pocket size camera for creative/art photography

[godfrey]

<center>

<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/godders/.Pictures/London-Minox/

museum-0001.jpg"><br>

The Tate Modern, London<br>

©2002 by Godfrey DiGiorgi<br>

Minox EC + Agfa APX100 film<br>

</center><br>

<i>

> In my experience, all digicams limit the range of conditions<br>

> where you can get a quality shot so much that I hit the same<br>

> problem as with a big DSLR: I'm not getting enough shots.<br>

</i><br><br>

The same could really be said of all cameras: features, size, cost, and quality pose

limits to their usability at some point or another no matter what camera you choose.

It's sometimes a hard choice. Do you not get the shots you want because you don't have

the

bulky, heavy, noisy SLR with you? or not get the shots because the pocketsized marvel

is not sensitive enough? or not high-enough resolution?

<br><br>

I used to carry a nice little Minox subminiature all the time so that I could

get photographs when I didn't have my 35mm gear around. Of course, I

couldn't get the same kind or quality of photos that I could with the Nikon,

but I did get a lot of very good photographs. Exploited to their limits,

today's high-rez pocketsized digicams will serve the same function.

<br><br>

<i>

> There's yet another camera that looks pretty appealing - Casio<br>

> EX-Z750. The big thing is that it has almost all manual controls<br>

> that you might want, and it also looks like they're even<br>

> convinient! All that and a 2.5" LCD and useable movie mode for<br>

> $350, in the size of Altoids tin weighting 130g.<br>

</i>

<br><br>

Looks cute (although I rarely find Ken Rockwell's advice to be worth very much).

Comparing the Casio EX-Z750 against the Panasonic LX1, the big things that

the LX1 has going for it that the Casio does not are image stabilization and

RAW format. It is more expensive, but I'd wager those two features would add

up to significantly better image quality.

<br><br>

Pick your poison and work to get the most from it. ;-)

<br><br>

Godfrey

[bobatkins]

I'm just finishing up a review of the Canon Powershot A610 for photo.net.

 

If you don't mind a small sennsor and an f2.8 lens, it's pretty neat with every manual control you could want and more other stuff in there than you can shake a stick at (movies, color effects, audio etc. - but you can ignore them if you wish).

 

Personally I just bought a Canon Powershot SD200. Only 3.2MP, but it's small. Really small. Tiny in fact. No manual control over exposure (except for times from 1s to 15s - go figure), but all the rest of the stuff (WB, ISO, Exp. comp, flash, flash exp. comp etc.) can be manually set.

 

Did it mention that it's small? I'll be reviewing that one too in a few weeks.

[Tim_Lookingbill]

Dmitry,

 

I was hoping I could get you to show us a before-(bad digicam

shot) and after (edited to your sense of what is correct). I

understand what you're talking about the differences between

digicams and film. I wanted to get your specific view on it.

[jcuknz]

Through all this I get the feeling that folk are ignoring a couple of basic truths about photography .... that bad photographers take bad photos and good photographers take good photos irrespective of the gear they use ... one man's fish is another's poison :-)

[Tim_Lookingbill]

Check out the film like quality of these <a

href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf810/page13.asp"

>samples</a> from the Fuji F810. Note the noise in the pool

table shot.

[dmitry_a]

Tim,

The majority of the editing that I was doing is _drastic_ work with curves and color balance. Then size it down to 640x480 and sharpen the heck out of it. I find that that's the only way that a P&S image looks good to my eye, but then again I don't have any experience with the current 8MP stuff and Fuji SuperCCD. For concrete examples I'd have to dig out my archives on CD's..

 

 

Re: the comment about fundamentals of photography - sure, you still need to think about where to point your camera and when to hit that shutter button.

 

But this is a conversation about enjoyment and commitment. I want enjoyment with not much commitment (typical male, yes), and having some understanding of P&S limitations I came to a conclusion that I'd rather not shoot at all. Will test it again based on comments here.

[dmitry_a]

And yes, that pool shot from Fuji 810 doesn't look nearly as bad as I'm used to. I could probably live with that, but to really make that conclusion I'd have to see a 8x10 print and a desaturated (better yet, B&W setting in the camera) version of the same shot.

[levander_thomas]

Does anyone owns a Fuji E900 have an opinion as to how good that camera meets Dimitri's criteria?

 

And, yes it does seem like Dimitri is still refining his criteria, but what he's said sounds pretty close to the questions in my own mind. With the exception that I plan on learning photography with this new camera, whereas Dimitri seems to know quite a bit already.

