Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Opinions: Small Digital Point-and-Shoot

Subject: [OM] Re: Opinions: Small Digital Point-and-Shoot
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 21:12:32 -0700
Joel Wilcox wrote:
> On 6/11/06, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   
> .....
> You made the statement that the small cameras don't shoot RAW. I
> didn't know whether that meant you did not know that the C-7000 shoots
> RAW or that you didn't consider it small.  I see that you simply don't
> consider it to be small.  Fair enough.
>   
There is really a continuum in camera sizes from amazingly small through 
quite large. Which combination of size and capabilities will fit a 
particular person's need and desires is very individual. In my case with 
the F10, I had been using a Can*n S110 for some time. I had done a lot 
of research and thinking before buying it, even to the extent of 
comparing it's size to objects around the house, trying to be objective 
about what would be small enough that I would be comfortable to carry it 
around pretty much anywhere. I went to play with it and it's slightly 
bigger brother wiht the 3x zoom and rejected the bigger one. And I 
really hit the nail on the head - for me.

So when it came time to upgrade, my first test criterion was whether the 
new camera would fit in my belt case for the S110. As it turned out, 
there were several quite capable cameras significantly smaller even than 
that. Further research revealed that all of them failed other 
performance criteria, that the F10 was only a bit longer than the S110 
and would handily fit in my case - and, most importantly, that it 
measured up pretty well to my performance desires.

I think a camera like the C-7000 is wonderful for many people. I know I 
would have it with me much less often than the F10 or its predecessor. 
And a camera on the shelf doesn't take pictures. :-)
>> Also, it is slow in operation, one of my key criteria. I spent too much
>> time missing shots of my granddaughters due to focus/shutter lag with my
>> prior P&S. It also failed another of my key criteria, noise. Although
>> noisier than the F10 at iso 400, it isn't bad, but the lack of at least
>> 800 knocked it out of the running. Both cameras have lenses of the same
>> speed.
>>     
> Oh yes, noise.  I don't think we will ever agree on that issue.
>   
I suspect we are less far apart, or at least apart in a different way, 
than you may think. I don't desire only pics with no noise at all. I 
agree with you and others that noise often at least doesn't detract 
from, and sometimes enhances, an image. I simply want that level of 
noise to occur at higher, rather than lower, iso speeds.

I'm not much a fan of flash. I don't like carrying big, heavy lenses if 
I can avoid it. I like long focal lengths and long ratio zooms. For the 
majority of shots I take, I would prefer more available DOF, not less. 
And I seem to often find myself in natural places where the light isn't 
very bright. So assuming one camera has pleasant, non-intrusive noise at 
iso 400 and another has the same at 1600, I simply prefer the latter, as 
it lets me indulge all my other preferences. And in practice, it lets me 
take quite a few shots that I value that I simply couldn't make with the 
other body.

I'll be posting some jellyfish shots from the Monterey Bay Aquarium. 
It's very dim in those displays, yet the subjects are moving and require 
significant DOF. Tripods and fast lenses just won't do what 3200 iso 
will - get the shot. I appreciate that other folks have other sets of 
preferences, and more power to them.
> I do agree about speed.  I still haven't shot jpeg with the C-7000.
> The fast xD cards bring write times down to very acceptable margins,
> but that's very relative.  Playback is slow enough to try my patience.
>  I nearly always shoot one-off, so RAW has been quite OK.  This camera
> nails exposure better than any camera I've ever had.  So I frequently
> deal with the playback problem by simply skipping it as a mostly
> unnecessary step.
>   
The F10 is faster from on to first shot than my 300D, but stone slow 
compared to the 5D. But what is most important to me is frame to shot 
time, once the subject is framed, and the F10 is very quick there, with 
fast focus and almost zero shutter lag after focus/exposure is set. Like 
you, shot to shot time isn't a big deal, I'm not sure what it is on the 
F10, simply fast enough that it doesn't get in my slowish way of picking 
subjects.
> Both the C-8080 and C-7000 provide some macro capabilities which are
> worth the trouble of learning to use.  It seems incongruous to use
> these cameras on a tripod, but if you want to use the AF lock to vary
> DOF (or manual focus on the C-8080) it is pretty much essential.
>   
The F10 actually does quite nice macro. Not flat field, I'm sure, but 
for the natural, 3D subjects I tend to shoot, it's quite good. This last 
week, I used it for several at least semi-macro shots that were too 
close for the 5D without changing lenses to a MF macro.
> I almost bought an F10 but didn't like the Auto-only nature of the thing.  
That was probably my biggest concern, but I found that using the spot 
metering mode and selecting iso, I could mostly obtain the settings I 
wanted.
> I probably would have bought an F11 if I could have found one somewhere other 
> than eBay at the time I was looking.
I bought the F10 before the F11 was announced, and I might have waited, 
except I was off on an extended vacation to the NE, so maybe not. In any 
case, it seemed that the F11 never really was released in No. America. I 
never found it at regular retailers.
> But it was too expensive for the kind of thing I wanted.
>   
B&H now have the F30 in stock for $340, cheaper than anyplace else, even 
fly-by-nights, and there is a $50 rebate. Lots of incremental 
improvements over the F11. (I didn't really jump, did I?)
> The small cameras always drive me back to a DSLR.  They each have some
> advantage or attraction, but the [D]SLR is the most transparent
> interface for photography to me.
>   
I certainly prefer a (D)SLR for flexibility, focal length range and 
quality, but there are many times and places where I just won't have 
mine along. In the case of the frescos I posted a while ago and 
yesterday, I foolishly went out with only one card for the 300D, and had 
filled it up by the time we ran across these gems. so I made do with the 
F10 and got great results.

Another difference is in how other people see/think of one depending on 
the camera in hand. In Carmel Valley, we ran into a most amazing seller 
of outdoor garden items. As I wandered around taking pics with my 
innocuous P&S, a sales woman came out to ask if she could help us. As 
she eyed my camera, then decided to say nothing, I realized the 5D would 
not have been acceptable to her. And the quality of the images is more 
than sufficient.

Moose

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz