OT: Digi Camera, help me make up my mind... [Archive]

Kevan

12-07-2007, 10:44 AM

dave thompson

12-07-2007, 10:54 AM

There's no reason at all why you shouldn't have both of them! One for the jersey pocket for ride pics, snapshots and those instant memories where in the past you've slapped your forehead and exclaimed "I wish I had my camera!" The other for the more serious/artistic/creative pics that you want to take. That's what I've done and it seems to work well for me.

Pete Serotta

12-07-2007, 11:00 AM

Far more knowledgeable folks than me on this BUT this is how I did my selection process....

What are you primarily going to use the camera for? Small is good but there is a price for smallness.

Examples:

Inside snap shots or non action photo outside - than point and shoot works ok

Are you going to keep in it your pocket where size is #1 priority? As in bike riding etc? If so point and shoot.

The point and shoot does not have a viewfinder so the screen will be hard to see in bright sunlight.

Also the recycle (from when shutter in pressed until picture captured is usually slower on the point and shoot)

The larger camera will usually be better for "action photo" such as sports

Typically the quality of print is better on non point and shoot BUT most folks can not tell the difference in the format they look at the pictures.

Both types have a place for taking pictures - just depends on what your top requirement is.

A lady on the trip last summer in Vermont had a point and shoot she kept when the group was riding. She got some wonderful shots.....

PETE

PETE

shinomaster

12-07-2007, 11:00 AM

Just don't a POS Nikon P1

Ray

12-07-2007, 11:02 AM

Speaking only for myself, I used to be a pretty serious photographer and used a nice SLR. As point and shoot cameras improved, I got one of those and found myself using it for everything except big occasions where I could plan to bring the big one. But as the little guys have gotten better and better in this digital age, I found myself not using the big one any more. My wife recently stole my pentax optio so I went out and bought a 7 mp Canon point and shoot for $170. And it friggin' rocks. The image quality is far beyond anything I need, since I'm not doing huge enlargements. I used to think that the problem with the little cameras was the optics, but they're really decent these days. Color and sharpness and exposure control (if you wanna mess with it) is really quite astounding.

I'm pretty sure I'll never buy another SLR because I can't imagine needing more capability than most of the little digital cameras give you today.

Your wants and needs may vary, but think about whether you'd really use the bigger one before you plunk down the bucks. Or get the little guy now and if you find yourself wishing you had the full-feature camera, buy one of those next year.

-Ray

KeithS

12-07-2007, 11:17 AM

I have some of each. I have an Olympus SLR style that I use most of the time, and a little point and shoot that I carry in my pocket or in this really nice saddle mounted bag. The thing I looked for was a camera with a non proprietary power system for the PHD (Press Here Dummy) camera. The little Nikon 3x zoom is a 7 megapixel and uses an SD card and regular old AA batteries. So when you're out in the middle of nowhere and the batteries are dead (because that is where and when that happens) you can just stop at the next grocery store and pick some up. The other thing is an accomdation to old age and changing vision. Viewfinders are hard to come by, I really miss mine. In bright light with polarized sunglasses it is hard to focus on the really big screen on the back of the camera body.

Kevan

12-07-2007, 11:23 AM

This is what I'm talking about. I think the smaller camera might be the better move, but you know how those bigger-better cameras make you itch.

I'm thinking the small camera is the better vehicle here, though I will miss big-time the isolated viewer that a bigger camera offers.

Dave, Ideally both would be good, but this time around, I only get one to pick from.

Ken Robb

12-07-2007, 11:25 AM

the best camera made does you no good if it's too big to have with you most of the time. Get a simpler one--I have a 4 year-old Nikon CoolPix with less than 4mb and it works fine for everything I have wanted to do. It has a viewfinder as well as lcd screen to frame shots.I bought a 256mb memory card that easily holds a whole vacation worth of pix for us. Should we fill that card we can always download/email the images and start over.

Get the small camera first. Use it a lot. If you don't find yourself frustrated by some missing features or performance you win. If you learn that you do need more camera buy one and keep the little guy for lighter duty.

If you get the biggie first you're doomed to being a pack mule unless you take Sandy along for such duty.

MrBilly

12-07-2007, 11:25 AM

I have a Sony ultraslime point and shoot and it is the only one I use - not the 2 SLR, not the larger Sony dig.

Get the smaller one and take a look at the Sony too.

Billy

Ozz

12-07-2007, 11:25 AM

Good topic....I was considering one very similar.

The problem I have with the small cameras is the shutter delay....if you are trying to take photos of kids, they just don't hold still while the the camera thinks about when it will actually snap the photo....frustrating, especially when trying to take photos of sports.

I have a Sony Cyber shot - DSC80....it takes nice photos, when you have time to frame the shot.

I've been thinking an SLR might be the way to go to get better shots of the kids playing soccer and such....

Any thoughts / recommendations on SLR's would be appreciated....budget all-in is probably around $2500 - $3000....seems like a lot, but I have some damn cute kids! ;)

fiamme red

12-07-2007, 11:27 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/technology/personaltech/06pogue.html?pagewanted=all

Pete Serotta

12-07-2007, 11:30 AM

There are some pretty nice ones out there from NIKON and CANON....SLRS NIKON D40, D80 and CANON in the same price range.....Min if any shutter lag.

Go to a store and try them in your hand to see which feels most confortable. Also see what your neighbors use and what they like and dislike about them.

You can not go wrong with NIKON or CANON. (this does not mean the other brands are not good - but these are the ones I have personal experience with.)

Good topic....I was considering one very similar.

The problem I have with the small cameras is the shutter delay....if you are trying to take photos of kids, they just don't hold still while the the camera thinks about when it will actually snap the photo....frustrating, especially when trying to take photos of sports.

I have a Sony Cyber shot - DSC80....it takes nice photos, when you have time to frame the shot.

I've been thinking an SLR might be the way to go to get better shots of the kids playing soccer and such....

Any thoughts / recommendations on SLR's would be appreciated....budget all-in is probably around $2500 - $3000.

Hardlyrob

12-07-2007, 11:36 AM

We went Serotta Pete's route.

For big stuff I have a Canon Rebel xti, and several lenses. This is a GREAT camera for the money, and you can shoot anything with a few lenses. But that does raise the pack mule issue. The SLR set up is very compact, and everything fits in a small toolbag - camera body, 50mm lens, 28-105 zoom, 100-300 zoom and 19-35 wide angle zoom, plus a good flash, compact tri-pod etc all told the bag weighs about 8 pounds. Hauled this setup around Scotland last month and it was great.

The other side is the Canon Powershot 550 I gave my wife. It is a fixture in her purse for work (she's a window restorer for old houses), and play. The downside is the cycle time for the small camera. We were recently at a Christmas party at a restaurant. The Powershot had about a 2-3 second delay as it tried to meter and set the flash in a relatively dark environment. As a result we missed a bunch of shots we would not have missed with the SLR. One advantage of the Powershot over many small cameras is that it has a viewfinder.

That probably didn't help you, but I would go for the small one first, and then think about an SLR for the situations where the small camera isn't well suited.

Cheers!

Rob

Hardlyrob

12-07-2007, 11:48 AM

Any thoughts / recommendations on SLR's would be appreciated....budget all-in is probably around $2500 - $3000....seems like a lot, but I have some damn cute kids! ;)

Ozz you should be able to meet that price target easily. All told I have about $1500 in the camera bag, and there is very little I can't do. The Canon / Nikon thing is like Campy / Shimano Both work well, are well designed and have their lovers and haters. However, given the cost of lenses, once you pick one it is very expensive to try the other, and unlike bike bits, these really are not interchangeable at all.

Serotta Pete is right - go to a store and work with a number of bodies. Even within the same line (Nikon or Canon) different models have a different balance and different feel. Also make sure to try them with different lenses and a good flash - the weight and balance of the camera can change substantially.

Good Luck!

Rob

Kevan

12-07-2007, 11:53 AM

small it is for now. Still pondering makes and models though I like the features of the Olympus.

Seems the isolated viewfinder and the ability to use conventional batteries is no more. Or least nearly so...

jbrainin

12-07-2007, 11:57 AM

Canon's SD850IS is a very good choice for an all-purpose camera. It's small (part of the digital Elph line), has a 4x zoom, 8mp resolution and even has image stabilization. It's also got a street price around $250. It's also got a titanium body.

Clydesdale

12-07-2007, 12:04 PM

Been using a canon s3 ($295 @ amazon) and have loved it. The thing does it all and takes fantastic pictures. A little big, but so easy and such great images that I take it with me even when it is a little more than I want to carry. For $50 more right now at Amazon, you can step up to the S5, which has a few more bells/whistles/pixels. Both also do superb video and the standard flash is good (s5 allows an external). Both use regular AA batteries which is great travelling or out all day. They even make an underwater case to use while diving. If you do anything more than point and click, I think the full featured cameras are a better way to go. Not meant for the jersey pocket, probably, but for one all around camera, hard to go wrong imo.

Hardlyrob

12-07-2007, 12:27 PM

The Canon Powershot A550 has both a separate viewfinder and uses AA batteries. The elph lines also seem to have viewfinders.

malcolm

12-07-2007, 12:33 PM

Kevan, check out this website http://www.steves-digicams.com/
He reviews almost every camera and it is fairly well organized and I think as independant as possible. The reviews are arrnaged by megapixel as well as by type/size camera.

maunahaole

12-07-2007, 12:38 PM

If you go P&S and plan to carry it on the bike, look into an Olympus 720SW (I think). It has the advantage of being waterproof to 10' and shockproof to a 5' drop. Which sounds a whole lot to me like perfect for a jersey pocket.

That being said I'm currently having the DSLR dilemma now. I'm heavily leaning towards an Olympus E-510. Canon, Nikon and Pentax all have nice offerings as well. Beware the Nikon D40. Nice camera, BUT only 6mp and can't use a lot of nikon lenses. Nikon has some AF lenses with the motor on board and some where the body provides the motor. IIRC, the D40 does not have the motor in the body. I dont know if this holds for the D40x, which is a 10mp cam.

gt6267a

12-07-2007, 12:40 PM

I think Ray�s advice is spot on. I did some semi-pro shooting back in the day and had piles of camera bodies and lenses and flashes. It was all stolen and when the insurance cash came through, I seriously looked at a D70 or Rebel XT. In the end, I got a phd Panasonic Lumix FX-1 or whatever was the cool slim model for that six weeks. It is great and handles almost everything. True, there are some fun things it can�t do, but it handles 90% of everything with such ease, its amazing. Not having a view finder seemed trashy at first, but now I don�t care. The screen is large, 2.5�, bright, and it works just fine.

Since the forum peeps seem to have convinced you to go phd already, I recommend looking at the Panasonic products. They have Leica lenses and other than the cosmetic shell, they are the exact same models Leica sells and charges hundreds more.

Crazy Chris

12-07-2007, 12:55 PM

Canon, Canon, Canon. I have the Powershot 640, without IS. Look at the Powershot 650 IS or the Canon G-9. Shoot at 80 or 100 ISO, not higher. Look up DCVIEWS.Com.

Ken Robb

12-07-2007, 01:07 PM

the Panasonic/Leica sounds like a great combo ATMO. Thanks for the tip. Ken

Ray

12-07-2007, 01:08 PM

Since the forum peeps seem to have convinced you to go phd already, I recommend looking at the Panasonic products. They have Leica lenses and other than the cosmetic shell, they are the exact same models Leica sells and charges hundreds more.
Yeah, the Panasonic uses Leica optics and the Sony's use Zeiss optics, so you might get marginally better sharpness from those. But I think it's all just a feature comparison in those lowish priced digitals. I've had three in the last five years or so. A Panasonic with the Leica optics and 3 mp, a Pentax with no particular optics and 4 mp, and now a Canon with 7 mp and no particular optics. I'd say the Panasonic and Canon are marginally better than the Pentax was, but they've all been excellent. So I'm not sure the Zeiss and Leica name really mean diddly at this price point. I used to sell cameras many many many generations of camera ago (auto-focus was BRAND new - digital wasn't even a gleam in its daddy's eye). In terms of name, Canon and Nikon really were superior cameras at the very high end. In the consumer range, you were just paying for the name. Ricoh, Minolta, Pentax, etc, etc, etc all made equally good consumer cameras, but they didn't sell as well because Nikon and Canon had the names and the ad budgets. I assume it's pretty much the same today, so just try a few and see which one feels best to you.

I also wouldn't worry about the latest greatest in mega pixels unless you're doing a lot of VERY large format work. I almost never enlarge anything anymore - hell, not that much ever makes it to paper. But I did an 8x10 enlargement of a shot I took with the Panasonic (3mp) that was incredibly sharp and clear. At this point, its just insane to worry about it (Oh man, I'm getting Campy's new 15 speed group, the 14 speed stuff just doesn't COMPARE!). The 7mp Canon I just bought was $170 and the newer 8mp version was nearly $300. Easy call on that one.

Whatever you decide, its hard to go wrong today - almost everyone is making good digital cameras.

-Ray

mcteague

12-07-2007, 01:38 PM

You really need both if you are even halfway serious.

After years of SLR film cameras and working in photo stores I cut way back when I left that occupation. I picked up a Canon G1 and like it but really missed the control of an SLR, not to mention the terrible shutter lag the P&S cameras have. I then bought the Canon Digital Rebel when it came out and just last month got the Canon 40D. The 40D is the best of both worlds, all the control and build quality of my old film camera along with the convience of digital.

However, it is big and just won't do for cycling so something like a Stylus may be in my future as well. So few have optical viewfinders and I really dislike using the LCD to compose. Plus, when I cycle I like to do that and don't stop for pictures anyway. So I guess I'll stick with SLRs for now.

Tim McTeague

avalonracing

12-07-2007, 01:51 PM

I was a pro photographer for 15 years and my advice is... Get the camera that you are most likely to carry with you!
There is an old photojournalist saying... "f/8 and be there" which means "Get the shot" because none of the other stuff matters if you don't get the shot in the first place.

You can take tremendous images with some of the small point and shoot cameras (I'm partial to Canon and Sony models). Just make sure that you get one with controls that are quick to access (especially exposure compensation).

If you find yourself getting very serious about your shooting and that the smaller camera is holding you back get one that takes interchangeable lenses.
In my opinion, the in between cameras are kinda like hybrid bikes why they are okay for all around they don't really one they or another as well as a specialized machine.

michael white

12-07-2007, 01:57 PM

Canon, Canon, Canon. I have the Powershot 640, without IS. Look at the Powershot 650 IS or the Canon G-9. Shoot at 80 or 100 ISO, not higher. Look up DCVIEWS.Com.

this represents my own experience. I've had two of the A series (the A series is the value version, but very similar to the G series), and I shoot the holy crap out of them. These in between models work perfectly for me. Small enough to go in a banana bag, big enough to give all sorts of SLR-like control. And they have viewfinders and decent movie modes. I took a couple of funny movies once while riding through the streets of Amsterdam on a rental bike.

If you don't want the control, just get a little one (Elph, etc.) to go in the pocket, because with these you need a small case with shoulder strap, although it's still much more convenient than a DSLR

But if you're a bit artistic, these high end, in between digi cams are just right. The G9 is a gorgeous, chunky, Leica rangefinder-style digi cam which will probably be my next purchase.

MarinRider

12-07-2007, 02:04 PM

Speaking of Leica, anyone here has direct experiences using a M8?

Kevan

12-07-2007, 02:34 PM

I'm liking what I read about this model. A bit bulky, but not too bad.

Pete Serotta

12-07-2007, 03:01 PM

If the size meets your need it is an excellent camera. Canon I think has the best overall point and shoot and CANON/NIKON the best support. Sony makes a good product BUT the service and support leaves something to desire in my opinion. Leica was in bankruptcy, and I do not know the current status. many of the CMOS (brain on the camera) are made by SONY.

I'm liking what I read about this model. A bit bulky, but not too bad.

swoop

12-07-2007, 03:14 PM

The Eagles.

Oh.. wrong thread. But seriously.... who needs a camera when they're a soundtrack to your life.

KeithS

12-07-2007, 03:16 PM

The point and shoot compact cameras sacrifice speed for size, but the good news is they will be a lot faster, the day after you buy yours. The Coolpix I have uses conventional power, it is the first non Olympus I've owned in years. Go to a camera store, not a big box store. They generally know what they're talking about. Explain what you want and the fact if you're happy you'll come back and spend a lot more.

Bud_E

12-07-2007, 04:03 PM

You may find http://kenrockwell.com/index.htm interesting. Some folks I've talked to don't care for it but for a rank amateur such as myself, I've picked up some very useful tips.

FWIW I recently bought a Nikon D40 and it definitely doesn't fit in your pocket but it's relatively light and - for me - having to haul it around is more than compensated for by it taking the best pictures I've ever snapped. It "only" has 6 MP but it has such a good image sensor that it's a non-issue. Also it's one of the best ergonomically designed products of any type that I've run across.

DarrenCT

12-07-2007, 06:04 PM

i have a panasonic lumix with 10x optical zoom

very good for taking pictures of birds, etc..

for me, optical zoom was the main advantage atmo

Doc Hollywood

12-07-2007, 07:22 PM

I photograph and sell my work, but not full time. I do almost exclusively sports.

If you want to shoot fast action stuff, P&S often have a shutter lag, but they are getting better. By shutter lag, I mean push the button and then the picture takes in a half to full second later. That's bad. They are getting better though. DSLR's don't have an appreciable shutter lag. So if you want to take action photos, shutter lag should be a factor.

Most P&S cameras now don't have view finders, they use the LCD on the back for composing the image. Good and bad to this, Good actually see what is in the picture. Bad, uses power A LOT, difficult to read in bright sun, and some find the puttting the camera up to your eye and composing helps steady the camera.

Agree with others, decide what you need/want it for and look at models that will do those things. Remeber more MP isn't always better. A high quality P&S 6 MP camera is more thean adequate for 11X14 prints.

If I was to get another P&S, I'd go with an Olypus waterproof model. I have Pentax P&S WP model and while waterproof, the quality of the images at 5 MP is lousy. My other cameras are a Nikon D200 and Nikon D70. Looking to get a D3 or D300 soon.

Doc

ChamUK

12-07-2007, 07:48 PM

nikon = campy
canon = shimano
olympus = sram

mcteague

12-08-2007, 07:38 AM

many of the CMOS (brain on the camera) are made by SONY.
Canon is one of the few camera companies that make their own CMOS chips. Nikon's are made by Sony.

Tim McTeague

Kevan

12-08-2007, 05:24 PM

For those of you who have this camera or its older cousin the G7 what camera case did you select? Did you go with the hard leather case option?

Also, what type of memory stick do you suggest?

Do you use filters? Details please.

Blue Jays

12-08-2007, 05:46 PM

Just a photographer hack here, but if I could offer a SINGLE notion to the discussion, it is securing a camera that uses easy-to-find batteries rather than proprietary ones.
Rechargeable batteries degrade over time. They get to the point they can only hold sufficient charge for a half-dozen pictures. It's easier to have a camera that runs on AA or CR123 batteries and have a pocketful of 'em before vacation departure.
That way one can leave chargers and all that kind of peripheral nonsense at home, where it belongs! :)

Ken Robb

12-08-2007, 06:17 PM

re: batteries. My Nikon uses a pair of AA. It came with a proprietary lithium that provided great performance and speed. I tried energizer AA and it took a LOOOOOONG time to reset for follow-up shots. I bought a Panasonic recharger with about 6 AA and 2 AAA nicads at COSTCO for $20. These work almost as well as the pricey lithium. Cool!

stevep

12-08-2007, 06:19 PM

i use a canon elph. its fabulous. i carry it on rides a lot this time of year when im in cruise mode.

e-RICHIE

12-08-2007, 06:23 PM

i use a canon elph. its fabulous. i carry it on rides a lot this time of year when im in cruise mode.
Puccipedia 4.0�� atmo - (http://youtube.com/watch?v=B-_W18CWypE)

DarrenCT

12-08-2007, 06:27 PM

rs,

u a disc jockey before??

stevep

12-08-2007, 07:00 PM

hey e-r . nice race today.
good race by the flux too.

these blockheads going to the nationals i trust?

im making a sentimental pick. tj to win.
he's going ok but not off the planet good.
hope for lots o' mud.
he will need a little help... him and page duel, treborn falls off and has to chase.... ideal scenario.

worst scenario.
super dry, ultra fast..
page is asleep at the start, forgets to go when they say go...tim j has his head on pages shoulder also napping and then gets a flat 100 meters in...treborn gets the hole shot w/ mark m on his wheel which he cannot hold.

race over 150 meters in.
that was last years race.

Kevan

12-09-2007, 07:46 AM

Memory sticks! There are all different types. For the more powerful cameras where the speed of transfer is everything, what works best? The Canon G9 at 12MP's, that's a lot of information moving.

TMB

12-09-2007, 10:18 AM

This has been an interesting read.

A few years ago when I decided I wanted a digital camera I bought a CAnon G2, state of the art at the time.

I am sure I paid well over $1,300 at the time.

It takes great pictures but really cannot be considered to be suitable for carrying on the bike.

A few months ago I was in the car heading to a client, realized I had forgotten to bring my camera.

Stopped at the next Wal-Mart and left a few minutes later with a Kodak something or other with an LCD, and a viewfinder, and a 7MP image. I paid $110.

I honestly couldn't believe it.

The Kodak will fit in mt pocket so it gets taken with me when I go out, and when I go riding.

The G2 rarely gets used.

I was in a Best BUy yesterday though and was looking at the Canon A series. Smaller than ever, far more control than even the G2, and somewhere around $250.

If I thought I owuld use it, I would buy one.

For me, if it is small enough to get taken with me, it is the best camera choice - but I really "need" a viewfinder. I find trying to take a picture by looking the back of the camera - insanely irritating, which means I won't use it.

The little $100 Kodak, with 7 MP - takes better photos than I will ever need and I certainly won't tell the difference between those and shots taken with a camera costing 2 or 3 times as much.

slowgoing

12-09-2007, 11:19 AM

nikon = campy
canon = shimano
olympus = sram

+1

zip

12-09-2007, 03:45 PM

I've got 2 cameras in mind, but don't know which I would prefer overall. One is a simple point-n-shoot, easy to carry in the pocket, take-anywhere. The other camera is a bit more robust, more bells and whistles, but isn't as easy to carry. I like the idea of a camera that has more capability, but I also know that that stick-in-the-pocket feature of a point-n-shoot makes it more likely that I'll take it to more places and events. I suppose down the road I could eventually buy the alternative, but what should santa bring now?

Here's what I'm considering:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fz18-review/index.shtml

http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-cameras/olympus-stylus-820-red/4505-6501_7-32578707.html

Thanks

I have to say I LOVE my Nikons. I have a D80 for "walk around" pictures and a Coolpix S50 to carry around in my pocket. Nikon has a lower price model comprable to the D80 the D40X. Worth checking into.

Rec. the 18-135 lens as a good all around lens.

Here is a link to Cyclocross photos taken with the D80.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/k-pics/sets/72157603357970661/show/

11.4

12-09-2007, 04:04 PM

Speaking of Leica, anyone here has direct experiences using a M8?

I'd only recommend it if you have a selection of Leica M-series lenses you want to stick with. Leica had a significant constraint with the lens to chip distance, plus with their historical lens designs. They couldn't accommodate a full-size chip and even with the smaller chip (which uses the center portion of the lens image to avoid significant approach angles at each pixel) the quality is only so-so. They have a fair amount of noise and various digital flaws. Leica had to do almost all the software development themselves for this model and simply don't have the experience yet to match other manufacturers' imaging quality (at a digital level). So while you have nice lenses, the digital images are less than you'd get with many other cameras. Plus, the most popular lenses these days on Leicas have been the 35 and perhaps the 28, which now offer a field of view comparable to a 50 and at most a 35. I've owned a long series of M-series lenses and bodies, and after getting to field test an M8 for several weeks, decided to pass. Leica will probably get it right in another rev or so, but this one does have meaningful imaging problems. It's nice, compact, and usable in the M tradition, but it really needs to go to a 1:1 sensor or come up with revised lenses that preserve the size, balance, and coverage.

11.4

12-09-2007, 04:19 PM

I'm liking what I read about this model. A bit bulky, but not too bad.

For professional use I switched a few years ago to Canon and never looked back. The images come out cleaner without digital noise or color discrepancies and the L-series lenses are superb. Canon's SLR lenses are either good consumer items with superb optics but somewhat lightweight construction, or are optical marvels and built like tanks for professional use. If you look down their lens list, you'll see two distinct classes of lenses -- the cheaper ones and the quite expensive ones. The expensive ones (mostly the L series) are almost without exception amazing products. And the top-line Canon SLRs continue to outpace Nikon; for a while they had more software issues but those are solved and now Nikon is playing catch-up.

When I am using equipment on a professional basis, I typically have been bringing the EOS 1D series (Mark II and more recently Mark III). But I always (and many photojournalists I know) also carry a G9 in a side pocket. If we go out for the evening, or want something in a crowd where a big SLR is too obvious or might be grabbed or confiscated, the G9 comes out. It is simply a wonderful compact camera. You can read the specs, and the camera basically lives up to them. Criticisms? At wider angles the internal flash doesn't give even coverage, but the camera does have an external hot shoe (or just stay at about 60 mm focal length or above). The battery lasts reasonably well but does have to carry a pretty sizeable power load, so get a spare battery with the camera. The battery charges outside the camera so this lets you keep working. The viewfinder is pretty much a waste of time -- just plan on using the rear LCD screen. And get a cover for the viewfinder because it's rather exposed. Other than that, it's a very smart, very sturdy, and extremely high performing camera. I often have to look at image file names to determine which camera an image was taken on, the G9 is that good. It's a little bulky to fit in a jersey pocket, but you get a camera that takes photojournalist abuse and has a broad feature set and optical quality that far exceed anything you'll get with the little point-and-shoots. It actually is very comfortable to hold and use, and the slight extra bulk isn't noticeable unless you want it to fit in your shirt pocket. It belongs at the top of your list of candidates as long as the size works for you.

Kevan

12-10-2007, 07:32 AM

Can you expand a little on memory sticks? What works and what doesn't? I tried earlier to get someone here to expand on what make model works best, but no one bit the hook. I understand that memory cards have an impact on camera response time and hope that picked wisely. I ended up ordering a SanDisk 4 GB Extreme III SDHC Card with MicroMate USB 2.0 Reader figuring I'd get what I think is the holy grail of cards.

Anyway, I'm really excited to put this camera into action.

11.4

12-10-2007, 11:01 AM

First of course, you have to pick the format to fit your camera -- Sony uses "Memory Sticks", larger professional cameras mostly use Compact Flash (CF), and most point-and-shoots tend to use Secure Digital (SD). SD now has two variants, one is a micro version (same shape but much smaller) and an ultra-speed one that only works in a camera designed for it.

With any of them, you're mostly paying for capacity. If you have a high-megapixel camera and are saving a lot of images from continuous-fire mode or downloading gigabytes of images, a higher-speed chip works a lot better but also costs more (usually this is a rating such as 133X or 300X, though manufacturers all fudge with these ratings a lot). For a better camera, the higher-speed chip is often worth it but for most point-and-shoots under 8 megapixel, probably not worth the extra cost. Note that prices on flash cards have plummeted incredibly so you can buy a decent 4 gigabyte card for $30-65 -- which is more capacity than you'll probably ever need no matter how hard you use your camera.

There are some issues between manufacturers with compatibility with equipment, plus some issues with accurate speed. Lexar tends to set the standard in speed ratings and pretty much works with any camera equipment from any major manufacturer. Sandisk tends to be the most universal -- it works with most anything and tends to be close to Lexar in speed at a slightly lower price. There are dozens of alternative brands, big and small, but if you run into any odd problems with a particular camera, you don't have much recourse unless you spot the problem immediately upon opening the package (and memory incompatibilities often are sporadic and hard to define). If price is a really big issue, try an alternative brand. Otherwise, I'd just stick with Lexar or Sandisk.

Kevan

12-10-2007, 11:07 AM

for your time and insight.

I think a lot of folk enjoyed this thread.

KeithS

12-10-2007, 09:54 PM

11.4

You are expert in all things. I really enjoy your posts.

So explain this to me I have the Sandisk really fast CF, I think it's branded Extreme III, I don't do RAW so in my normal mode I have more than 300 photos on one card. And as you relate the transfer speed is the key to real high performance. So I have a 2GB CF and in a second slot I have a 1GB xD - Olympus just won't let go.

My question. Why did I buy the second CF?

Keith

maunahaole

12-10-2007, 10:26 PM

There is also supposed to be a speed advantage when using certain lexar cards with certain Nikon dslrs as well. Nikon will let you know in their specs when you do a little research. The SD explanation is a little incomplete. In the SD size format there is regular SD and there is also SDHC which is a higher capacity SD. The camera will have to support SDHC to use it.

11.4

12-10-2007, 11:18 PM

Is that a rhetorical question? The Sandisk Extreme CF is pretty fast -- more than enough if you aren't doing 5 fps in RAW on a 15 MP camera. In that case you'd really like a higher-capacity card anyway.

Sounds like you are in a 6-8 MP camera, depending on whether you're in a fine setting or not. You almost certainly don't have a fast enough internal bus to avail yourself of the speed of the fastest CF, and you aren't generating data that fast anyway. However, it's always nice having a spare card. These things do have a way of suddenly hiccuping.

By the way, to the post above about SDHC, this is one of the variants to SD that I mentioned above. The "High Capacity" is a bit of a misnomer. The term "SDHC" is applied to any SD card that goes over 2 GB. The reason for this is that just like in computer operating systems that have limits in the amount of memory they can access, the camera has to have newer software to support over 2 GB. When it can support it, it's also doing so on a faster bus so while you have more capacity, what you really notice from shot to shot is that you can shoot and download significantly faster. The deal with higher-end Nikons and a few other cameras is that they engineered their bus to produce greater throughput. This sounds nice until you run into incompatibilities with some flash or you discover that the coding of the RAW file is slightly different and has to be opened and managed either by Nikon proprietary software or software developed under license from Nikon (e.g., Adobe Photoshop CS2). Nikon and Lexar made sure the Nikon modifications to the standard worked well, but the tradeoff is that some brands may have more trouble with Nikons (the higher end ones, anyway).

SDHC will be the standard on virtually all new cameras with higher megapixel levels, since those are the ones that require more capacity anyway. It adds, I'm told, about $20 to the camera to add the newer bus and software to the camera so it will be slow to show up on lower-end cameras. The MMC standards are hopefully a more universal standard and will eliminate some of the past incompatibilities between flash and cameras. By the way, if you have an SDHC camera, it can use non-HC storage as well, it just will be somewhat slower. And the cap even on SDHC is 128 GB so there will be further revisions of the standard. If you buy SDHC, just be aware that you can't necessarily use it in most PDAs, smartphones, and other smaller (slower) devices.

Bruce H.

12-11-2007, 07:08 AM

Thought I might throw in a wrench to give you more to think about.
I have all types of cameras over the years. Right now I am using a Sony DV video camera. It takes incredible stills as well as great video. Fits in your palm. Just a thought for versatility
Bruce H

C5 Snowboarder

12-11-2007, 01:29 PM

I picked a Digital for use in the rain, shock drop, freeze proof and waterproof. so I went with a small Olympus 770SW. Snowboarding it can get wet and if I fall at high speed do not want the camera to be bulky or get damaged. i
I bought mine thru ebay at Olympus factory stores. $260 or so.

here is the link

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1287

Skrawny

12-17-2007, 12:10 PM

I'm a little late to this thread, but I thought I'd throw in a few cents.

I shoot Nikon (D70S), and have quite a few lenses. I won't start on why I chose Nikon over Cannon... Like others have said it is akin to the Campy/Shimano debate, and this isn't the time and place for a Nikon/Cannon debate. Suffice it to say there are some things that each company does better than the other, but both get the job done.

Beware the Nikon D40. Nice camera, BUT only 6mp and can't use a lot of nikon lenses. Nikon has some AF lenses with the motor on board and some where the body provides the motor. IIRC, the D40 does not have the motor in the body. I dont know if this holds for the D40x, which is a 10mp cam.

I wouldn't worry about the D40/D40x at all. I think it is a great camera. The main difference is that prior to the D40 all Nikon SLRs kept the autofocusing motor in the camera body instead of the lens. This gave Nikon its very good backwards compatability. For the D40 Nikon left the autofocusing motor up to the lens so that they would have a smaller & lighter camera. All of the slick new Nikon lenses (including the vibration reduction "VR") have a motor in the lens as well (the "S" and "I" lenses).

Currently there are 26 Nikon AF-S lenses that are compatable with the D40 with focal lengths ranging from 12-24mm to 600mm, 13 of them are "VR." The D40 will work with other lenses, but you have to use manual focus, and some of the older lenses may only have a spot meter.

IMHO the D40x is a fantastic camera for someone looking for an intro to digital SLR. The lens compatability issue is only an issue if someone already has a bunch of Nikon lenses and wants backward compatabilty . . . that guy isn't looking for an intro SLR & should look at the D300 (ooooooh, I want one BAD!). What the D40/D40x gave up in lens compatability, it gained in the form of a smaller, lighter, & more portable camera body that is more attractive to it's target consumer.

-s

Kevan

12-31-2007, 11:24 AM

I finally got the Canon G9 out and have been praticing alot. I like how the camera works and while it is bulkier than many slim-line versions of p-n-s, it does an awesome job. Waiting for software and some other bits and pieces to arrive, but I'm out there getting myself refamiliar with apetures and iso's (asa's in my earlier life) and the like.

