| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/29/2005 11:46:46 PM · #1 |
Hi everyone I have a question. Which camera has "near" dSLR image quality (low noise at high ISO and good details, etc) but isnt a dSLR (meaning cannot change lense)?
A friend is camera hunting and that is his description. I thought maybe DPC can help, with the vast members here.
Thank you! |
|
|
|
11/29/2005 11:48:28 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 01:00:15 AM · #3 |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 01:05:19 AM · #4 |
BradP's old Olympus, I forget the model number, Nards has one for sale right now at a very attractive price.
R. |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 01:06:55 AM · #5 |
Sony R1 with a 10.3 megapixel CMOS with a smaller version of the sensor used in the Nikon D2X. Should be out in December.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2005 01:07:21 AM · #6 |
you are talking about sony dsc r1, i liked the lense test results, they are quite impressive.
Originally posted by crayon:
Hi everyone I have a question. Which camera has "near" dSLR image quality (low noise at high ISO and good details, etc) but isnt a dSLR (meaning cannot change lense)?
A friend is camera hunting and that is his description. I thought maybe DPC can help, with the vast members here.
Thank you! |
|
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:11:18 AM · #7 |
| Matching your description the Olypus E-10/20's have the best build quality. Although some of the newer prosumer models likely have better ISO quality at high levels. |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:16:06 AM · #8 |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:28:24 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by faidoi:
Sony R1 with a 10.3 megapixel CMOS with a smaller version of the sensor used in the Nikon D2X. Should be out in December. |
smaller sensor physical size? Isnt that... bad? I read that larger sensor size (not pixels, is physical) has sharper detail and less noise. How true is that? |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:44:22 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by faidoi:
Sony R1 with a 10.3 megapixel CMOS with a smaller version of the sensor used in the Nikon D2X. Should be out in December. |
smaller sensor physical size? Isnt that... bad? I read that larger sensor size (not pixels, is physical) has sharper detail and less noise. How true is that? |
True, but the sensor is the largest in a non-dslr camera. Larger then most new lower priced dslrs I believe.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:46:54 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by faidoi:
True, but the sensor is the largest in a non-dslr camera. Larger then most new lower priced dslrs I believe. |
This is exciting. Maybe I'll change mine too :) Thanks again |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:48:11 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by faidoi:
Sony R1 with a 10.3 megapixel CMOS with a smaller version of the sensor used in the Nikon D2X. Should be out in December. |
smaller sensor physical size? Isnt that... bad? I read that larger sensor size (not pixels, is physical) has sharper detail and less noise. How true is that? |
It's true, as far as it goes, but the D2X is 12.8 Mp and this is 10.3 Mp and will have the same pixel pitch as the Nikon, assuming it's really a "smaller version" of the same sensor. The difference would not be huge, I don't think. Most of the noise problem with smaller sensors is cramming the pixel pitch too tight, I believe.
I donno, I'm not the expert on this.
R. |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 07:50:42 AM · #13 |
Fuji S9500 (What its called in the UK)
Great value for money, high iso with low noise, decent lens, has had some very good reviews. Downside is that it is slow on writing images to card, also focus is slow so not good if you intend to use it for sports photos etc and low light focusing is not too good. If you can live with the downsides then this would be a very good choice.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2005 08:14:20 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
BradP's old Olympus, I forget the model number, Nards has one for sale right now at a very attractive price.
R. |
It's an E-10, but it definitely doesn't meet the requirement for "low noise at high ISO"; the max ISO is 320.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2005 08:44:51 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by crayon:
Hi everyone I have a question. Which camera has "near" dSLR image quality (low noise at high ISO and good details, etc) but isnt a dSLR (meaning cannot change lense)?
A friend is camera hunting and that is his description. I thought maybe DPC can help, with the vast members here.
Thank you! |
The definition of slr /dslr is pretty fuzzy. A original criteria is that the camera user views a intended image through the taking lens by means of a optical viewfinder connected to it by a system of mirrors. In digital this can be done with the cheapest cameras with viewing done via a connection with a lcd viewfinder. Lens interchangability is another factor, however many fine well featured models of Leica M's can do this, but viewing is done by means of an additional lens viewing system. I would say that that a true slr is one that uses an optical viewfinder connected to the taking lens. |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 09:01:56 AM · #16 |
The Sony R1, Fuji S9000 and Samsung Pro815 are all fixed lens cameras more or less equal to DSLRs. If you don't need a lot of zoom, the Fuji FinePix F10 is an interesting alternative. It's a really tiny camera, yet features a DSLR-sized (low noise) sensor with 6.3 megapixels, excellent low-light capabilities and a 2.5" LCD for less than $300.
Message edited by author 2005-11-30 09:02:35. |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 09:21:09 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
The Sony R1, Fuji S9000 and Samsung Pro815 are all fixed lens cameras more or less equal to DSLRs. If you don't need a lot of zoom, the Fuji FinePix F10 is an interesting alternative. It's a really tiny camera, yet features a DSLR-sized (low noise) sensor with 6.3 megapixels, excellent low-light capabilities and a 2.5" LCD for less than $300. |
Wow. That F10 looks like a really nice camera. Not really a "dSLR sized sensor", but quite close. The ISO800-1600 samples at DPR look really nice.
The 36mm eqv. wide end is quite a disappointment though.
Message edited by author 2005-11-30 09:23:25. |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 09:28:15 AM · #18 |
i'd go with the canon pro 1
|
|
|
|
11/30/2005 10:10:15 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by undieyatch:
The definition of slr /dslr is pretty fuzzy. A original criteria is that the camera user views a intended image through the taking lens by means of a optical viewfinder connected to it by a system of mirrors. In digital this can be done with the cheapest cameras with viewing done via a connection with a lcd viewfinder. Lens interchangability is another factor, however many fine well featured models of Leica M's can do this, but viewing is done by means of an additional lens viewing system. I would say that that a true slr is one that uses an optical viewfinder connected to the taking lens. |
SLR = Single Lens Reflex (Reflex mirror). "Single Lens" is to separate it from a TLR (Twin Lens Reflex), where two lenses were used to operate the camera.
P&S cameras don't have reflex mirrors. Maybe they should be called SLDVF (Single Lens Digital ViewFinder) cameras.
Oh, and this is just my opinion, but I think, that the DSC R1 is just a waste of money. Why not get a 350D+Sigma superzoom combo and never change lenses? And you even have the luxury of an optical VF and proper high-ISO performance. Not even mentioning, that you could actually change lenses if and when you want.
Message edited by author 2005-11-30 10:13:29. |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 12:35:28 PM · #20 |
The Sony looks pretty good, Imaging Resource review.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2005 01:31:56 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
Oh, and this is just my opinion, but I think, that the DSC R1 is just a waste of money. Why not get a 350D+Sigma superzoom combo and never change lenses? And you even have the luxury of an optical VF and proper high-ISO performance. Not even mentioning, that you could actually change lenses if and when you want. |
Or get the Minolta 5D with the Sigma 18-200 and have an image stabilized SLR with 11x zoom and true wide angle for under $1000.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:05:23 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
Oh, and this is just my opinion, but I think, that the DSC R1 is just a waste of money. Why not get a 350D+Sigma superzoom combo and never change lenses? And you even have the luxury of an optical VF and proper high-ISO performance. Not even mentioning, that you could actually change lenses if and when you want. |
Or get the Minolta 5D with the Sigma 18-200 and have an image stabilized SLR with 11x zoom and true wide angle for under $1000. |
I don't believe in the AS system. Besides. I picked Canon because of the ability to use various old lenses. Maybe should've gone with Pentax. They have the best support for old M42 and K lenses. |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:12:15 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
Oh, and this is just my opinion, but I think, that the DSC R1 is just a waste of money. Why not get a 350D+Sigma superzoom combo and never change lenses? And you even have the luxury of an optical VF and proper high-ISO performance. Not even mentioning, that you could actually change lenses if and when you want. |
Or get the Minolta 5D with the Sigma 18-200 and have an image stabilized SLR with 11x zoom and true wide angle for under $1000. |
I don't believe in the AS system. Besides. I picked Canon because of the ability to use various old lenses. Maybe should've gone with Pentax. They have the best support for old M42 and K lenses. |
Pentax doesn't have IS though, sadly.. Although I'm not a big fan of IS myself. |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:29:36 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
Maybe should've gone with Pentax. They have the best support for old M42 and K lenses. |
I use M42, Nikon and even leica m39 threaded lenses on my Olympus SLRs and still maintain metering (both flash & ambient). I've seen 4/3 adapters for Leica R, Nikon, Olympus OM, Pentax K & M42, Contax, Minolta, Exakta, Rollei, & Topcon. I personally have the M42 & Nikon versions. Its funny that many don't consider the Olympus system because "not much glass" argument, but it there was ever a true universal SLR the 4/3rds is it. Plus there are rumors that Leica and/or Panasonic will introduce a 4/3rds DSLR at PMA in Feb 06.
 |
|
|
|
11/30/2005 02:34:26 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by hyperfocal:
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
Maybe should've gone with Pentax. They have the best support for old M42 and K lenses. |
I use M42, Nikon and even leica m39 threaded lenses on my Olympus SLRs and still maintain metering (both flash & ambient). I've seen 4/3 adapters for Leica R, Nikon, Olympus OM, Pentax K & M42, Contax, Minolta, Exakta, Rollei, & Topcon. I personally have the M42 & Nikon versions. Its funny that many don't consider the Olympus system because "not much glass" argument, but it there was ever a true universal SLR the 4/3rds is it. Plus there are rumors that Leica and/or Panasonic will introduce a 4/3rds DSLR at PMA in Feb 06.
|
I just don't see 4/3rds catching on fully until they decide to change the default print size (or common everyman print size), from 4x6.
When people take photos and go to print, it's generally 4x6 prints. Albums are sold mainly to accomodate 4x6 prints.. we're a society where the 3:2 aspect is king to the everyman.
Until that changes, 4/3rds is just for people that enjoy something different.. or love to print in 8x10 all the time. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/01/2025 06:11:39 AM EDT.
