motography, cameras, gear and chatter

[Supersignet]

Best Budget Cam now has got to be the Sony NEX-3 or the Samsung NX100. Both are excellent choices. The Sony is smaller than the Samsung by just a little, but the Samsung is cheaper by about 100 bucks. Both cameras do great video, are pocketable in a larger pocket / tank bag and both have APS-C size sensors, good ISO range and interchangeable lenses

[Gardo]

I've used the Midland XTC-100 to shoot all my ride videos and what not. great little camera easy slide on off button uses 2 AAA bateries and up to a 32GB Micro SD card.

the pros - which some are listed up top are that its small easy to use no drivers to install. Comes with all the mounting equipment you can think of

the cons - batteries only last 2 hrs, it only shoots in AVI format breaks videos into 2GB 30 min segments, Micro SD sold separately

A non issue was that i needed to add a piece of electrical tape over the Mic, which is still sensitive, to stop the whistle in the videos from the wind

I bought mine from Amazon for $72.00 USD and the Micro SD was $10.00 USD for a 16GB chip.

I'm happy with the camera and plan to get a second one

[MissRose]

Hi guys!

So my point&shoot Sony cybershot 14.1MP just died on me, which (I feel) allows me to buy a REAL camera. The problem is that I've been way out of the scene since analog film when I had an old fashioned Pentax...
What to buy? I want my options and would love to be able to switch lenses, but it also has to be affortable... and look good.... and make great pics of course... and not be gianormous...
I saw the new Fuji X10 and love it, love it, love it, but no switching lenses of any kind (it's like a grown up version of a P&S cam)
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1109/11...x10.asp#images

Recommendations????

[euphonius]

"Which camera?" is probably as volatile a subject as "which oil" or even "which bike" -- a topic that can destroy friendships. Few of us have used many cameras, and we tend to like the one(s) we have, unless, in rare instances, we don't. I'm like you, started with film in a totally manual Pentax SLR, with a bunch of lenses. That was a long time ago, when there was film.

In recent years I've used DSLRs, chiefly Nikon's pathbreaking D70. But I really tired of carrying body and lenses. Great pix, but so much compromise. Only the very best zooms don't suck, so you carry numerous fixed focal length lenses. This sucks. The SLR itself is big and bulky, which sucks. But with the right combo, great pix.

For several years, I dealt with the klunkiness factor by carrying a little P&S, a Canon Powershot something or other. And though the quality of the images was inferior to the big Nikon, I found myself taking a lot more pix. And finding that the quality of a well-composed snapshot, though inferior against some absolute standard, was often good enough. Not publishable (and I'm a journalist/publisher, so this is an issue), but great for capturing stuff on the fly when it's near impossible to pull out the big gun unless you have it slung around your neck at all times, which sucks.

Gradually, I tired of taking work pix for my magazines, but also thought, is there a smaller camera that could, in a pinch, deliver pix that could be used in my magazines, which, since the are covering various forms of surgery are never going to win photojournalism awards anyway. I took my time, but finally acted when the bag with my little Canon got nicked.

I went for the Canon G11, for a bunch of reasons. It's got a lot of glass -- a very big, relatively fast lens. And though it has great automatic features, particularly exposure and focus, you can also run it in a totally selectable array of semi- and fully manual modes. I'm not talking about scene modes, which can also be handy. I'm talking about standard aperture priority, shutter priority or fully manual, with white balance control, selectable or auto ISO, etc. And even when I'm letting the camera set exposure, it's got a handy compensation dial, so if I know it's over or underexposing in high-contrast situations, I can compensate.

The G11 turns out to be a very good compromise. It's not a small or light camera; it's got a metal body, so it's tough. It fits great in my hands, the controls are mostly very accessible (though I sometimes inadvertently bump the the dial on the back). In motography terms, I can grip the G11 in my clutch hand from the back while riding at speed, with my thumb underneath and fingers curling over the top, clawlike, and operate the shutter with my left index finger. I've made some amazing pix that way (check out our Slabbing to Moganshan thread last fall to see what I'm talking about).

In proper light and if I carefully control the exposure, I can get shallow depth of field, with just a narrow band in focus and foreground and background unfocused, but the results are not as predictable as with a DSLR. Finally, I find myself using the rangefinder quite a bit, rather than framing with the video display. Yet there are often instances where the display is a lifesaver; the display flips out and can rotate through a wide range, so you can use it to look around corners, over people's heads or between people's legs!

In January Canon launched the G12, which is a relatively minor update, with more video modes and stereo sound, but not a lot of changes from the G11. The change from G10 to G11 was much bigger, and had a really big breakthrough: Canon reduced the number of pixels, finally abandoning the disingenuous and unrelenting race for bigger pixel counts, as if this had anything to do with resolution and sharpness; the G10 had 14 megapixels, while the G11 has only 10, and the improvements in quality were substantial!

So it's a compromise, but a good one. Since you are nearly 180cm, I'm guessing your hands are not small, so a bigger camera will be easier and less delicate to handle.

My brother uses one of the Sony NEX cameras, which have interchangeable lenses but only a video screen (and maybe a rangefinder) for framing; the camera body is as small as a P&S because it doesn't have the big mirror assembly of an SLR. So that's also a compromise, as there are many situations where it's nearly impossible to frame pix with a display.

If you'd like to play around with my G11 or my D70, do let me know.

cheers!

[MissRose]

Thank you so much for this reply! You're great, you know that!
I def want to play with your G11! Back home I also have a chunky analog Nikon lying around somewhere and I hardly ever used it because I had to carry too much around. What I loved about my old Pentax was that it was a great size, easy in use, half auto/full manual and the looks of course. The Nikon just made it too complicated for me (mind: I like it simple and this Nikon came with half digital setting things that I couldn't possibly find the patience to decipher)
What I like about this Fuji X10 is that it's small (so it'll fit in my "handbag"), it seems easy to use, it has the viewfinder we love, a good lens as far as I can tell and it looks good (the X100 looks even better, but besides the bigger sensor not much better than the X10 although bigger and twice the price). Then again, it might be too small, esp on the bike with gloves on...
But it has manual, and how I loved to fiddle with that!
Secretely I almost already have my heart set on the Fuji X10, but I have to make sure I guess.... Maybe I'll fall in love with your G11!

[felix]

I'll just quickly throw in a good word for the Panasonic LX5. Though that X10 looks like a great camera, i love wide lenses. The LX5 has a 24mm equivalent at its widest, which is the widest of any of the cameras mentioned in this thread. For taking pictures of architecture it just great, you get much more in the picture; and on the road you can get shots like this.



It's also got full manual control and all that, plus i love those sliders on the lens to quickly change picture format and focus settings. Welcome to try it out also!

[MissRose]

The Panasonic looks great, but according to the specs I found, your lens is acutally eq. 35 and so is the Fuji
panasonic specs http://www.dpreview.com/news/1007/10...onicdmclx5.asp
fuji specs http://www.dpreview.com/news/1109/11...x10.asp#images
Or did I get confused?
The Panasonic zoom is twice that of the Fuji but the Fuji's sensor is almost twice that of the Panasonic.... Isn't the sensor important with digi cams?
I'm all conflicted now, cuz the Panasonic is also cheaper and it has all these scene modes (although I've never really used those on my P&S cam...)
I guess I'll have to hold them in my hands. Compared I think both cams are equaly good, having different (tho not too diff) pro's and cons

[euphonius]

MissRose, as noted in my lengthy post, do not confuse high pixel count with quality of sensor. It's largely a marketing gimmick, and, in fact, the more pixels the companies try to cram onto their sensors, the more likely quality is to degrade. You want 10m good pixels, not 14m shoddy ones. (Check out this blog to learn more...)

Yes, you need to get the cameras into your hands, and also upload your pix onto a computer with a very good display, in order to understand their strengths. Take your time.

[slabo]

Whatever camera you buy, please invest in a good protective case from to always house it from day1. My Panasonic DMC-TZ15 was reduced to a point, hope and shoot because I destroyed the LCD screen. It still shoots ok, but I have no idea what settings I'm using.

[felix]

Or did I get confused?

You did indeed. The panasonic has 24mm equivalent at its widest, the fuji, canon and nikon all have 28mm equiv. And as euphonious noted, number of pixels is not important. It's the physical size of the sensor that makes a big difference; cramming loads of pixels into a tiny sensor just adds noise and wastes space on your card. The LX5 has 10mp and i even think it's too much.