|
nerdz posted:If I had the chance to buy a barely used Sigma DP1 for the same price as a new s95, would it be a better choice? Which DP1 were you looking at? The Foveon's a lovely sensor, but the Sigma DP range has always had a hell of a time handling it - it's famously slow (in terms of turn-on time and shot-to-shot). I've handled a DP1s, and I found it unbearable, and I'm not even usually that fussed about camera speed. But yes, a big sensor does indeed make a difference, especially if you're into a bit of bokeh. Not sure how it is in low-light, though. If you want a sensor that size in a point and shoot, it's pretty much that, a Leica (gnnnnh) or wait for the X100. Also, the newest Sigma DP1x has a new processor which is meant to be a lot faster. I'm going to be a bit biased, as mine literally arrived yesterday morning, but I picked up a Ricoh GR Digital III for just £310, and it is blowing me away. It's just terrifically well made, and that f1.9 lens is a real beaut. It's only got a standard-size (for a point-and-shoot) 1.7" CCD, but the lens and image quality seem to really make up for it. It's also famously good as a low-light/nighttime camera. It can manage some lovely depth-of-field effects even with the small sensor, and I've had it focusing perfectly at distances of less than 1cm (!) in macro mode. It's also got a Dynamic Range mode (takes two photos at different exposures and combines them) which, much to my surprise, is actually very impressive. On top of all that, it's very satisfying to hold, and feels decidedly well made. It would probably be slightly alarming in terms of features for a beginner (especially with the latest firmware) - it's almost bafflingly customisable (most of the buttons and modes can be entirely re-programmed). It does have a good full-auto mode, but it really rewards use in manual or aperture-priority mode. I also find it quite ugly in a profoundly endearing manner. //edit: I just came across these threads at the Rangefinder Forums (they're kinda like the freaks at NMA but with Leicas instead of Fallout) about the DP range: DP1 DP2s Their consensus seems to be: Rangefinder Foums posted:My first day of shooting today. Christ. I'd forgotten how ridiculously AWFUL everything is--the AF, the groaning, creaking lens, the cap, the plasticky buttons, GOD. Maddening to use with a very beautiful sensor, basically - they've got some nice sample images to bear that out. It'd be a very different prospect from the S95. I'd suggest that if you're not 100% sure you want a Sigma, you're probably better off with the Canon. hairysammoth fucked around with this message at 11:31 on Nov 12, 2010 |
#
¿
Nov 11, 2010 21:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 17:13 |
|
|
nerdz posted:Well, I've read about something around 7 seconds per shot, and I think I can handle that. But the problem here is the lens, the DP1 has a f/4 lens, I think that's way too dark for me. I would have to go with a DP2, and the price goes way up from there. The S90/S95 it is then, I'll only wait for some black fridays discounts. That was exactly my thinking, which is why I went with the Ricoh - f1.9 is pretty unusual in a PnS, especially at $450-odd new. The S95 is similarly quick by all accounts. krushgroove posted:I do OK with panning and picking the right shutter speeds, but I was having trouble finding the right F-stop and ISO settings, especially as it went to completely dark. I am undoubtedly a very long way from being the most qualified person on the forums to talk about this, but my understanding is that in most circumstances you usually want to use the lowest ISO you can get away. However, as you're also shooting moving targets, you're (probably) also looking for a relatively short exposure. Personally, I'd crank the aperture as wide as it'd go (assuming you're not worried keeping the background in focus). I'd then try a few different ISOs until I was looking at the lowest I could get while still using a decent shake-free shutter speed (again, depends on the camera, whether it has proper image stabilisation, whether you're using a tripod etc.). On my unstabilised Ricoh I can usually be confident of a half-decent shot at anything faster than 1/40. With motorsports, though, this may be too slow if your subject is really hooning it. If that's the case, you may need to use a faster ISO so you can speed up the shutter. Either way, though, I'd keep the aperture cranked way open. Now someone knowledgeable can explain to me exactly why I'm doing it completely wrong 
hairysammoth fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Nov 15, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2010 20:03
|
|
|
