If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
if you think memory sticks are expensive, check out the prices on XD cards.
But it doesn't matter after all, just get a X-drive and don't pay for extra proprietary cards. "Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message ... It's pretty silly to take someone to task for "possibly" quoting hearsay and then closing with a statement starting with "From what I've heard". Presumably your photo skills are better than your reasoning skills. At the risk of being burned at the stake for my own heretical opinion, I'll venture that anyone truly serious about photography should first consider companies with a significant history of designing and building serious cameras and not film companies or consumer electronis outfits who try to assemble them from other peoples parts. Which would lead me to look at Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Olympus and Pentax and away from Kodak, Sony, Fuji, Casio, HP, Panasonic, Toshiba, Samsung. OTOH, I couldn't agree more that Sony continues to try and lock people into their proprietary memory sticks, just like they've done before with products like Betamax and MD disks. They've always been great innovators with killer products like the VCR, Walkman, Vaio notebook computers and most recently in the Palm OS world, but they really don't want to fit in with anyone else. I think they are as much to blame as any other single company for there not being a unified DVDR standard either, although they can share some of the blame there with a few others. Tom P. "Wolverine" wrote in message From what I heard, this camera is not bad at all, it just needs the operator to really know what he is doing. Default settings are not the best settings. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
I love posters who have all the answers but no names.
Me, I think the digital camera differs from a film camera only in the storage medium really. From a functional aspect they are very much the same. And the same ergonomics apply to both as well; the ability to easily and intuitively control the many aspects of photography. If you only want to take snapshots, a good AF and exposure system and an easy to reach shutter button are all that really matter, but for more serious efforts design and engineering play an important role, and I believe companies who have a significant experience in those areas generally make more usable products. Not always, but more often than the newcomers. Panasonic does have Leica lenses. They even make the Digilux for Leica. They don't have any appreciable market share though, so apparently most of us weren't convinced. Sony has Zeiss lenses, but most serious photographers making the switch to digital are buying interchangeable lens DSLRs, not the 717/828. Megapixels are great for the "mine's bigger than yours" crowd, but I think the advanced amateurs and certainly pros want the flexibilty of a camera SYSTEM, with lots of lens choices, flashes and other useful stuff, not some all-in-one solution with screw-on Titanium fish-eye attachments. You didn't mention it, but Kodak has Schneider optics, but I'll take a Powershot or Coolpix any day to a Kodak. Don't get me wrong, Sony, Fuji and others make some very usable products with some nifty features. But if you're serious about photography, you should be pragmatic in your choice of manufacturer. At least that's my opinion. Tom P. "Enter Your Full Name" wrote in message ... You're probably best also not listening to the opinions of dinosaur's too much. The digital camera is very different to film cameras, not only that but business is different. Alot of the cameras user the same manufacturer's sensors. Panasonic cameras have Leica lenses, Sony have Zeiss. It isn't that important who makes the camera - decide on what features you need, identify which models satisfy those requirements, read several reviews and owners opinions, and most important - go to a shop and try them out. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
DSLR certainly is the way to go if you are serious and if you have the $$$.
But I don't see why a powershot or coolpix is certainly better than a F707/717/828. I am not say G3 or 5700 are not great cameras, but I am not thrilled with a small lens rotating out every time you turn on the camera, and I am not thrilled with their built qualities either. Most times, non-major brands cameras are not worth a try, but F707/717/828 are exceptions. Yashica T4 was a great P&S although Yashica is not a big player either. "Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message ... I love posters who have all the answers but no names. Me, I think the digital camera differs from a film camera only in the storage medium really. From a functional aspect they are very much the same. And the same ergonomics apply to both as well; the ability to easily and intuitively control the many aspects of photography. If you only want to take snapshots, a good AF and exposure system and an easy to reach shutter button are all that really matter, but for more serious efforts design and engineering play an important role, and I believe companies who have a significant experience in those areas generally make more usable products. Not always, but more often than the newcomers. Panasonic does have Leica lenses. They even make the Digilux for Leica. They don't have any appreciable market share though, so apparently most of us weren't convinced. Sony has Zeiss lenses, but most serious photographers making the switch to digital are buying interchangeable lens DSLRs, not the 717/828. Megapixels are great for the "mine's bigger than yours" crowd, but I think the advanced amateurs and certainly pros want the flexibilty of a camera SYSTEM, with lots of lens choices, flashes and other useful stuff, not some all-in-one solution with screw-on Titanium fish-eye attachments. You didn't mention it, but Kodak has Schneider optics, but I'll take a Powershot or Coolpix any day to a Kodak. Don't get me wrong, Sony, Fuji and others make some very usable products with some nifty features. But if you're serious about photography, you should be pragmatic in your choice of manufacturer. At least that's my opinion. Tom P. "Enter Your Full Name" wrote in message ... You're probably best also not listening to the opinions of dinosaur's too much. The digital camera is very different to film cameras, not only that but business is different. Alot of the cameras user the same manufacturer's sensors. Panasonic cameras have Leica lenses, Sony have Zeiss. It isn't that important who makes the camera - decide on what features you need, identify which models satisfy those requirements, read several reviews and owners opinions, and most important - go to a shop and try them out. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Larry Lynch" wrote in message . .. The Sony 707 had color problems that are almost as bad as the D9, but it seems to have been corrected in the 717 (with judicious use of manual white balance). True. every model has some flaws, especially at this price. For example, G3 has AF issue and G5 is just noisy. The 828 is a real gamble for two reasons: 1. It is a totally new sensor, untried by anyone except Sony. Every new technology is untried. 2. Its going to sell for $900 (US). It will come down. Buy the F717 (for $550 or even less) if you are price sensitive. Dont miss-understand me, I TRULY LOVE my 717, but I wouldn't put my trust in SONY for even a FEW dollars. They have blown it before in other areas, they could very well blow it with digital cameras. I think the Fxxx series has been a success so far. I don't know what you mean by "blow it". I haven't and will not touch Sony MD stuff or their PC or laptop. But a non-DSLR digital camera is just a camera. There is no continuition, no long-term compatibility issue to consider. Just like G3, G5, 5700, 5050, or all other non-DSLR digital cameras, you replace it whole once they get outdated. You are not making any long-term commitment by buying them. So just make your decision on whether you like to features on the model you are looking at. Raising the bar to 8 mp doesn't impress me all that much. I've said it before and repeat it now, I dont count pixels, I look at the pretty pictures. Agree. I dont mind spending a long hot humid day at a horse show (12 to 14 hours somedays) just to get a few good shots of a champion doing his (or her) thing, its part of the price of getting a good picture. I do mind spending dollars I've earned on an untried camera that is over-priced to begin with. Only the rich consumers buy new models right after they are marketed. If you don't want untried camera, then don't get the 300D because it is the first sub $1000 DSLR, and the lens in the package is the first of that format in the Canon line. The price point of the 828 is well into the range where you could be shopping for a DSLR, and unless the 828 can do something no other camera can do, its priced too high by about $300 (US). Wrong. Only 300D is available at a bit over that price. However, if you want to get the same focal coverage, you need to get another tele lens, a quality one will be $300+ extra. 828 and 300D are for different types of consumers. I believe a lot of people are "one-lens-for-all" type and they won't appreciate 300D. If, after a few months on the market the 828 shows me anything, and the price drops (a lot) I might consider one, 'till then, its just so much smoke & mirrors, and I'll continue to look for my first DSLR. Just keep waiting, everything will be cheaper. IMHO if the 828 were all that great they'de have done what it takes to get it to market by Christmas. Stalling the release as they have, Sony is sending me a message. I could be wrong but to me the message says "There is a fatal flaw in this camera, we are trying to do a last minute fix". "Last minute fixes" are for hay balers, and lawn mowers (stuff you can work on with a hammer and wrench) NOT for digital cameras. -- It could be one of so many other reasons, such as clearing F717 inventory, timing holiday season, etc. PS: to all you may well have noticed, I have NO BRAND LOYALTY WHAT- SO-EVER. I have been a long time Canon user, although I have used a couple of Nikon, Leica, and own a Sony now. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
I only ever remember ONE other brand of BETA recorder TOSHIBA. Sanyo and Marantz as well. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
I have A 5700 and it takes great pics. It is my first digital and a bit
complicated when indoors since you have to play with settings in order to get a great med - low light picture but a external flash helped greatly!! worth considering! "Q. Lu" wrote in message ... "Allen Worthington" wrote in message ... If you're partial to Nikon and can wait six months or so, Nikon plans to release a lower priced SLR using the same 6mp sensor as the D100. John Wait for the Nikon. They are far superior when it comes to lens selection than Canon ever was. I would spring for the D100 if you can swing it. I am not sure about the "far superior" remark. Nikkor lenses may have a slight edge over Canon in terms of selection (maybe even quality as some people would argue), but not by much. Nikkors are more expensive that I know. If you are willing to go third parties, then there are plenty of selections with either brand. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Telesensory Voyager XL CCD Optical magnification system, Model # XL3A. | M.Roy | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | February 25th 04 10:24 PM |
Small claims model help | mp | General Equipment For Sale | 1 | November 26th 03 01:56 AM |
Trade Nikon 14mm AFD f2.8 ED (current Model) for | Gwen & Franc Flipsen | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | September 7th 03 11:16 PM |
Trade Nikon 14mm AFD f2.8 ED (current Model) for | Gwen & Franc Flipsen | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | September 7th 03 11:16 PM |
Trade Nikon 14mm AFD f2.8 ED (current Model) for | Gwen & Franc Flipsen | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | September 7th 03 11:16 PM |