AFAIK it is just a Bayer filter with one green pixel (photosite) replaced by a non-filtered one. Image reconstrcution is obviously different and presumably there will be appropriate hardware image processors for the purpose. The subject was under conjecture in the 1990s as I recall. I'm sure the new filter array will be popular in the P/S sensors, which have miniscule sensors and horrible noise at even moderate ISOs without heavy in-camera processing. However, I much prefer not to lose any more color information in a real camera just to gain an extra stop or so. The 1D MK III has shown that noise improvements and usable DR improvements are possible without sacrificing color information.
Another Digital Camera Thread - Point and Shoot
- Thread starter timwhit
- Start date
AFAIK it is just a Bayer filter with one green pixel (photosite) replaced by a non-filtered one. Image reconstrcution is obviously different and presumably there will be appropriate hardware image processors for the purpose. The subject was under conjecture in the 1990s as I recall. I'm sure the new filter array will be popular in the P/S sensors, which have miniscule sensors and horrible noise at even moderate ISOs without heavy in-camera processing. However, I much prefer not to lose any more color information in a real camera just to gain an extra stop or so. The 1D MK III has shown that noise improvements and usable DR improvements are possible without sacrificing color information.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Yes, of course, that is preferable... however, design constraints for much larger dSLR sensors are not nearly as limiting as they are for P&S and camera phone sensors.
Even with this new filter taking two steps forward and one step back, we're still left with one big step forward that addresses the most pressing issue with these cameras. I personally would be satisfied with the tradeoff.
Even with this new filter taking two steps forward and one step back, we're still left with one big step forward that addresses the most pressing issue with these cameras. I personally would be satisfied with the tradeoff.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Good choice on the D40, Will. Not the most compact solution if you need to travel light, but excellent quality over the others.
I would be concerned about the Canon S5, if only because I just purchased a canon S3 to try out (and assuming the S5 has some traits in common with the S3 since it is the successor to the S3).
Basically, I'm not impressed. Actually, no, that's not true. I am impressed by the crazy 12x zoom lens that maxes out at 432 mm @ 35 mm equiv and that it has a live histogram as a standard feature. What I am not impressed with is the overall image quality:
I find the lens to be a little soft, the sensor to be a little noisy, and the noise reduction processing below average. All three elements result in lower quality images than its pedigree suggests. For example, the A710, which has a 7 MP sensor but only a 6x zoom produces noticeably better images. Sharper, less noise, and less reduction of detail from the NR. One would think that the only big difference should be the lens, but the sensor and NR are not as good. Yes, the S3 is an older design, but previous A-series cameras had better output from what I remember.
I am able to extract some decent pics out of the S3 using 80 ISO, shooting RAW, and doing all the NR and sharpening post-processing. However, it is disappointing to know that you have to shoot at 80 or 100 ISO and the JPEG files produced by the camera are not that great.
Having said that, I am not sure the S3 has many competitors in its price range. You'd have to pay significantly more to get a 12x zoom with the ability to shoot RAW mode (albeit through a user modification).
I hope that anyone looking at the S5 will take a close look at the lens sharpness, sensor noise at medium and higher ISO's, and noise reduction effects on its JPEGs to see if it's improved since the S3.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
I forgot to mention another "Con" regarding the Canon S3: both the LCD display and electronic viewfinder (no, that's not an optical viewfinder at the top of the camera, deceptively enough!) are too small, too dim, and too low resolution. It's honestly difficult to see what you're taking a picture of sometimes. Even the low resolution display on the Canon A710 blows it away.
I am seriously considering taking the S3 back to the store for a refund before my refund period is over. The 432 mm (35 mm equiv) telephoto capability is the only thing that is making me hesitate.
In order to determine how valuable that 432 mm reach is, I tried my D40 and its 18-200 mm lens out at its long end (300 mm, 35 mm equiv) to see how much of a difference 132 mm is. While the 18-200 is a bit soft at the long end no matter what aperture you use, it is still sharper than the S3 with less CA. The big difference, however, is the noise. I can shoot at 400 ISO and even 800 in a pinch with the D40 without having noticeable noise in the shot. With the S3, even at 80 ISO, I either get visible noise shooting RAW or visible NR smoothing/blurring effects using JPEG.
Remarkably, I find it easier to shoot at the long end with lower shutter speeds using the S3. Sometimes I need to track my subject and pan a bit to keep it in frame while I take the shot. I found out with the 18-200 VR that I have to pan ahead of it, stop, anticipate when it's going to pass over my central focus point and shoot... otherwise, I will have to crank the shutter speed way up to compensate, and I still might have blur from the VR (and yes, I am using the VR mode that allows for panning).
All that said, the 432 mm reach allows me to get those distant subjects without the dreaded prospect of having to crop and enlarge from a slightly soft lens and 6 MP image. Problem is that the image itself is even less sharp and relatively noisy. Sigh.
Ultimately, it doesn't add any incremental utility over my existing equipment, and that means it should go.
But to put my disappointment over the S3 into perspective, for those of you thinking of buying something like an S3 or S5, if I didn't already have my D40 + 18-200 setup (which combined, cost $900 US more than the S3), I would probably keep it knowing it has little in the way of immediate competition.
I am seriously considering taking the S3 back to the store for a refund before my refund period is over. The 432 mm (35 mm equiv) telephoto capability is the only thing that is making me hesitate.
In order to determine how valuable that 432 mm reach is, I tried my D40 and its 18-200 mm lens out at its long end (300 mm, 35 mm equiv) to see how much of a difference 132 mm is. While the 18-200 is a bit soft at the long end no matter what aperture you use, it is still sharper than the S3 with less CA. The big difference, however, is the noise. I can shoot at 400 ISO and even 800 in a pinch with the D40 without having noticeable noise in the shot. With the S3, even at 80 ISO, I either get visible noise shooting RAW or visible NR smoothing/blurring effects using JPEG.
Remarkably, I find it easier to shoot at the long end with lower shutter speeds using the S3. Sometimes I need to track my subject and pan a bit to keep it in frame while I take the shot. I found out with the 18-200 VR that I have to pan ahead of it, stop, anticipate when it's going to pass over my central focus point and shoot... otherwise, I will have to crank the shutter speed way up to compensate, and I still might have blur from the VR (and yes, I am using the VR mode that allows for panning).
All that said, the 432 mm reach allows me to get those distant subjects without the dreaded prospect of having to crop and enlarge from a slightly soft lens and 6 MP image. Problem is that the image itself is even less sharp and relatively noisy. Sigh.
Ultimately, it doesn't add any incremental utility over my existing equipment, and that means it should go.
But to put my disappointment over the S3 into perspective, for those of you thinking of buying something like an S3 or S5, if I didn't already have my D40 + 18-200 setup (which combined, cost $900 US more than the S3), I would probably keep it knowing it has little in the way of immediate competition.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Deleted. Duplicate post.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Sorry, having problems with the website.
I own a bunch of premium AI and AI-S Nikkor bayonet mount lenses -- some fantastic fixed focal length (prime) lenses I had for years that I've used on my Nikon F3 (and my '72 Nikon F).
I waited and waited, for years, and finally took the plunge and got a Nikon D-100. Of course, I waited several months after it came to market for the price to ameliorate and for whatever bugs to be worked out in the firmware (just in case there were any -- there weren't).
And as far as that goes (de pistola grippo), a bit of advice:
Never never NEVER use those riflestock camera holders to take pictures at weddings or of people in public places.
Gary,
You should buy a D200 by now as the prices are very reasonable.
Heh, remember the old Novoflex follow-focus lenses? :lol: I never got the hang of using the 400/5.6. Man, it is so much easier now with AF and IS.
You should buy a D200 by now as the prices are very reasonable.
Heh, remember the old Novoflex follow-focus lenses? :lol: I never got the hang of using the 400/5.6. Man, it is so much easier now with AF and IS.
Believe me, the D-100 is absolutely fine. Even though the D-100 has all those whiz-bang features, and I have a couple of auto-focus lenses, I'm primarily a manual photographer.
I still have, and use, my 1999 Olympus CL-2500 Camedia (with its ED glass lens). The 8-year-old camera writes to 2 GB SanDisk Ultra II Compact Flash perfectly.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
I have returned the accursed Canon S3 and am seriously considering buying (or should I say virtually on my way to the store) the 70-300/VR to replace the S3's wonderful 432 mm telephoto reach.
I was also seriously thinking of buying a 10 MP body to go with such a nice lens Basically settled on the D40x and the D80. The D80 is $200 more expensive, but it doesn't offer much more performance than the D40x. In fact, the dynamic range and focusing in low light are slightly better with the D40x (granted, it was part of the brief testing I did at the store), and it's smaller and lighter.
The extra functionality in the D80 is basically the ability to do bracketing, the ability to autofocus non AF-S and AF-I lenses, the ability to save in RAW + JPEG at any quality, the ability to control other flashes wirelessly, and more dedicated buttons for stuff like WB, ISO.
I don't really use any of these things, so they don't provide any incremental value (except for the bracketing, which I may use for HDR later). However, the D80's saving grace for not having any incremental features that I'm interested in and costing $200 more is that the grip is noticeably larger and that it's easier to hold than the smaller D40 series, especially when using a heavier lens.
In the end, I might just spring for the D80.
I was also seriously thinking of buying a 10 MP body to go with such a nice lens
Basically settled on the D40x and the D80. The D80 is $200 more expensive, but it doesn't offer much more performance than the D40x. In fact, the dynamic range and focusing in low light are slightly better with the D40x (granted, it was part of the brief testing I did at the store), and it's smaller and lighter. The extra functionality in the D80 is basically the ability to do bracketing, the ability to autofocus non AF-S and AF-I lenses, the ability to save in RAW + JPEG at any quality, the ability to control other flashes wirelessly, and more dedicated buttons for stuff like WB, ISO.
I don't really use any of these things, so they don't provide any incremental value (except for the bracketing, which I may use for HDR later). However, the D80's saving grace for not having any incremental features that I'm interested in and costing $200 more is that the grip is noticeably larger and that it's easier to hold than the smaller D40 series, especially when using a heavier lens.
In the end, I might just spring for the D80.
udaman
Wannabe Storage Freak
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,209
I have returned the accursed Canon S3 and am seriously considering buying (or should I say virtually on my way to the store) the 70-300/VR to replace the S3's wonderful 432 mm telephoto reach.
I was also seriously thinking of buying a 10 MP body to go with such a nice lens
The extra functionality in the D80 is basically the ability to do bracketing, the ability to autofocus non AF-S and AF-I lenses, the ability to save in RAW + JPEG at any quality, the ability to control other flashes wirelessly, and more dedicated buttons for stuff like WB, ISO.
I don't really use any of these things, so they don't provide any incremental value (except for the bracketing, which I may use for HDR later). However, the D80's saving grace for not having any incremental features that I'm interested in and costing $200 more is that the grip is noticeably larger and that it's easier to hold than the smaller D40 series, especially when using a heavier lens.
In the end, I might just spring for the D80.
What kind of store lets you 'test drive' all these cameras, basically turn them into demo models they'd have to sell for a loss, and allow you to use them for free? I'd love to be able to do that.
$200 more? The D200 has even better sensor (heh, according to Rockwell), much better accuracy, it's even bigger, and only costs another few hundred more
. You must have big hands like Clinton- e_dawg, even the D40 is a bit too large for what i like. I have no problem with even smaller cameras, Oly E400/E500 series w/live LCD view. I especially like the newer compact lenses that Oly is making for that smaller 3/4rd(?) format sensor. Lighter weight, more compact lenses; that's what Oly did for the 35mm world with the original OM1 & OM2.e_dawg
Storage Freak
?? I thought this was normal for any true camera store -- the kind of camera store that only really sells anything to do with photography and video, not a big box store that sells general electronics, appliances, etc. It's not like I took the camera home for the day. I spent 10-15 min with the 70-300/VR lens on both bodies testing out the AF in the store. The bodies were in the display case; the 70-300 he did have to take out of a new box in the back.
Here in Toronto, Vistek, Henry's, and Black's are the three big name camera stores. I prefer Vistek. Black's is often cheaper if you look for their sales. They periodically discount cameras by 10-20% off MSRP, which is unusual for the other guys. The other guys let you bargain, but don't usually give you too much... maybe 2-3% on sale items and 4-6% on non-sale items.
McBain Camera in Alberta is great too. They are great for Canadians in that you can buy from them online without any provincial sales tax, saving ~8% right off the bat and you still get the Canadian warranty, which you don't get (with Nikon anyways) if you buy from the US. I may still get all my filters from somewhere like BH Photo, as many filters are hard to find and are expensive in Canada.
Nah, many people say the D40's grip could be bigger for heavy lenses. The D40's grip is actually bigger than Canon's consumer models (many feel that the Rebels' grips are just too small). But I know what you mean about wanting a great small camera.
Yes. When I was reading about the new Oly E-410 and its tiny 14-42 and 40-150 4/3 lenses, I thought about you. I thought you would be all over that system!
I feel that the Canon A710 is actually a decent compact substitute for a dSLR if you don't need the low noise, high sensitivity performance of the dSLRs. You can get wide and tele conversion lenses and shoot in RAW with live histogram/zebra mode. I am extremely pleased with it as my compact travel system.
I am primarily a Canon user this century, but purchased a D80 last autumn. It is quite a nice body and you won't find appreciably better detail in a Nikon without going to the D2Xs, which has other advantages and limitations. As you know, the D40x is crippled in AF lens choices, so carefully consider whether you will want to have an expanded lens arsenal in the future.
Dynamic range and other image characteristics cannot be properly judged without looking at the RAW files. I know that the default setting of the D80 is for a small colorspace, med-high contrast, some sharpening, and some noise reduction. These are fine for drug store prints and e-mailing files straight from the camera, but not a good place to start if you want to maximize image quality.
Dynamic range and other image characteristics cannot be properly judged without looking at the RAW files. I know that the default setting of the D80 is for a small colorspace, med-high contrast, some sharpening, and some noise reduction. These are fine for drug store prints and e-mailing files straight from the camera, but not a good place to start if you want to maximize image quality.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Good points, LM. The D80 uses the ubiquitous Sony 10 MP sensor also found in the D40x and Sony Alpha 100k. The main differences are in the op-amps and to a smaller extent the A/D converters downstream that affect signal quality.
Yes, the D40x does not have the screw-drive motor, but I have thought long and hard about it when I decided to purchase the D40 instead of the D50, and I am fairly sure (at this point, anyway) that I will not be using non AF-S or AF-I lenses in the future. There are only a couple non AF-S primes I would consider using that are not AF-S.
Having said that, for me, the D80's grip alone is almost worth the price of admission. With the D40 and even the 18-200 lens, I can't hold the camera with one hand for more than a short period. It's just too heavy and too small a grip. The rest of the features I might use from time to time.
Good point about the dynamic range. I was looking at the test results from dpreview, but ultimately, looking at the RAW output for myself would be needed, and I bet the difference isn't that much anyways between two models with the same sensor and similar price points.
As for the in-camera processing, I normally use a lower contrast tone curve to get more DR out of the JPEGs. But regardless, I always shoot RAW + JPEG, so if I need the best IQ, I just process the RAW file.
Yes, the D40x does not have the screw-drive motor, but I have thought long and hard about it when I decided to purchase the D40 instead of the D50, and I am fairly sure (at this point, anyway) that I will not be using non AF-S or AF-I lenses in the future. There are only a couple non AF-S primes I would consider using that are not AF-S.
Having said that, for me, the D80's grip alone is almost worth the price of admission. With the D40 and even the 18-200 lens, I can't hold the camera with one hand for more than a short period. It's just too heavy and too small a grip. The rest of the features I might use from time to time.
Good point about the dynamic range. I was looking at the test results from dpreview, but ultimately, looking at the RAW output for myself would be needed, and I bet the difference isn't that much anyways between two models with the same sensor and similar price points.
As for the in-camera processing, I normally use a lower contrast tone curve to get more DR out of the JPEGs. But regardless, I always shoot RAW + JPEG, so if I need the best IQ, I just process the RAW file.
ddrueding
Fixture
Lunar,
What would cause you to get a body from a second (non compatible) manufacturer? Surely your original choice (Cannon) makes a body with the features you are after that would support your existing lenses?
Collecting lenses for 2 different lines seems a bit...crazy?
What would cause you to get a body from a second (non compatible) manufacturer? Surely your original choice (Cannon) makes a body with the features you are after that would support your existing lenses?
Collecting lenses for 2 different lines seems a bit...crazy?
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
Getting back OT (after all, this is supposed to be a Point and Shoot thread! ;-)):
My honeymoon with the Canon Powershot A620 is over. 3 gripes:
1) Picture quality seems markedly worse now compared to when new (1 year ago). Yes, I've checked the settings.
2) More and more, my shooting is inddor, and the itty-bitty flash just doesn't cut it. Have to see if an external flash is available for it.
3) Since I'm shooting indoors with flash a lot, the batteries can't seem to power the flash in quick succession. The damn thing becomes a slug, actually exposing about 3 - 4 seconds after I press the shutter. I'm using 4 x 2500 mAh NiMH AA batteries, fully charged before use.
Anyone know if it's safe to use Lithium AAs? I have read that Canon discourages their use in cameras meant to use rechargeables. 4 x 1.2v = 4.8v as opposed to the full 4 x 1.5v = 6.0v the Lithiums put out.
When I have the money, I'll ask here (or start a new thread called Another Digital Camera Thread - dSLRs).
My honeymoon with the Canon Powershot A620 is over. 3 gripes:
1) Picture quality seems markedly worse now compared to when new (1 year ago). Yes, I've checked the settings.
2) More and more, my shooting is inddor, and the itty-bitty flash just doesn't cut it. Have to see if an external flash is available for it.
3) Since I'm shooting indoors with flash a lot, the batteries can't seem to power the flash in quick succession. The damn thing becomes a slug, actually exposing about 3 - 4 seconds after I press the shutter. I'm using 4 x 2500 mAh NiMH AA batteries, fully charged before use.
Anyone know if it's safe to use Lithium AAs? I have read that Canon discourages their use in cameras meant to use rechargeables. 4 x 1.2v = 4.8v as opposed to the full 4 x 1.5v = 6.0v the Lithiums put out.
When I have the money, I'll ask here (or start a new thread called Another Digital Camera Thread - dSLRs).
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Do you mean the LCD is blacked out and the flash icon is flashing for 3-4 sec after your previous shot and you can't take another picture yet? Or, do you mean everything is ready to go but the camera just doesn't "fire" after you press the shutter all the way?
I ask because sometimes I have the same problem, and it's not the flash recycling. It's the AF not being able to get a good lock in low light/low contrast or I'm too close than the minimum focusing distance at that zoom.
But I'm not surprised with the flash recycle performance, to tell you the truth. It's like that for all compact P&S. The 4 battery A series should recycle in 2-3 sec. 3-4 sounds slightly worse, but still within the realm of what can be considered "normal". The 2 battery A series cameras are even worse. They take 5+ seconds for flash recycle.
They do have an external flash for the A series called the HF-DC1. About $80-100. I think it would be a worthwhile addition, especially since you're taking a lot of shots indoors. And if it doesn't make a huge improvement, you can still use it on any A series camera you buy in the future and can sell it on eBay as well. In fact, I would probably buy it from you if it turns out you don't like it.
Also, did you try turning off red-eye reduction?
I ask because sometimes I have the same problem, and it's not the flash recycling. It's the AF not being able to get a good lock in low light/low contrast or I'm too close than the minimum focusing distance at that zoom.
But I'm not surprised with the flash recycle performance, to tell you the truth. It's like that for all compact P&S. The 4 battery A series should recycle in 2-3 sec. 3-4 sounds slightly worse, but still within the realm of what can be considered "normal". The 2 battery A series cameras are even worse. They take 5+ seconds for flash recycle.
They do have an external flash for the A series called the HF-DC1. About $80-100. I think it would be a worthwhile addition, especially since you're taking a lot of shots indoors. And if it doesn't make a huge improvement, you can still use it on any A series camera you buy in the future and can sell it on eBay as well. In fact, I would probably buy it from you if it turns out you don't like it.
Also, did you try turning off red-eye reduction?
e_dawg
Storage Freak
I did get the 70-300/VR and the D80 after all. Generally happy with both. The only thing I was a little disappointed with on the D80 was the metering. I was a little surprised with how much the matrix metering was willing to blow the highlights to get the rest of the scene exposed properly. I'm not surprised the D40 does this, being an entry-level dSLR and targeted to "uninitiated" consumers. I used -0.3 to -0.7 EV right from the start. But I thought the D80 was designed for a slightly more advanced crowd too. The metering sacrifices highlights just as much as the D40, if not more.
I'm a little bitter that I blew the highlights on my first hundred shots with the D80, but I am mostly to blame because I didn't specifically check for that (in daylight, the pics looked slightly dark on the LCD; I only noticed when I used the highlights view when reviewing pics inside). Now that I know, i can work around it, but I'm still a bit disappointed that Nikon set the D80 up that way. I guess they intended the D80 to be used by mainstream / non-enthusiast consumers, and the D200 to cater to enthusiasts, semi-pros, etc.
I'm a little bitter that I blew the highlights on my first hundred shots with the D80, but I am mostly to blame because I didn't specifically check for that (in daylight, the pics looked slightly dark on the LCD; I only noticed when I used the highlights view when reviewing pics inside). Now that I know, i can work around it, but I'm still a bit disappointed that Nikon set the D80 up that way. I guess they intended the D80 to be used by mainstream / non-enthusiast consumers, and the D200 to cater to enthusiasts, semi-pros, etc.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Just wanted to share my recent discovery of an excellent photo editing tool called Unshake:
http://www.hamangia.freeserve.co.uk/
It's a deconvolution program, which supposedly uses some FFT and sinc algorithms to "undo" blurring caused by poor focus and motion blur / camera shake. It also works well as a sharpening program for soft lenses.
I was trying out my new D80 with the 18-200/VR by taking pics of a Canada Day parade. While trying to catch the action, I was walking and dodging other photographers and pedestrians on the sidewalk as we followed the procession. Needless to say, there wasn't much time to take my shots, and I rushed myself too much, not holding the camera still when the shutter was released. Even with Auto ISO engaged to not let the shutter speed drop below 1/100 sec, what happened was that a significant percentage of my shots were a little blurry.
Put a bunch of these blurry pics through Unshake, and I have to say that I am amazed with the results on photos that aren't too blurry -- this thing has its limits.
Nevertheless, it "saved" more than half of those blurry pics and made them quite usable, and for that, I owe Unshake and its creator, MD Cahill, my gratitude. No one likes seeing their pics go to waste due to focus or exposure errors. Now you can correct focus errors after they happen.
Limitations of Unshake are that it doesn't work with TIFF or DNG files, and it will only save to JPEG. Now don't worry about the input file -- it doesn't have to be a lossy JPEG. It can be an uncompressed PNG. But outputting to JPEG means that you can't do too much to it after Unshake... you have to use it near the end of your post-processing, and accept the fact that you can't really do things like USM afterwards.
Another well regarded deconvolution program is Focus Magic. It's more flexible and customizable than Unshake and can be used as a Photoshop plug-in, but it isn't free like Unshake is. Nor does it work on Windows Vista.
http://www.hamangia.freeserve.co.uk/
It's a deconvolution program, which supposedly uses some FFT and sinc algorithms to "undo" blurring caused by poor focus and motion blur / camera shake. It also works well as a sharpening program for soft lenses.
I was trying out my new D80 with the 18-200/VR by taking pics of a Canada Day parade. While trying to catch the action, I was walking and dodging other photographers and pedestrians on the sidewalk as we followed the procession. Needless to say, there wasn't much time to take my shots, and I rushed myself too much, not holding the camera still when the shutter was released. Even with Auto ISO engaged to not let the shutter speed drop below 1/100 sec, what happened was that a significant percentage of my shots were a little blurry.
Put a bunch of these blurry pics through Unshake, and I have to say that I am amazed with the results on photos that aren't too blurry -- this thing has its limits.
Nevertheless, it "saved" more than half of those blurry pics and made them quite usable, and for that, I owe Unshake and its creator, MD Cahill, my gratitude. No one likes seeing their pics go to waste due to focus or exposure errors. Now you can correct focus errors after they happen.
Limitations of Unshake are that it doesn't work with TIFF or DNG files, and it will only save to JPEG. Now don't worry about the input file -- it doesn't have to be a lossy JPEG. It can be an uncompressed PNG. But outputting to JPEG means that you can't do too much to it after Unshake... you have to use it near the end of your post-processing, and accept the fact that you can't really do things like USM afterwards.
Another well regarded deconvolution program is Focus Magic. It's more flexible and customizable than Unshake and can be used as a Photoshop plug-in, but it isn't free like Unshake is. Nor does it work on Windows Vista.
udaman
Wannabe Storage Freak
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,209
Umm, let me try again, the boldface above suggests a purchased camera that has been returned for refund, does it not? So I'll ask again, what kind of store (other than CostCo which claims to have a 100% satisfaction guarantee where you can return any product for any reason, forever, for a full refund...lol) allows you to take a camera home, use it for some period and then 'return' it? I've not seen this before, and would like to take advantage of that, maybe buy the TX1 to see if I can put up with it's flaws, for the perceived benefits. Oh hell, I'd like to return any camera after being able to use it for several weeks to see if I like it and want to keep it. $500 is a lot of money to find out you can't live with the flaws of a camera like the TX1. What does e_dawg do with all those other camera's he bought, other than the returned S3?
Oly E410 doesn't have the IS of the E510, and both are still significantly larger & heavier than the '70's OM1 &2- WTF can't manufacturers put a damned full size 35mm sensor in an OM1 sized body, it's not like there's any film inside these digicams...come on already?!? 4/3rd sensors are 1/2 the size of 35mm film so the lens should be 1/2 the size of the sevelt OM1 style lens, yes
. I think I'll wait another year and see if the revised E410 (E420?) comes with sensor IS, then you can use any lens with it. And maybe they'll even have the pro level articulating LCD by then, trickle down theory. Except for pap style photography, or holding a camera above a crowd for better camera angles, I'd never shoot dSLR's one-handed, so I don't want a big hand grip. Even with the 50mm standard lens on the OM1, I always cradled the body with the left hand underneath both large and small lenses while using that hand to manually focus. I would use the same technique for any dSLR, you'll get the most vibration free shots using that classic/standard camera holding/shooting technique.
70-300 f4-5.6 Oly zoom, only 5in! long and 620g; now that's more like it(if only it had a bit lower F stop, <500g would be even nicer).
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0706/07062601zuiko70300.asp
Stereodude
Not really a
On a somewhat related note to the topic I have a Fuji F31fd en route to me. UPS estimates delivery on the 9th. I'm looking forward to getting a P&S without a pile of noise.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Udaman, a lot of stores have a 14 day or 30 day return policy that applies to most things except for things like software, music, consumables, etc.
I bought the S3 at a mainstream consumer camera store called Black's
http://www.blacksphoto.com
I don't know if camera stores in your area will let you do that, but you can always go to big box stores like Best Buy that carry cameras. They should carry mainstream models like the Canon TX1 and have 14 or 30 day satisfaction guaranteed return policies as well.
I bought the S3 at a mainstream consumer camera store called Black's
http://www.blacksphoto.com
I don't know if camera stores in your area will let you do that, but you can always go to big box stores like Best Buy that carry cameras. They should carry mainstream models like the Canon TX1 and have 14 or 30 day satisfaction guaranteed return policies as well.
ddrueding
Fixture
I've had my eye on this camera for quite some time. I'm specifically interested in its performance in low light motion shots where flash is not allowed.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
As for what I do with the other cameras...
Fuji F10 is gathering dust, as it's been replaced by the Canon A710 as my preferred travel camera. I will probably use it for those situations where I want to bring a camera, but I can't bring a case for it and can't leave it lying around somewhere unattended... like at a club or a party... something that has to fit in my pocket. I may also leave it in the car as a backup / emergency camera if I go somewhere impromptu / forgot to bring a camera, or if I get into an accident.
The D40 was my "nice" camera that I would take with me whenever it was practical to do so. Now that the D80 fills that role, it now represents my lightweight SLR solution with the 18-55 kit lens. I might take it to a birthday party, for example, where I can bring something bigger than the F10 or A710 and can leave it on the table unattended, but don't want to deal with the heavyweight D80 + 18-200 combo.
Fuji F10 is gathering dust, as it's been replaced by the Canon A710 as my preferred travel camera. I will probably use it for those situations where I want to bring a camera, but I can't bring a case for it and can't leave it lying around somewhere unattended... like at a club or a party... something that has to fit in my pocket. I may also leave it in the car as a backup / emergency camera if I go somewhere impromptu / forgot to bring a camera, or if I get into an accident.
The D40 was my "nice" camera that I would take with me whenever it was practical to do so. Now that the D80 fills that role, it now represents my lightweight SLR solution with the 18-55 kit lens. I might take it to a birthday party, for example, where I can bring something bigger than the F10 or A710 and can leave it on the table unattended, but don't want to deal with the heavyweight D80 + 18-200 combo.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
I'm not that impressed with the Fuji's image quality, despite signing its praises in the past and having an F10 myself. Fuji uses a contrasty tone curve designed to bury noise in the shadow region and use a bit heavier NR and sharpening for in-camera processing. Combined with the high chromatic aberration / purple fringing from the Fujinon lens, what you get is a picture with less shadow detail and darker midtones that looks slightly more "digital" and processed than some of its competition when you view things at higher magnification.
I found myself correcting for the Fuji's tone curve and purple fringing more often than I would have liked in post-processing.
While it does have better high ISO performance than most, let's not forget that the IS found on competing cameras like the Canon A710 is effective for an extra 2-3 stops. At 200 ISO, the point at which most non-Fuji digicams start getting noisy, IS allows you to shoot with a shutter speed 2-3 stops slower, which gets you close to the equivalent of 800 or 1600 ISO with the Fuji in terms of noise / sensitivity tradeoff.
The only situation for which IS cannot make up for high ISO is when your subject itself is moving quickly enough that you need the faster shutter speed to freeze action (assuming you're not using flash).
As for flash performance, the F10 was not good at throttling down for close subjects. They say that the F31 has improved in this area. The A710 has flash exp compensation that does a great job of addressing this, and has a 1/500 flash sync speed as well.
At this point, I vastly prefer the Canon A710 IS over the F10 with the CHDK hack... I suspect the F31 would make it a tougher decision, but I think the basic philosophy of Fuji's image processing would make me go with the A710.
ddrueding
Fixture
What I'm looking for I fear is impossible. Something similar to photographing a cat jumping off a candle-lit table without flash. From 20 feet away.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Depends how dark your room is apart from the candle-lit table. You might be able to do it with an SLR at 1600 ISO and some post-processing to remove noise and recover shadow detail if the room isn't too dark. But if that cat has dark colour fur and is backlit somewhat from the candle light, good luck.
But why go without flash? Flash is your friend. I promise you it won't cause your candle-light to disappear if you use it correctly. I do it all the time -- use flash to be able to take pics in a dark room while retaining all the contribution from artifical light sources in the room. All you have to do is slow-sync the flash at 1/30 sec and use some negative flash exp comp (-1.0 to -1.5 EV works for me). Works great on both the D40 and A710.
The only problem might be being able to freeze the action of your cat when the shutter speed is so low. The flash will help freeze some of the motion even at 1/30 sec, but you will have to experiment with raising the shutter speed to 1/60 or 1/80 sec, keeping mindful that the more you raise your shutter speed, the less contribution you will have from other light sources in your room (which means your candles will become less and less prominent).
If you have an SLR, you can also try bounce flash and/or a Gary Fong Lightsphere (or much cheaper home made lightbox) with a bit of negative FEC.
But why go without flash? Flash is your friend. I promise you it won't cause your candle-light to disappear if you use it correctly. I do it all the time -- use flash to be able to take pics in a dark room while retaining all the contribution from artifical light sources in the room. All you have to do is slow-sync the flash at 1/30 sec and use some negative flash exp comp (-1.0 to -1.5 EV works for me). Works great on both the D40 and A710.
The only problem might be being able to freeze the action of your cat when the shutter speed is so low. The flash will help freeze some of the motion even at 1/30 sec, but you will have to experiment with raising the shutter speed to 1/60 or 1/80 sec, keeping mindful that the more you raise your shutter speed, the less contribution you will have from other light sources in your room (which means your candles will become less and less prominent).
If you have an SLR, you can also try bounce flash and/or a Gary Fong Lightsphere (or much cheaper home made lightbox) with a bit of negative FEC.
ddrueding
Fixture
Sorry e_dawg, the cat was just an analogy. I am interested in shooting tango dancers at events. These events are typically very dark and very crowded. The one I host is in a 6000 sq.ft. ballroom and I use 5 100W wall sconces (indirect at that) to light the room. I'll be shooting at a distance of about 10-20 feet, and the subjects will be moving fairly quickly and wearing black. No flash.
The reason I've been holding off buying something is I'm not sure what is necessary for this environment. If it was just an F31, I could go for it. If it requires a 1Ds MkII, I need to forget about it.
The reason I've been holding off buying something is I'm not sure what is necessary for this environment. If it was just an F31, I could go for it. If it requires a 1Ds MkII, I need to forget about it.
udaman
Wannabe Storage Freak
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,209
Taking a wild guess, Tannin's lust of choice pro Canon, might be able to do what you want. You'd want the 10fps rapid-fire capability, the extra bit depth for greater tonal/color gradation, slightly better dynamic range (though with a candlelit only situation you're at the very extremes of high-contrast, huge dynamic range requirements). Couple that $5k Canon with a very fast 1.2f stop 85mm mild telephoto prime lens, and you should be able to shoot at somewhere in the range of 1/100th-1/250th sec shutter speeds which would just be enough to almost 'freeze' the motion of a jumping cat @ISO3200 or 6.4k. Just a guess mind you, I could be completely wrong.
I would suggest though, like e_dawg says, you can purchase the Fuji F31d, and use it for 15days, then return it, if the low light capabilities are inadequate. The Fuji has shutter speed priority, so you can set the shutter speed necessary to freeze action, but you wouldn't be able to capture anything near the number of frames per second that you'd get with a higher end dSLR.
TY for the reply. I could have used the TX1 for the PinotDays in SF this past weekend. Then again, with one hand always extended and holding a wine glass, getting pours of wine that regularly dripped down the side of the bowl of the glass making for a wine stained thumb and index finger, I'm sure I would have irreparably stained any camera I brought along. Next year if I go, I'm going to have to use a BT headset for a cell phone with decent capacity microSD card to audio record my notes, instead of trying to write them down on the program guide booklet...would have allowed me to probably taste an additional 50 wines over the 6hrs it took me to taste 145+ (which was less than 1/2 of what was available).
I don't think the TX1 is widely available just yet (unlike B&H in NYC, the established proshops in the LA area tend to get stock of consumer digicams after the big box stores, sometimes months later), so you're limited to online retailers with those dreaded restocking fees as well as shipping costs. I'll take a look at 'test driving' the TX1 for 15days or more when I can find it at Best Buy (might even show up at CostCo). If I had the money to get the D40 and then thought about the D80, I'd just fork up the extra and get the D200 (though, of course I'd probably wait for Oly's P1 or whatever it's called prosumer model later this year with the articulating live-view LCD)
udaman
Wannabe Storage Freak
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,209
Sheesh, why didn't you say so in teh 1st place....arggh! The real scenario you are contemplating, while still difficult, is no where near as demanding as the 'fanatasy' analogy. A little motion blur @1/60th sec. shutter speed?, might produce nice shots that convey that emotion/energy of the tango. In such a case, with varying distances to compose your shots, you do want a zoom lens.
Just go buy that Fuji F31d, try it out; return it, if it doesn't work out. Get Noise Ninja, if you have to shot at ISO800 or above (probably nothing will remove all of the noise at 3.2k, but at least you'll get some shots you maybe happy with).
Stereodude
Not really a
The F30/F31fd is not better than most in regards to noise. It is better than every P&S. It's has the lowest noise of any non DSLR digital camera.
I don't understand why you're relating noise performance to IS. IS can't and won't give you nice clean noise free image.[/QUOTE]
Stereodude
Not really a
How far away from the people would you be shooting? Are you trying to shoot from the edges of the room, or are mixed in with the people?
I don't think you need a 1Ds MkII, but a DSLR like the Digital Rebel XTi will be better than the Fuji. However, the F31fd may be good enough depending on what exactly you're trying to do. If you're trying to shoot from a long distance the lens cost will exceed the body cost on the DSLR solution, however the Fuji will not work well at long distances either because the lens is F5.2 at the telephoto end and won't let in enough light to get slow shutter speeds.
ddrueding
Fixture
Distance? 10-20 feet; I'll be shooting from the edges of the room. I will have a mini-tripod, as my hands are useless at holding still.
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
e_dawg said:
No the LCD doesn't black out, and when everything is apparently ready, the camera won't fire for 3-4 seconds after I press the shutter. This is when taking flash shots in succession.
I somehow always thought it was because the batteries were recovering after firing the flash, because if I wait about 10 seconds after a flash shot and then press the shutter, the exposure with flash is near instantaneous.
I'm probably going to start using Lithium AAs from now on. My stockpile of NiMH batteries will live their lives out in remote controls, portable CD players, flash lights etc. Had enough of their hype.
Thanks, e_dawg, weirdly enough I did some searching this morning, found this, and have decided to buy it. A real plus is that it'll work with my wife's SD600 as well. Heck, I've read that it'll work with other cameras too, since it senses the built-in flash going off and itself fires. Plus it can be handheld some distance away, used as a bounce flash, etc. I'm kicking myself for not thinking along these lines earlier.e_dawg said:
And thanks for unshake; I've downloaded it, will try it out in a day or two.
You should always use the RGB histogram to determine accurate exposure. LCD brightness in not meaningful, and blinking highlights are less than accurate. But yes, the D80 tends toward overexposure.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
Allow me to explain...
There are 2 ways to prevent noise (assuming you don't have a Panasonic or Leica, in which case, don't bother... noise is a part of ownership): (1) use low ISO (regular P&S), or (2) use a sensor with a higher SNR (Fuji). Two approaches to the same problem with similar results. IS allows you to use much slower shutter speeds, which allows you to use much lower ISO to get to the same exposure.
The A710 has about the same amount of noise at 200 ISO as the Fuji F series does between 800-1600 ISO. The fact that it has IS allows you to use 200 ISO and still be able to shoot in low light just as well as the Fuji when it's set to 800-1600 ISO.
If you shoot at 80 ISO with the A710, there's not much noise to speak of anyways, and the Fuji's noise level isn't significantly lower. If the small amount of noise present at 80 ISO with the A710 is bothersome, this can be easily fixed with Noise Ninja or equivalent software.
Also, noise levels are not the be all and end all when it comes to image quality. You can get very low noise levels if you want, but at the expense of other things. See any Panasonic Lumix camera with the Venus III engine for a prime example. The noise levels you see from the review sites are after in-camera processing, not what the sensor outputs.
Yes, Fuji has a low noise sensor. But they also use various processing tricks to make the apparent noise level look even lower. One of them is to use a contrasty tone curve to bury noise in the shadows. One of them is to use slightly more aggressive and selective NR and sharpening. What happens is that you lose shadow detail, your lower midtones are darker, and the image is a little artificial looking and has less "post-processing headroom" in any photo editor. And since you have to lower the contrast a bit and raise the shadows and lower midtones a bit to "fix" the picture, you're going to be increasing the apparent noise a bit in the process.
There's a lot of hype out there propping up the Fujis on review sites and forums, but take it from a veteran Fuji user who has taken over a thousand of pics with it and did photo editing / post-processing on several hundred of them and has compared it to other cameras in its class: the low noise performance of the Fujis is (1) good, but not as good as you think on a net basis once you dig deeper (when considering the tradeoffs needed to get to that point), and (2) low noise performance is mitigated by other shortcomings, as image quality apart from noise is a little lackluster.
For example, you may not consider chromatic aberration and purple fringing noise, but it does detract from the overall quality of the image... and the Fujinon lenses suffer from a lot of it.
Stereodude
Not really a
Well, unless I misread something you didn't have a F30/F31fd. The F10 isn't exactly comparable to the F30/F30fd. First the F30/F31fd have less noise than the F10. Second, the F31fd also address some of the quirkiness of the F10/F30.
From dpreview.com,
I have a Canon EOS 10D, and Canon Powershot G6 already. I think the Fuji F31fd will nicely complement them, and I'll find out for sure after Monday.
From dpreview.com,
I have a Canon EOS 10D, and Canon Powershot G6 already. I think the Fuji F31fd will nicely complement them, and I'll find out for sure after Monday.
e_dawg
Storage Freak
True, the F10 is not the same as the F30/31, but it is close, and did look over all the test results of the F31 before deciding to purchase the A710 instead. Basically, didn't look like enough improvement over the F10 to counter my disappointment.
Although... if they would have fixed the CA/purple fringing problem, I might have given the F31 a chance. But as it stands, it is just too much of a detractor for me.
I do hope you enjoy your F31, though, and find that my fears are unjustified. Sorry to rain on your parade before you even got your camera... but if anything, you'll be pleasantly surprised after hearing me trash it for the last few days
Although... if they would have fixed the CA/purple fringing problem, I might have given the F31 a chance. But as it stands, it is just too much of a detractor for me.
I do hope you enjoy your F31, though, and find that my fears are unjustified. Sorry to rain on your parade before you even got your camera... but if anything, you'll be pleasantly surprised after hearing me trash it for the last few days