spf3million posted:Widest aperture possible, don't forget it's widest @ the widest angle and closes up as you zoom in. This is a good point - looking at your album, the aperture on the darker photos varies between f3.9 and f5. The S95 is capable of f2.0 (I believe), but only when zoomed all the way out. That's a whole two stops (and some) of difference - zoom out all the way and you're effectively quadrupling the light you're getting. I'm afraid spf3million is right really, though - very hard to capture cleanly without a DSLR sensor... hairysammoth fucked around with this message at 10:55 on Nov 16, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2010 21:29
|
|
|
Korwen posted:I've been wanting to get a point and shoot camera because I'm going to be wanting a small camera to take with me while motorcycling/camping, and while I loved owning a DSLR and want to own one again, I want a point and shoot for the times I don't feel like carrying around camera gear. Yep, it's got a tripod mount (metal, IIRC), HD video and HDR. I don't know what this tells you, but a good friend of mine who's also a filmmaker recently bought a Leica M8, specifically because he wanted a small, DSLR-quality camera he would actually be bothered to carry around with him everywhere. He today confessed to me that he's since bought an S95 as well and actually uses it far more.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2010 17:36
|
|
|
john ashpool posted:So, the Fujifilm FinePix X100. Its not a compact, but its pretty drat small. My question is, how(if at all) would you focus with the hybrid viewfinder? Yeah, this is the big unanswered question in terms of officially released information. I'd guess that they still haven't finalised how they intend to do it, and are still playing around with various solutions like the ones poopinmymouth mentioned.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2010 12:32
|
|
|
krushgroove posted:Ah OK - I've never shot in RAW before but might start very soon, the S95 is my first RAW-capable camera. As if that wasn't complex enough, there's also different types of RAW files - it's not one unified format. There's a semi-standardised format called DNG (Digital Negative) that's Adobe's baby and widely supported, but people like Canon and Nikon (if I recall correctly) have their own systems. My missus gets sent quite a lot of RAW files by pro photographers for her work, and she spent most of last week spitting venom about Nikon's system for some reason.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2010 11:26
|
|
|
john ashpool posted:So, the Fujifilm FinePix X100. Its not a compact, but its pretty drat small. My question is, how(if at all) would you focus with the hybrid viewfinder? Just got sent this from Fuji: With manual focus selected, focusing is achieved using the focus ring around the lens barrel. A distance indication bar enables you to pre-focus if required, or you can simply use the electronic viewfinder to focus accurately. There is, however, no rangefinder focusing capability. There's a few other minor detail updates there now too.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2010 15:49
|
|
|
HPL posted:Well that pretty much kills most of the appeal of the X100. For some, certainly. I'm not hugely surprised though. For me, the combination of a fast prime lens, APS-C sensor, fast operation, and that viewfinder is still enough to make it really stand out. If nothing else, I'm hoping it encourages a rash of similar products across the board - it's been a glaring gap in the market for a while now. I'm also hoping they manage to stick to the rumoured price point.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2010 16:45
|
|
|
HPL posted: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. Ah, I read it differently - I took that to mean that there may be a simulated rangefinder mode in the electronic viewfinder, just no optical rangefinder built into the optical side of their funky hybrid system. It's still unclear how this will work. They say: "you can simply use the electronic viewfinder to focus accurately". They still haven't told us exactly how though... I do agree that a lot of people may simply go for an m4/3 system instead. Speaking for myself though (and I'd guess I'm not completely alone in this), the lack of interchangeable lens is actually part of the appeal of this camera. The competition for the X100 isn't the GF1 for me, it's the X1, a camera so far out of my practical price range it's no longer visible with the naked eye (and not actually that great by most accounts). I agree that Sony, Samsung et al. could very easily produce something along these lines, but people have been clamouring for them (or more usually, Canon or Nikon) to do just that for a while now, and they've all seemed singularly unwilling to. There have been rumours about one of the big dogs producing a proper digital rangefinder floating about for a few years - maybe Fuji catching the drop on all of them will encourage someone else to do try and follow suit?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2010 18:06
|
|
|
subx posted:To me it sounds like any newer camera will be a huge upgrade, but I'd base some of it on how much low light shooting you (and your gf) do. I reckon subx is on the money here: my guess would be that any non-awful contemporary P&S would be a very pleasant upgrade from both your current cameras. If you want to save your money rather than save up for an S95, a 2nd-hand S90 is also terrific (although, being a notably good camera, 2nd hand prices aren't as much of a saving as you might expect). If you were looking for a cheaper P&S that would do the job... I had a go with the Fuji Finepix F80 and really like it. You can get them new from about $160, unbelievably. For the money, it's terrific, and has lots of nice options (e.g. aperture priority) that you often don't get at this price. There are cameras that specifically try and deal with that small-sensor, graininess thing, but they're more expensive again. Things like the Ricoh GRD3 and Olympus XZ-1 have the same small sensors but fast lenses. The fascinating-but-flawed Sigma DP series have the beautiful and bigger Foveon sensor, but the rest of the hardware struggles to handle it. And of course, the forthcoming Fujifilm X100, which has us all excited exactly because it promises a fast lens and a big APS-C sensor in a relatively small P&S. These are all a lot more money though; if I were you, I'd save my cash and go for a decent new P&S. A 2nd-hand S90 or an F80 (or similar) would both be great.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2011 10:54
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Yeah, I've been scouring the Internet and it looks like what I want isn't feasible with current technology. It's either too large, lacks the zoom, or has poor low light performance. Nothing I can find manages to integrate those three things. The newish Olympus SZ-30MR doesn't look too threatening, has a 25-600mm equiv zoom, and is meant to be good in low light (though I can't say I've ever tried one personally). The lens is hilariously big once it's, erm, unfurled, but seems nicely innocuous when turned off:  Probe the root.  Work the shaft!  SAY THE NAME! (This is why I have to have fixed focal length optics; I'm too immature for zoom lenses.) Does the 2" restriction apply to the maximum length, or the at rest length? I was going to suggest the novelty option of a Ricoh GXR - nobody knows what the hell they are, so go in with the 28mm lens, and then swap the CCD unit with the 28-300mm body. But I figure 28-300mm won't really cut it, and besides, the zoom unit actually seems significantly slimmer than the wideangle one. Bet you'd be the only person in the joint with a GXR though, so that's fun.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2011 10:13
|
|
|
spf3million posted:We had a discussion similar to this in a different thread. I don't think you can get a point and shoot that shoots must faster than 1 frame per second. Also, autofocus on P&Ss pretty much always suck. I don't think you'll be able to find anything without the shutter lag outside of a dslr. Sorry to be such a downer, but autofocus speed and frames per second are some of the major reasons people buy dslrs. Really? I just tested my GRD III, and it can shoot at 2 frames a second even in RAW - and I wasn't aware it was meant to be a class-leader in that regard. It's also got a lower-resolution continuous mode that shoots at 7.5 frames per second. Is that so unusual? I'll admit, I knew I didn't want to buy a slow camera shot-to-shot, but I hadn't thought I'd picked up one of the fastest... /edit: Here's a handy, sortable table of shutter lag and frames per second. The Nikon S8000 sounds cheap and promising; it may well be up your alley. And it seems you're right, spf3million - the fastest point & shoot camera on that chart does five shots in 6.17 seconds, and my GRD does it in just over 5 including processing to card. Seems I've got an unusually fast camera! Who knew. \/\/\/\/\/\/\/ $400 on eBay, but yeah, I see your point. I always rather assumed that the Ricoh was the technological equivalent of a $300 P&S camera from one of the bigger manufacturers, what with the economies of scale and all. Seems I was being a bit unfair on the poor thing! And yes, it seems that the S8000 really does focus in under 0.2 seconds. Sounds like it's something of an aberration though; it has some weird "DSLR-like" auto-focus technique, whatever that means. I assumed it meant phase- rather than contrast-based AF, but apparently not. Lord knows how it does it. hairysammoth fucked around with this message at 15:47 on May 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2011 14:24
|
|
|
Hamburglar posted:Thanks a lot for the fast replies. I can go for the S95 if I really have to, but if I can save a few bucks I'd love to. Well, for cheap, I'd say the same as I suggested to Chainclaw: see if you can't get your hands on a Fujifilm F80 and see how it grabs you. (In fact, if you're still around bud, I'd love to know how you're getting on with it - I only had a couple of days with the one I tried.) It comes in as "average" in the speed stakes, but noticeably faster than the Canon S95. And it's now $150, which is silly cheap for what it offers. spf3million posted:That's cool, I'd like to see it in action. Unfortunate that it has a max aperture of f/3.5. hairysammoth fucked around with this message at 15:57 on May 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2011 15:47
|
|
|
scorntic posted:I've only shot with nikon cameras, thats basically the only reason. The only other brand of camera I'd probably ever get is canon. I'd understand that of SLRs, but the Nikon/Canon axis doesn't really exist in the Point & Shoot world. Nikon, in particular, have struggled to create truly memorable, great P&S cameras. There are exceptions, sure; but the difference is that a lot of different P&S brands share the same parts from 3rd party manufacturers. The sensors, in particular, are usually made by Sony - regardless of what brand P&S you buy. If I recall correctly, Canon do make some of their own CCDs, but Nikon don't. That's not to say you shouldn't get a Nikon, it's just that the Nikon and Canon that make SLRs are quite different from the Nikon and Canon that make point and shoots... If this is nothing to do with SLR cameras though, then ignore all that and go nuts! But seriously, Nikon doesn't have anything in the same league as the S90/S95 at the moment.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2011 09:43
|
|
|
john ashpool posted:So, I think I want something that's portable but has a huge sensor. There are precisely three digital compacts with nice big sensors*: The Fujifilm X100 The Sigma DP Series The Leica X1 All of 'em pricey as gently caress and all a bit odd. Had my first play with the X100 in over the weekend, and it's a weird thing. Truly amazing photos, but the interface is hard to get used to, and holy poo poo it takes an absolute age to turn on. The electronic viewfinder isn't as great as I'd hoped either (although the optical is very lovely). I'm still torn, personally. But yeah, unless you want to go mirrorless (which can be a good call), you don't have much choice. *[Citation needed]
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2011 20:51
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:It's not a dslr, the controls make perfect sense after even 3-4 days of normal use. With quick start enabled, and a Sandisk Extreme Pro 45mb/s SDcard formatted in camera, it starts up in less than 2 seconds. I mostly meant the digital UI - the physical controls (apart from that bizarrely execrable plastic disc thing) are all utterly lovely, especially the little exposure doodad. As you say, the controls made a lot of sense to me having come from rangefinders and the like. It was using the same SD card we've got for emergencies in a RED One, which is a ludicrously fast thing for shooting at 4k, so it wasn't that. I didn't know about a quick-start mode though - I may have to make sure the owner knows about it! It would be odd if he didn't as he's been reading the manual for long before he actually got the drat camera, but he was grumbling about start-up times so maybe he missed it. Would make a lot of difference to its every day usability. I also really liked those Fuji film stock simulation settings - as someone who's got kinda fed up with dealing with RAW in my workflow, those JPEG modes were a real treat. The Velvia in particular did a really good job with spring colours.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2011 16:20
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:That's a question for a programmer, but it absolutely matters, both the card speed and having it have been formatted in camera. People who put their SDcard in an ipad or other mac product that writes poo poo to the SD card report slower start up times after, and slower write speed. Format in camera, and the problem goes away. Got the new card yesterday - it's like a different camera. Thanks! Takes No Damage posted:I've recently started traveling extensively for my job and I'm looking for something to take decent photos with. Once upon a time I was a photo student, but at the same time I'm not looking to create high art. Just some nice quality landscape / architecture shots from the different places I visit. Since this will be a travelin' camera I'm considering things like size and durability a bit higher than I would otherwise; I've pretty much written off SLRs unless they're not as bulky as I remember from a few years ago and can be had for 'a couple hundred'. I also should always be able to dump the photos to my laptop every day so I shouldn't need a great deal of storage capacity either. I think my record so far is 30 in a day. I'm not sure what you mean by "shouldn't need a great deal of storage capacity" - that's entirely defined by the memory stick you use. But there's been a few recommendations in the thread at that sort of price point. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I like this Fuji at the sub-$200 level. That site has some good reviews and comparisons of the main rivals, which is useful. There's also dpreview, who do some really in-depth reviews.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2011 12:04
|
|
|
Takes No Damage posted:I see a S90 on diymicro for 299 that I'm leaning more and more towards. Oh and the CHDK software, does that really add anything to the S90s? It looks like a lot of the features that it enables on other cameras is already present on the S90s. An S90 new from a store for $299 is pretty good. You may be able to do better if you want to chance eBay, but the price of the S90 has stayed pretty stable as it's quite a desirable camera. Personally, of that lot in your DPR list, my choice would be defined by budget. An F80 (which, as you note, offers aperture priority despite being very cheap) can be had for $140. An S90 can be had for $300. Both are great cameras at their respective prices. If you're happy spending $300, it's no contest. Those are the only two cameras I'd consider in that lineup... but then, I'm a sucker for prime lenses, so I couldn't give a toss about optical zoom. Honestly, if you're wavering: get the S90. Shoots RAW, full manual modes, built like a brick, a pleasure to use, a steal at $200-$300 new. You want to zoom, just walk closer or crop in post. hairysammoth fucked around with this message at 11:16 on May 30, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 30, 2011 11:13
|
|
|
Epi Lepi posted:I posted this about 2 weeks ago but never got a reply. In short I've got a Nikon Coolpix S560, I want to throw like 300 or 400 bucks at a new point and shoot camera, and I like to go to concerts. What's recommended as a definite upgrade to my current camera? Current camera's specs here: http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Produ...tTabs.TechSpecs Yeah, sorry man, I've just not had much experience with cameras in that price range for that purpose, so I wasn't sure what to add. The XZ-1 that HeyEng mentions is meant to be great, and has (according to the gospel of dpreview):
But I've never handled one or seen one in the flesh, or know anyone personally who has, so who knows?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2011 10:59
|
|
|
Oh, hey, look what just got a 5/5 review on the Photography Blog. I'm not really seeing it, myself - I'm not floored by those sample images, and the low-light performance doesn't sound all that standout. It may be another option to consider, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2011 11:26
|
|
|
Slimchandi posted:Nice. Just ordered the XZ-1 for myself, spent a good couple of days going through comparative models (plus all of day trying to convince my buddy at work that I *don't* want a 4/3rds interchangable). Looking forward to playing with it, my last camera was a PS A510 so I think things have moved on slightly since! Cool, do let us know how it goes and post some samples - it sounds like a really interesting little camera. Nice to have some competition for the S90/95...
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2011 23:58
|
|
|
caberham posted:Understanding exposure, that's the only starter book you need How about that new Sony that a lot of people seem to rate? //edit - that's nothing, my mate left his Leica M8 in a hotel room drawer, and never got it back. Insurance didn't pay out either. He's still heartbroken about it. He's the one with the X100 - he holds it forlornly, like one might hold the slightly simple sister of your first wife, during an ill-advised relationship after the first wife was tragically left in a hotel drawer. hairysammoth fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Jul 29, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2011 09:04
|
|
Even though I do have a few spare batteries and chargers, I really don't want another s95 as much as I love it.
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 17:13 |
|
|
Gravitom posted:Tried out the Fuji X10 at B&H today. A few cons I didn't realize. I'm struggling to see how this could be perceived as a con. Noticed a new Ricoh GRD came out. The GRD III is still handily the best P&S I've ever owned, although I'd be the first to admit that it fits very neatly in with my needs and wouldn't be for everybody. I don't know about the GRD IV though; they're still charging that bonkers price for it, and there's an awful lot more competition for great, interesting non-DSLRs at that price point these days. Much as I love 'em, they only make sense to me as a 2nd-hand / on sale / eBay find now...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2011 10:48
|
|