phyrpowr Posted October 23, 2004 Share Posted October 23, 2004 A friend of mine wants to get into fairly serious photography, especially vacation/outdoor type stuff, but isn't really turned on about SLRs with interchangeable lenses. As I don't know beans about anything other than Canon SLRs, (and some would say not beans about them) are there any informed opinions out there about the new crop of 8MP P&Ss, Canon Pro 1, Minolta Dimage A2 and the like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry_tudor1 Posted October 23, 2004 Share Posted October 23, 2004 From that crop,in all the reviews I have seen,it's always one of the same 3,that arrive best buy,the Minolta A2,the Sony 828 or the Olympus. http://www.dpreview.com is a good place to check-out also the http://www.steves-digicams.com site.Finally,the http://www.luminous-landscape.com is also interesting,in fact,the guy did like the A2 so much...he bought it :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul - Posted October 23, 2004 Share Posted October 23, 2004 Before buying a P&S, your friend should do a lot of research about physical sensor size.<p>P&S digicams have sensors that are generally smaller than your little finger nail, and DSLR sensors are generally about the size of 1/2 a 35mm film frame. This size difference has a number of consequences, including a P&S's inability to make a photo of a sharply focused subject that "pops out" of a thoroughly out-of-focus background. This has to do with a combination of the tiny sensor and the ultra-low focal length lenses on these cameras (super wide with tons of DOF, like 7mm-28mm).<p>This single aspect of P&S digicams keeps me away from them for any "fairly serious photography". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiew Posted October 23, 2004 Share Posted October 23, 2004 Well vacation/outdoor type stuff is generally not considered really serious photography:) anyways ... I sympathize with your friend as there are situations where I hate to lug my DSLR around. In my situation I am looking for a small camera since it will only be a backup. Assuming your friend has totally ruled out DSLR's the only cameras he should consider are the Sony 828 and the Minolta A2. While there are other cameras out there that are very good, right now these two are the best of the best. Your friend should also try out the Olympus c-8080 and the new Nikon 8400. The Olympus is pretty highly regarded and the Nikon adds a very useful 24mm wide (but at the expense of the tele end). I think he should go down and try those 4 cameras and then get the one that floats his boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfrey Posted October 23, 2004 Share Posted October 23, 2004 <center><img src="http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW4/large/sc-wharf-in-fog.jpg"><br><i>Wharf in Fog, Santa Cruz, CA - Konica Minolta A2</i><br></center><br>I have a Canon 10D, Olympus C8080WZ and Konica Minolta A2. They are all excellent performers, for "serious" as well as casual photography, and have different strengths and weaknesses, capabilities. <br><br>Used/exploited properly with a thought to exploiting their strengths and avoiding their weaknesses, it is almost impossible to tell which one took a particular photo. <br><br>Godfrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfrey Posted October 23, 2004 Share Posted October 23, 2004 Oh yeah, regards "popping out of a soft background"... <br><br> <center> <img src="http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW4/large/tiger-lily-0111.jpg"> <br> <i>Tiger Lily - Konica Minolta A2</i><br> </center><br> You simply have to understand what the camera is capable of and how to get what you want from it. <br><br> Godfrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie_alcantara1 Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 I own the C-8080 and very happy with it. I have not tried the other cameras in this category, but had held them in the store. The Sony 828 is a bit too bulky for my taste. The Minolta A2 was fine, but decided with C-8080 for picture quality and its size. Attached is my Holloween shot taken with the Olympus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbizarro Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 I have recently add the Powershot Pro 1 to my kit, just for the type of photography you describe: leisure tending to serious:) I find it very intuitive to use, and the results are very good indeed. Ergonomics are fine, and the size is small, but not too much. Not too many buttons or controls to handle, once you have settled into your routine style of shooting. The lens is very high quality, and because I shoot in RAW mode, the images can be easily adjusted later on (less things to fiddle with while shooting). Any of the cameras mentioned will do the job, it is just a matter of ergonomics, and trying them out. In my case, I already have a EOS system, so I can use my 550 flasj with the Pro 1, so it was a no brainer. The only thing I miss (but not much) is the IS, but that is because I am spoiled with the EOS choices:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrybc Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 The 8MP prosumer level cameras use the 2/3 sensor size. This is a fair bit bigger than the really tiny sensors found in the smaller digicams (eg: A75, etc). But it is still smaller than the APS size sensor which are MORE than half the size of a 35mm frame. The Olympus 4/3 standard (used on the E1, for instance) is about half the size of a 35mm frame (which is why it has a 2x crop factor). Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiew Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 By the way.. what exactly is it that doesn't "turned him on" about SLR's? Pentax (and now Olympus) make some SLR's that are as small as the cameras he is looking at and all have superior image quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_ferguson1 Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 Jack, I normally use a full frame Canon 1Ds. But it's a heavy outfit so I recently got a Minolta A2 a light-weight carry around camera. I've been bowled over by the quality. For A4/8"x10" prints it's really very close to the 11MP Canon. Here's an example straight out of the camera. First the full frame, then a look at a 100% enlargement of the red framed section.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_ferguson1 Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 And here's the 100% section without sharpening.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul - Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 Godfrey, your sample closeup picture proves my point about not having a thoroughly out of focus background. You can clearly make out the background leaves, "soft" or not. At such a close shooting distance one should easily have a background with no recognizable features, to the point of the buds/stem behind the blossom even being very out of focus.<p>My point is that you cannot have an unfocused (not "soft"), unidentifiable nearby background in P&S digicam shot of a focused subject like a person, taken at a more common non-macro, non-closeup, shooting distance measured in feet or yards.