Advice Please

[Steve Randles]

All cameras take photographs in RAW, the majority then commpress and save as jpeg, same as a RAW file would be to be used in the challenge. In a RAW converter your setting the values as you would at the camera. End result, same thing..no 10%. The flexibiliity of RAW means you can change these values at a later date should you wish, the same as you could do at the camera, at the time of the shot.

 

To me, the quality aspect of RAW means you can convert and manipulate as a TIFF file in an image editing program to achieve whatever results you want at that point in the future, remember also that jpegs are compressed and do contain artifacts that a RAW shot wont have, hence improved quality. But this is now far and removed from the challenge....and from this thread too.

 

Steve...

[Guest CJS2]

OK, but I know what I've seen on demo shots.

 

[Colin Brett]

So Sony have had some problems!

 

So have Cadbury's, does that mean we all stop eating their chocolate?

 

Sony have been and still are [iMHO] the number one innovators in the electronics world.

 

My old DSC P100 camera is still going strong and taking great pictures. So is my Beta-max tape player also my VHS tape player, Audio tape player/recorder, TV, Hi Fi etc etc. I've always tried to buy Sony where possible and never had a moments problem.

 

However my son has a Panasonic FZ30 and is extremely happy with it.

 

Colin

[Alnath]

Dunno if this is too late but these were taken on my S3 IS when i cant be arsed to cart my 20D

 

http://alnath.fotopic.net/c1047434.html

http://alnath.fotopic.net/c1075708.html

http://alnath.fotopic.net/c1091335.html

 

It is no 20D but it is very versatile for a compact and the range of the zoom is stunning (the video mode is amazing as well)

 

I do not use RAW even for highly needed shots like weddings BTW, it is a pain in the arse and nothing else, the latest image editing software can alter a JPEG nearly as much as RAW when push comes to shove.

[steve pitts]

Hi Judy

 

This is my first post on the photographic section (usually on the Conservation section), so hope you don't mind me dropping into your thread.

 

I have no doubt that the cameras mentioned previously all all good cameras, capable of producing good quality photos (subject to user's abilities :-) ).

 

I recently bought a Pentax optio WP, which as the 'WP' suggests, is waterproof, so is ideal for anywhere damp or wet (most fishing situations).

It is a fantastic little camera, but only has a display screen and no viewfinder, which I find difficult to use in sunny conditions.

 

Sometimes it really is hit or miss wrt the subject matter being where I want it in the picture. Getting the horizon level is one of the hardest things to achieve, even with a good sized display screen. Nothing looks worse than the sea sloping off to the right of shot - make it appear that the world is sliding out of the picture.

 

I've usually resorted to taking several shots, just to be on the safe side, which is no problem with landscapes etc. but would be a problem with birds in flight. You can't ask them to 'hold it' or go back and fly past again!

 

So, my tip would be to go to a good camera shop (dare I suggest Jessops / LCE etc ) and give those cameras on your shortlist a good going over, to determine ease of use and pay particular attention to whether you prefer a traditional viewfinder or are happy with a display screen to compose your shots.

 

Hope that this help in your quest for the ideal digital camera

 

Cheers

Steve

Edited December 14, 2006 by steve pitts

[Hellbelly]

So Sony have had some problems!

 

So have Cadbury's, does that mean we all stop eating their chocolate?

 

Sony have been and still are [iMHO] the number one innovators in the electronics world.

 

My old DSC P100 camera is still going strong and taking great pictures. So is my Beta-max tape player also my VHS tape player, Audio tape player/recorder, TV, Hi Fi etc etc. I've always tried to buy Sony where possible and never had a moments problem.

 

However my son has a Panasonic FZ30 and is extremely happy with it.

 

Colin

 

Dont get me wrong Colin. Apart from the dust problem I've been very happy with my camera. Only problem is that the dust problem is huge and very very common. Then I hear of other problems too, so to me it seems that their name is getting tarnished. I thought they were best but I think I was just fooled by their name. Have a look at this thread. I've got some pics of my dust problem right near the bottom of the thread.

 

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...essage=20348609

 

HB.

[Steve Burke]

I belong with those who think that the photographer is more important than the camera. I can't take many good photos with any camera, but Judy has already very clearly shown that she can.

 

Enthusiasts will always argue the finer points and will probably consider this view sacrilege, but once you get out of the budget bracket I don't believe there's a huge difference in quality between similar cameras. Indeed, except with big blow-ups I think you'd be hard pressed to notice any really significant difference at all in many cases! In other words the quality of the composition is more important.

 

What's probably more relevant is the versatility of the camera. For instance some cameras, even otherwise very good ones, don't focus well in poor light. This would immediately disqualify them for me as they'd be no good for trophy shots of fish. For others, especially non-anglers, this might not be so important.

 

So I'd suggest that, rather than focus (no pun intended) on minor differences in quality, we look more at the features. Filter out those that don't have all the features you need, then with the short list that you've made look at the useful features.

 

On the short list that Judy has already given us she may decide that the ability to take conversion lenses is important for bird shots. Again, the ability to take successive self-portraits without having to put a fish down (the custom self-timer setting) would be extremely useful to me, as would a fully-tiltable screen. My choice would therefore be the Canon as this has both these features as well as taking conversion lenses.

 

However, Judy might find other features more important. Here the test reports and full specifications on the camera review sites can be very useful. For links to these go to http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/forums/index.p...mp;#entry582934

 

In other words there's no perfect choice, only the best compromise for each individual.

 

And once you're out of the budget range I don't think that minor differences in picture quality are nearly as important as the features each model does or doesn't have.

Edited December 15, 2006 by Steve Burke

[poledark]

Got to agree with Steve about the Canon, that moveable screen is a real godsend at times (the Panasonic only folds down)

 

I can't sem to see any reference to remote either on the Panasonic, so again the Canon scores...there WILL come a time when you want it

Just to get yourself in the family pics, timer is OK but what if the MIL is looking away when you take the shot? Remote will allow you to cajole everyone to look at the camera while you take several shots.

 

So it is back to the Canon for me

 

 

Den