Thanks guys...all of you, for this recommendation.

Say "Cheese!"

quattro

02-07-2008, 08:32 PM

Keven, would you mind providing an update on your G9? I'm in the market for a new digital and am torn between the G9 and SD850. Can't decide if the larger size G9 is worth having over the smaller SD850. How has it been learning to use? Picture quality? Software? What has your expeeriene been on carrying the G9, do you find it is small enough to take along when you want to have it? How do you carry it? Thanks

quattro

ewwhite

02-08-2008, 11:52 AM

I've owned a Canon G9 since November. It's slightly larger than the compact Powershot models, so it's not a pocket camera... However, with the included slim strap, I find it to be more than convenient to carry everywhere (shoulder-slung). I actually just returned from Maui with my girlfriend. She needed a cam, but didn't want a G9 (too big). We ended up getting her an SD870. I think the 850 is end-of-life. The G9 is a far more capable camera and worth the cost/size increase. Walking around the resort, I did have several people stop me to ask how I liked the G9. The local camera shops were all sold out, so it's a popular unit.

Sample photos:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2253/2234230106_b7f933c2a1.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ewwhite/2234230106/in/set-72157603831760119)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2078/2241627663_8551e51627.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ewwhite/2241627663/in/set-72157603831760119)

michael white

02-08-2008, 12:10 PM

I was about to get a g9 but at the last minute went with the 850is for the portability. I do notice how easy it is to slip into any pocket. However I don't notice much or any photo improvement over the other Powershots I've had. It's made better though. It will take a beating.

So, that's the choice, I think. . . .

Kevan

02-08-2008, 01:08 PM

The G9 is gaining strength among dSLR owners as the preferred travel-anywhere-do-almost-everything camera. People are leaving their beasts behind in favor for this smallish camera with a big heart.

I owe it to you guys for suggesting the little box.

Sorry Quattro for missing your post. Can't do it from here at the office, but I will try to remember to add some recent shots.

I can tell you that I found this cheap little bag in Rite-Aid of all places that is just perfect for protecting the camera. It has a double set of large plastic squeeze clips and a strap so it can be fashioned either as a fanny pack which is perfect for cycling or over the shoulder or neck when hiking.

Bruce H.

02-08-2008, 09:24 PM

I just purchased the new Sony DSC-T2. I was intrigued by it's internal memory. holds about 40,000 photos according to the specs and if full, can also use the pro duo :cool: . Should arrive on Monday. I'll let you know what I think when I get to use it.
Bruce H.

legacysti888

02-09-2008, 02:31 AM

Bought this lil camera after my close friend borrowed my SD700is and didn't want to return it. 'Been a Canon fan since I went digital 5+ years ago. Before that, a solid Nikon user. Love this camera and the P mode has given me excellent balanced exposures so far. Macro is awesome and the images have been tack sharp. I never thought I'd switch to another brand, but I was intrigued by it's Leica lens and wondered if it was any good. No regrets so far. It's all metal construction and I take it everywhere, everyday. A great point and shoot without any need to fiddle with controls. The G9 was in my sights but way too heavy to grab and go. Just my 0.02 cts.

Kevan

02-09-2008, 02:27 PM

who has time to ride?

Here's an entry to a photo forum contest, topic: anything "Industrial":

Kevan

02-09-2008, 02:28 PM

with today's weather...

1centaur

02-09-2008, 02:54 PM

with today's weather...

That's a really nice picture - nice contrast in what stands out vs. what recedes, good composition, interesting color variations. Good job (to you and to nature).

quattro

02-09-2008, 10:00 PM

Is anyone playing with one of these? Canon PowerShot Pro Series S5 IS, what do you think, it looks interesting, I have added it to my list.

Kevan

02-10-2008, 09:00 AM

Is anyone playing with one of these? Canon PowerShot Pro Series S5 IS, what do you think, it looks interesting, I have added it to my list.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonS5is/

One big question I think every potential buyer needs to consider is, "Will I carry this camera everywhere I go?" If the camera is too bulky, too difficult to bring on rides, spends most of its time on your closet shelf, then why...why buy it?

The G9 is not the be-all camera, but it does go with me almost everywhere I go. I take it to work. I take it on chores. I don't take it into the men's locker room at the gym. The G9 has a small sensor chip so it doesn't do high ISO's very well, certainly not as well as its bigger dSLR cousins. Yet for 95% of my photo taking needs it can do anything the big boys can do. What's fun is reading serious amateur and pro's comments about the camera and how they too have added one to their inventory. They use it...a lot.

I can see an enthusiast having two cameras: a point-n-shoot and a SLR. But my guess is, if the p-n-s is good enough, it'll get the lion's share of the action. I personally am not ready yet to consider getting a bigger camera, I'm extremely pleased with what this one does.

You might want to explore whether you want a camera that offers photos is RAW format, but I'll leave that to you to Google.

Just something to consider.