothing is sharp. There is no true focus to infinity. If you do a lot of stuff where you need range, you are gonna be unhappy.
After doing a lot of reading, I feel I can fairly confidently say that this is a characteristic particularly of smaller sensor cameras. The lens on my camera is slated more to the close-up side of things than other big zoom P&S cams, so I think the lack of range is a problem more pronounced on the S2 than others. |
|
|
|
|
08/18/2005 02:03:18 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
I get better results cropping in on my 70-200mm f/4L canon glass.
|
I don't regret selling the sigma 135-400, but now I'm questioning my jugement selling my 70-210 f4. They haven't made that lens since 88' so its not like I can run to the store to replace it. |
|
|
|
08/18/2005 02:15:01 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Isn't what you're saying about lack of range true for all big zooms, regardless of the body they are on, DSLR or P&S? My understanding is that all telephoto zooms are going to be soft at their tele end, just from lack of deep DOF, for one. Maybe a telephoto prime lens would perform better, but at the price of weight and bulk, and money.
|
Maybe up to a point it's true of all zooms, but...
1. There is no difference in DOF between a zoom and a prime at same focal length and aperture.
2. The small-sensor cameras have a much higher signal-to-noise ratio, and this has the effect of degrading fine detail significantly. Since we tend to "measure" our telephoto's performance by crispness of detail, we see a serious discrepancy when we compare. In reality, the detail problem exists at WA end of the spectrum too, but we don't norice it as much I think. When you add to that the fact that the longer you "reach" the more atmospheric conditions contribute to image degradation, the difference is quite noticeable.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-08-18 14:15:55.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2005 02:25:04 PM · #23 |
Thanks, Bear...
At what kinds of telephoto reach are we talking about, greater than 200mm focal lengths or are we talking about extreme telephoto focal lengths?
oly
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Isn't what you're saying about lack of range true for all big zooms, regardless of the body they are on, DSLR or P&S? My understanding is that all telephoto zooms are going to be soft at their tele end, just from lack of deep DOF, for one. Maybe a telephoto prime lens would perform better, but at the price of weight and bulk, and money.
|
Maybe up to a point it's true of all zooms, but...
1. There is no difference in DOF between a zoom and a prime at same focal length and aperture.
2. The small-sensor cameras have a much higher signal-to-noise ratio, and this has the effect of degrading fine detail significantly. Since we tend to "measure" our telephoto's performance by crispness of detail, we see a serious discrepancy when we compare. In reality, the detail problem exists at WA end of the spectrum too, but we don't norice it as much I think. When you add to that the fact that the longer you "reach" the more atmospheric conditions contribute to image degradation, the difference is quite noticeable.
Robt. |
|
|
|
|
08/18/2005 03:03:57 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Thanks, Bear...
At what kinds of telephoto reach are we talking about, greater than 200mm focal lengths or are we talking about extreme telephoto focal lengths?
oly
|
It's all subjective anyway; 200mm is a lot, to some people. Atmospheric effects on sharpness increase dramatically as you get into really long lenses, though. I can notice them at 200mm, but at 500mm they are pronounced. As far as the viewer's perception of "good" detail, that's entirely subjective. A lot of people in here are happy with the Canon 70-300mm, but I tried one and thought it was horrible...
R.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2005 01:23:00 AM · #25 |
My comment on the range of the S2 IS is not limited to telephoto shots. It extends also to the wide angle range, so if you want to capture detail on mountains in the distance of a landscape shot on a clear day, you are equally hooped. The same applies to clouds, the moon...
Additionally, the difference in the quality dropoff *seems* quite heavy on the S2 because of the multiplication to take a 6-72mm lens to be equivalent to a 36-432mm.
I'm with the other guys that say that a picture will look better if cropped from a DSLR and even upsized. |
|