<p>I understand what a P&S is capable of (and more importantly, not capable of), which is why I no longer own one. I do occassionally borrow a P&S for some shots when specificly asked to have everything in the image focused/identifiable. This is one area where a P&S shines.<p>Of course, different strokes for different folks. I know people who think everything in every photo should be tack sharp. They love their P&S digicams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 << The 8MP prosumer level cameras use the 2/3 sensor size. >> They not only use the same sensor size, they use the exact same Sony sensor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie_alcantara1 Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 Paul, I agree with you about the out of focus background. It is harder, if not impossible to totally throw off the background expecially for portrait shots. In this case, P&S is not your choice. I have not used DSLR's, but, Paul could you post pictures with the background out of focus ??? Thanks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfrey Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 <i><b>Paul:</b><br> ... your sample closeup picture proves my point about not having a thoroughly out of focus background. ...</i><br><br> I chose to not totally unfocus the background, Paul. I generally don't like totally unfocused backgrounds. It would have been easy to achieve if that's what I wanted. <br><br> Godfrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
everitt Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 <I/>Godfrey, your sample closeup picture proves my point about not having a thoroughly out of focus background.</I><P><P>Ever heard of the Blur tool in Photoshop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_ferguson1 Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 "This size difference has a number of consequences, including a P&S's inability to make a photo of a sharply focused subject that "pops out" of a thoroughly out-of-focus background." Paul, I agree that the Minolta A2 can't deliver the extremely restricted depth of field that's possible with a wide aperture, tele-photo lens on an DSLR. But that surely misses the point. A camera like the A2 has a zoom with an extremely wide range, a comparable zoom on a DSLR would have an aperture of about f5.6 or f6.3, consequently it would also be unable to deliver restricted depth of field. Furthermore, because it's easier to design a good quality lens with a small image circle (ie the type of lens required for the tiny sensor size used in the A2) the zoom for the DSLR would need to be stopped down a little to get good quality, where as the A2 delivers even wide open. The A2 shot I posted above was taken at f4. I sometimes use a 28-135mm zoom on a full frame Canon 1Ds, and I can vouch from experience that good quality with this combination requires f8-f11, at which point there's a similarly extensive depth of field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig_gillette Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 It does seem like the A2, the Sony 828 and the Olympus seem to be getting the better part of the various reviews (and the "low" points of the Nikon or Canon may be irrelevant to some users, etc.). But as with any of the "which digicam" questions, I think it's really important for the user to personally handle the cameras in question. If the user doesn't like the feel, can't stand the finder, then the rest may not be all that satisfying. They are different and have different high and low features/capabilities and the casual or beginning user probably can't make an informed/experienced decision about many of those differences. "Vacation/outdoor" seems to indicate that speed/responsiveness is less critical than for the individual seeking to shoot kid's soccer (for example) so a low rating for speed may be less an issue. But are they more interested in urban shooting which might imply needing a wideer starting zoom? Or are they thinking "animals" which might mean a longer zoom or greater final equivalent focal length? If one of the "turn-offs" is size, the Sony is a big camera compared to many digicams and is probably comparable to many slrs, especially if not equipped with battery packs/vertical grips, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_k3 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Personally I will still recommend digital SLR. However, for a convenient all purpose camera, I will look into the current 8MP prosumer cameras. I followed Michael Reichmann's long review on most of the cameras and here is his choice http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/konica-minolta-a2.shtml He wrote a lot about why he chooses A2 but these articles do not seem to please all people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiew Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Mark I agree. Michael Reichmann's while very truthful and honest are also very much opinion. People should do exactly what he did and take each o the choices for a spin and then pick the one that workd for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmanthree Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Rob, Is that true about all of them using the same sensor? Isn't the Sony the only one that uses a four-color sensor? None of the other brands use a four-color sensor, so can they all be the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfrey Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 All the 2/3 sensor 8Mpixel cameras on the market today use Sony's sensor. The RGBE vs RGB filter matrix is a matter of what filters are used with the sensor, not the sensor itself. such differences are a matter under control of the particular manufacturers' requirements, as well as many other things like the A-D converters, bus speeds, image processing firmware, etc. Godfrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 << Is that true about all of them using the same sensor? Isn't the Sony the only one that uses a four-color sensor? None of the other brands use a four-color sensor, so can they all be the same? >> I was also confused about this at first. The problem here is that the "4 color" bit isn't the sensor; it's the filter array that sits on top of the sensor. CCD and CMOS devices only detect light monochromatically. The color filter array is there to filter for specifc wavelengths of light. For more info see this page: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/Color_Filter_Array_01.htm Sony, to the best of my knowledge, is the only company in the world that makes a commercial 8 megapixel CCD chip. If anyone else can confirm or deny this, I would be quite interested. If I'm repeating bad information, I apologize, but at this point I don't believe I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phyrpowr Posted October 25, 2004 Author Share Posted October 25, 2004 Thanx to all, good information and links here, but my friend (a definite "she", btw) decided to take my original advice, and get a used Canon Elan II, a 50mm & a 28-105, classes at a local school , and start from there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now