 

Dimitri, there's a reason you like the Casio EX-Z750 better than the Fuji E900? I'm trying to make the exact same decision you are.

[dmitry_a]

Levander,

 

I've got some other considerations that are outside of what I was talking about here.

 

I go into all sorts of extreme sports, and that little Casio is truly little and has a very useful movie mode so that's what is winning me over. You have to see it to appreciate how tiny it is. 2.5 hours of continuous movie recording in such a small package for this money is something I can pay for even if it wasn't able to take still shots at all.

 

With past experience with digicams I made a conclusion that manual mode that lets you tightly control exposure actually takes a lot of frustration out of the shooting process. You know the camera is not capable of much, but at least you also know where it _is_ capable of getting a decent snap. So you just keep it in that range using manual controls. It sort of expands the range because you don't let the camera to choose out of range settings and increases your confidence at the same time.

 

Usually small digicams have terrible access to manual settings (if any at all), Ricoh GR being just about the only exception that I know of.

 

I've actually went ahead and ordered that Casio. Worst case - it'll be used as a video camera in the mountains. I'll report back here when I get some experience using it.

[dmitry_a]

Oh, and if you really want to learn stuff, I'd highly recommend to pick up some real SLR gear. A used dSLR body and a quality autofocus prime lens is what you're after. An older Digital Rebel would probably work well for you, or better yet a Nikon D50. Just don't buy the kit lens.

 

If that is out of your price range, pick up a Canon G3 or G5 (around $300), they have all the right controls in the right places.

[levander_thomas]

Okay, thanks for the response Dmitry. For my personal preferences, I want something that can easily fit in my pocket. I just figure that if it's easy to carry around with me everywhere, I'll be more likely to take a bunch of pictures. Even though yes, the quality of the pictures themselves won't be quite as good than if I just got a bigger camera. That Casio camera is small, but seems just a little big to fit in my pocket.

 

Also Dmitry, just about all the cameras I look at can do 640x480 movies for about 20 minutes. I don't know that that's special about the Casio. But, I didn't really look at the Casio, so maybe there's something else special about it's movies.

 

I think I've narrowed my decision down to two cameras. The Lumix/Panasonic LX-1 or the Fuji E900.

 

The LX-1 seems to have its controls laid out in a more "advanced" configuration. Meaning, the buttons on the cameras can manipulate more settings than the E900. Even though you can set a lot of things with the buttons on the E900, it's just that a few more of the settings you have to go into the menus to set on the E900.

 

And from reading, the LX-1 takes better pictures in well-lit environments. However, it takes pretty bad pictures in low-lit environments. It seems its engineers intentionally put a poor flash on the camera so that its users wouldn't really to much on it, and wouldn't even test low-lit environments that much. The review I read saws that ISO 400 pictures are usable on the E900. But, ISO 200 pictures on the LX-1 has noticeable noise.

 

Plus there's noise on all dark areas of images on the LX-1, regardless of lighting.

 

The LX-1 seems to have a better "feel" than the E900. The LX-1 has more metal parts on it's body whereas the E900 has more plastic parts. And, the LX-1 is lighter. Which will be nice when I take it hiking.

 

The other negative of the E900 seems to be purple fringing in high-contrast areas in it's images. High-contrast like where you photographing an object when the background is a well-lit sky.

 

I think from reading this, you can tell I'm leaning to the E900. But, everyone in this thread, who probably knows more about cameras than I do is recommending the LX-1. Anybody can tell me why everybody's recommending the LX-1 but not the E900?

[sandie]

I have a FZ 20 Panasonic and LOVE it. It has a fixed lens but zooms 12 x which brings it to about 400mm so that is great, Leica lenses, it is NOT a pocket camera per se but is all in one and the pictures are superb. ONE thing though, not great in low light like inside a building with only a little lighting or at a studio shoot where there are lights on the subject the screen is really dark unless you really move up the ISO. I love the camera and when I post about looking for a Canon 20D or the Minolta 7D it is as a present for someone else, I love this camera. There is a FZ30 but have not really seen the differences so can not comment on it.

[sandie]

Dimitri, As I read along I think now you are pulling our collective chains.

[walter_jeffries]

I am also considering the Fuji E900. I want something I can slip in my pocket to have with

me out in the field and woods when I'm working to catch those shots I would miss because

I can't always be lugging a larger camera around. Manual controls are a must. All to many

of the small cameras are totally automatic. I can't understand why so many of the

manufacturers are forgoing manual control over shutter, aperature, white balance and

focus. It is purely a software issue. They are purposefully cripping the cameras, perhaps

thinking they don't want to canabalize their DSLR sales. They're missing out on an

opportunity. Those of us who like DSLR's aren't going to replace a DSLR with a compact

hand camera. We are simply going to augment the DSLR.

 

I've weighed the E900 against the Fuji F11, S80, Canon SD550, A620, Olympus SP-500 UZ.

The E900 is winning by a slim margin. The fact that it can take AA batteries is a big plus. I

don't like being locked into prop. batteries. The 9MPixels isn't a huge bonus although it

does mean easier cropping and greater effective zoom. I would rather have greater

dynamic range, greater ISO range (both higher and lower), less noise and Chromatic

Arbiration. The CA and lense quality in the E900 is my biggest issue.

 

At this point I'm looking for more sample photos on the web. I can't actually get my hands

on an E900, or most of thse, since I'm a looong ways from camera stores and not a

traveler.

 

Cheers,

 

-Walter

http://SugarMtnFarm.com/blog/

 

Here is my notes on the top contenders:

Fuji E900

+9MP on 0.625" SuperCCD HR 5 (1/1.6") (2 sensors / pixel)

~32-128mm 35mm equivelant 4x optical zoom

-CA at WA high contrast, maybe TF too

+Good sample photos at Fuji Germany web site but not as gorgeous as the A620

++ISO 800

++2xAA

+400 shots per charge

~xDPicture memory card 1GB current max, faster & lower power? $80/1GB

-Popup flash

++Smaller but not tiny

~LCD 2.0" 115,000 pixels

-LCD fixed

-no lense thread

+Comes with rechargable batteries and charger

-$400 best price

-Low availability right now

-Stitch Assist / Panorama

--Time lapese photography

++Smaller & Lighter 4 x 2.5 x 1.3 in

 

Fuji F11 (F10 with addition of manual controls and larger LCD) (2 sensors / pixel)

-6MP on 0.588" SupperCCD 5 (1/1.7")

-36-108mm 35mm equiv 3x optical zoom

+good photos according to users in other countries

+Excellent macro mode

-Menus hard to use according to dpreview.com

+++ISO 1600

+3s-1/2000s shutter speed

-2.8-5.0 aperature

+2.2 fps for 3f continuous shooting

++LCD 2.5 153,000 pixels

-Prop battery - 500 shots per charge

-no lense thread

+$399

+++Smaller & Lighter 3.5x2.3"x1.1" Slightly smaller than E900, no handgrip so no AA

batteries

--No USA sales yet

 

Fuji F700 Spring 2003

--3MP on SuperCCD SR 4 (2 sensors / pixel)

 

 

Canon A620

~7MP

+Macro 1cm

+High quality lenses with no CA

~35-140mm 35mm equivelant 4x optical zoom, 4x digital zoom

-Barrel distortion at WA

+++Gorgeous sample photos at Steve's

++Burst mode ?f

-ISO 400

+Noise reduction filter at slow shutter speeds

+Focus assist lamp

+Underwater housing

-no lense thread

+Better lens attachment system?

+AA

-4xAA

-100 shots per charge

~SD/MMC memory card 2GB current max, $60/1GB

-Bigger

~LCD 2.0" 115,000 pixels

++LCD rotateable

+$325 best price

+High availability

+Stitch Assist / Panorama - interesting, never had it, do in computer right now

++Time lapese photography

+Remote Capture (acts like a web cam)

- Bigger & Heavier 4.1 x 2.6 x 1.9 in

 

Canon S80/S70

-8Mp/7Mp

-S70 has only 10fps video

++S70 CompactFlash

+S80 SD/MMC

+Stich Assist

-28-100 35mm equivelant 3.6x optical zoom

-Burst mode 0.6fps 40f

-ISO 400

+LCD 2.5" 115,000 pixel

-Special LiIon Battery

+Excellent photos, sharp, dynamic, some high contrast, wide angle corner softness, wide

angle barreling and lens flare issues

 

Olympus SP-500 UZ

+8MPixels

+38mm-380mm 35mm equiv 10x optical zoom

+Excellent optics

-ISO 400

+4AA batteries

~xDPicture card

-Popup flash

+LCD 2.5"

+$400 list

-Casio sized 4.11"x2.9"x2.76"

-Small slow movie format