New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Camera..bouncy bouncy...lost!

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
I am thinking I was ready for a new camera...First I left my charger in Oregon... Then I had photobug extradonaire Bob Barnes help me set up my camera for better shots (the Canon 750 did have amazing battery life) then while mountian biking...it must have fallen out of the saddle bag, because when I got back, no camera.

Do I spend $500.00 or so and get a good SLR or under $200.00 and get another P&S? Thoughts? Comparisons?
post #2 of 19
Sorry to hear that....I found one once, made some goofy videos on it, turned it into the ski area lost& found and it was returned.

An SLR gives you so much more control over focus, exposure etc. Point and shoots are nice and convenient, but maddening when snow (exposure) or branches (focus) screw with your picture.

Of course, you need both, a quiver of cameras!

post #3 of 19
Newfy, where'd you get that pic of Phil? :

It was evident that you were finally getting the hang of your camera Phil. Its a bummer that you lost it, just when you found out what it could do.

Maybe Bob can help you find a nice P&S.
post #4 of 19
I've got both but I can't come up with a good way to carry my SLR while skiing where I don't feel like I might fall and destroy it.
post #5 of 19
My .02 about P&S is don't get one that doesn't have a viewfinder in addition to the LCD screen. Those LCD displays are worthless outside in the sun. Multi-shot/burst option is also a must have. Next, is amount of OPTICAL zoom. Digital zoom's crap. I'm happy with my Cannon A430a but if I wanted to spend more I'd be looking at some of the models with viewfinder and about 10X optical zoom.

Get a Digital Rebel or other SLR and problem solved, but then you encounter size and weight issues when taking it along to activities. I guess there's no perfect solution just yet.
post #6 of 19
Canon Powershot G9!!!

SLR quality photos and most of the flexibility with a powerful zoom and you can still put it in the pocket of your ski jacket.
post #7 of 19
I have a G7 and it's a great camera, the G9 is probably even better. Most mid to upper range P&S cameras brag about their tele. I've always found a 28mm wide angle more useful than any telephoto but they're a lot harder to find.
I've owned several SLRs but I always found I missed more good shots than I took because I did not have the camera with me.
Even the G7 is a little bulky for a pocket camera. Since my son has pretty much taken over the G7, I may get something even smaller with a wider lens.
post #8 of 19
i like my canon a720. it's light, cheap, has a 6x zoom and takes good pictures:

post #9 of 19
and you can't get a good dslr for $500.
post #10 of 19
It all depends on what you want to do with it...but then, you knew that.

As has been pointed out, a quiver of cameras might work. No camera does everything well.

A few generalizations, for which there are always exceptions. Caveat emptor.

SLRs will produce the highest quality image files. Period. Many of them (though not all, by any means) use CCDs that match the size of a 35mm frame. Most of them will save RAW files, allowing very high quality post processing to be done in Photoshop. Often, they have superior JPEG image processing internally, as well. This adds up to greater dynamic range (although still not as much as film), and improved rendering of color, detail, shadows, highlights (the dynamic range thing), etc. SLRs have minimal shutter delay, which makes them well suited for sports photography.

SLRs, of course, suffer from being big and heavy and complicated. The large CCD makes long telephoto lenses very big and very expensive. 12:1 zoom ranges are pretty much out of the question. They don't do video. Ask yourself, "Do I really want to carry that thing?"

If you want to publish in print media, an SLR is the only way to go.

There is, of course, a considerable range of point-and-shoot cameras, and some of them offer an excellent choice of manual controls and decent image quality. Some can save RAW files.

Note that some P&S cameras with very high pixel resolutions have poor enough internal image processing to negate the theoretical improvement that more pixels can give you. Read the reviews.

I have an ultra-zoom that I find to be useful. Some ultra-zooms, while not being "pocketable," don't make too much of a lump and may have capabilities that are useful for casual ski snapshots. Many suffer from excessive shutter lag, but prefocusing by depressing the shutter release halfway may provide a useable workaround. They can do video, and many of them (but not all) can zoom while capturing video. An ultra-zoom may make a very useable compromise between an SLR and a compact P&S. I have both an SLR and an ultra-zoom, and I find for most use, the ultra-zoom is the one I carry. It has a lot of moving parts, though, so I take care not to expose it to impacts. When I ride my bike, it is strapped to my body, rather than being in the bike bag.

Many ultra-zooms have electronic viewfinders. They are useable in bright light and provide more accurate framing in macro mode than the optical viewfinders on compact cameras, but manual focusing is difficult and some have significant image lag. Nonetheless, I would avoid the cheaper ultra-zooms that have only the LCD on the back of the camera.

All ultra-zooms and compacts use relatively small CCDs. This will always impose some compromise on image quality, just like small film formats imposed quality compromises compared to, say, 2 1/4 or 4x5 formats.

Some compacts are now "ruggedized" and water resistant. This has considerable appeal for skiing, swimming, etc. Again, I would prefer one that has an optical viewfinder in addition to the LCD. AFIK, there are no water resistant ultra-zooms. At least one manufacturer claims their SLR is weather resistant.

Websites with possibly useful reviews include www.consumersearch.com and reviews.cnet.com.
post #11 of 19
Good news. Phil just walked in after retracing his steps from yesterday--with his camera! So now his choice is simple: he can get that new digital SLR.

Quote:
and you can't get a good dslr for $500.
Prices have come down. You can get a competent DSLR like the Nikon's "starter" D40 with a decent lens for well under $500 these days. Pro-level and "prosumer" level cameras are still in the multiple thousands, but lightweight little cameras like the D40 will shoot great images with the same lenses, and they're a lot easier to lug around. They may not last a lifetime, but being electronic devices, they'll easily last until they're obsolete!

Best regards,
Bob
post #12 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barnes View Post

Prices have come down. You can get a competent DSLR like the Nikon's "starter" D40 with a decent lens for well under $500 these days. Pro-level and "prosumer" level cameras are still in the multiple thousands, but lightweight little cameras like the D40 will shoot great images with the same lenses, and they're a lot easier to lug around. They may not last a lifetime, but being electronic devices, they'll easily last until they're obsolete!
nikon's decent slr cameras start with the d300, and canon's with the 40d. i think a used nikon f4 35mm for $200 from ebay is a far better value than the lower end dslrs. the thing that bugs me about the lower end models is they are basically crippled versions of their big brothers. same hardware, you just have to pay more to use it to full advantage.
post #13 of 19
Canon sd970 - 10 Meg, 5 x optical, and fantastic video quality. Put it in a Mountainsmith small pouch attached to a shoulder strap on your pack and you have great pictures instantly available no matter what sport you're dealing with.

G9 also a great choice to be able to shoot ram, but it's a bit bigger and you'll feel it on your shoulder strap.
post #14 of 19
easy solution get a DSLR so you can get rid of your saddle bag.
post #15 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
easy solution get a DSLR so you can get rid of your saddle bag.
I was using a loaner bick and I didn't have any pockets so thats is why I had the saddle bag. Flava, I pus the blue SB on the BEnz, in case you were wondering . Well, it turns out the camera DIDN'T fall out of the SB, I forgot it up at the water ramps. As Bob said, I retraced my steps and went up to the ramps and sure enough it was right where I left it!. On the way back down, I did meet a new friend, they are so cute at this age, you just want to pick them up and cuddle them.


post #16 of 19
very cool pics phil. Havent seen a bear in utah yet....
post #17 of 19

g9 is not SLR-quality

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgiddyup View Post
Canon Powershot G9!!!

SLR quality photos and most of the flexibility with a powerful zoom and you can still put it in the pocket of your ski jacket.
g9 is not nearly SLR quality (if you think so, you need to upgrade your SLR ;-). It is also too big for a true point and shoot. My solution is to carry a small Canon Elph point and shoot all the time and take out my SLR when I feel like taking pictures. See the critical advantage of the SLR is not in the image quality, it is in the speed of oepration and no point and shoot will give you that. So if you are not using an SLR you might as well get something that will be small, light and easy to use.
Here is an example of the SLR picture:






Alex

P.S. the only point and shoot currently that provides SLR-like image quality is the Sigma DP1 and it is not something I would take skiing- too clumsy, too slow, too dependent on user input, and too expensive to fall on and break. It is also a "real" camera, and many times when you ski you just want to take out your camera, and press the button using gloved fingers without worrying about the camera settings, modes, or focus points. Sigma would hate that.
post #18 of 19
Glad you found your camera!
Did you know Brown Bears are Meat Eaters? Just thought you should know
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
I was using a loaner bick and I didn't have any pockets so thats is why I had the saddle bag. Flava, I pus the blue SB on the BEnz, in case you were wondering . Well, it turns out the camera DIDN'T fall out of the SB, I forgot it up at the water ramps. As Bob said, I retraced my steps and went up to the ramps and sure enough it was right where I left it!. On the way back down, I did meet a new friend, they are so cute at this age, you just want to pick them up and cuddle them.


post #19 of 19
Thread Starter 
I really an not supposed to have that camera...I left it at the condo we were staying at.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: