Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Digital P&S cameras...the BEST so far...  (Read 19997 times)
Dave Millier
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 120


WWW
« Reply #40 on: May 25, 2008, 10:01:50 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm certainly not one to defend the honour of the Sigma DP1 but I think it is important to get the facts straight at least. The DP1 uses the same sensor as the SD14. It may be "only" 4.7MP but the image quality is impressive in suitable conditions.

You might like to take a look at my comparison of image quality between the 4.7MP SD14 (Foveon) and 14MP (bayer CFA) Kodak SLR/n here:

http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/scans/sd14vs14nx.htm

Quote
The Sigma is similar by having a film-like sensor, but the SD-14 is pricey and not a P&S camera.  And 4.6 actual MP is too low to really look good, IMO - you need 8MP worth of actual sensor locations at least to resolve finer details.

ie - the Sigma looks exactly like film.  Just like you're shooting that crummy APS film or 110 in a pocket camera.  Better than digital?  Absolutely.  Too low resolution to be useful?  That, too.  Real shame, actually.
Logged

My website and photo galleries: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/
sojournerphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 473


« Reply #41 on: May 25, 2008, 01:09:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have the GX100 and theres no doubt is a nice camera, and I'm sure comparable to other P&S cameras.

When I went to University, my Mum and Dad gave me an Olympus trip.  I used it mainly with B&W film. I had some great photos with that camera. Thirty years later, I have negatives from it that I would happily enlarge to 20x24 and put on the wall.

Funny, I can't see that ever happening with the output from the GX100. 

If I needed something to stuff in a shirt pocket in the way suggested, I'd rather it was shot on something like the Rollei 35s, or even perhaps an Olympus trip!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197831\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


You might be pleasantly surprised at what size you can enlarge the GX100 output to is you're careful about how you shoot and how you enlarge. At iso 80 it's not actually that noisy and the lens quality is good. As the iso goes up, of course, noise becomes more evident but files can still be useable.

I've just printed a 21 by 14 (I know that's not 24 by 20) from the GX100 and it's exactly what I was trying to achieve - not 5D or 1Ds3 style, but a nice presentation. The raw file is fairly agressively worked for contrast. Another B&W print at 15 by 10 from a slight crop, shot at iso200 shows a very fine grain, but actually I would almost like more on this shot and will probably run it at 18 by 12 in due course.

Just give it a go and see what you get. It's not 35mm film, but I've been very pleasantly surprised (and I use the aformentioned 5D and 1Ds3 as well)

Now I'll just let everyone else get on with the brand wars - I suspect that the same could be said about any of the makes listed.

Mike
Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #42 on: May 25, 2008, 01:28:41 PM »
ReplyReply

People are a lot more intelligent than a lot of folks give them credit for.  A major indicator of intelligence is curiosity, and a major indicator of curiosity is the desire to see what most ordinary people don't see, i.e. the very small and the small-due-to-distance.  Hence the macros and telephotos, which bring the intel to people with small cameras that they can afford, and can carry at all times.  The Canon G9 is an excellent example where you can increase your intelligence.  Other models - YMMV.
Logged
mrleonard
Guest
« Reply #43 on: May 25, 2008, 10:28:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
People are a lot more intelligent than a lot of folks give them credit for.  A major indicator of intelligence is curiosity, and a major indicator of curiosity is the desire to see what most ordinary people don't see, i.e. the very small and the small-due-to-distance.  Hence the macros and telephotos, which bring the intel to people with small cameras that they can afford, and can carry at all times.  The Canon G9 is an excellent example where you can increase your intelligence.  Other models - YMMV.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197897\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Gee..I thought intelligence could be measured by ones interpretation of the everyday..what everyone sees...and then seeing something that the others are missing. The use of strong composition and interpretation of content to make a strong visual statment that transcends it's 'everyday' character.

Not sticking a camera in front of a bug...

i.e. maybe wide angle too?  lol  (arc d' triomphe)[attachment=6773:attachment]
Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #44 on: May 26, 2008, 12:55:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Curiosity and intelligence are not elitist, i.e. thinking you can "see" what others can't or won't.  It's about small amounts of inspiration followed by hard work.
Logged
JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #45 on: May 26, 2008, 07:00:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Gee..I thought intelligence could be measured by ones interpretation of the everyday..what everyone sees...and then seeing something that the others are missing. The use of strong composition and interpretation of content to make a strong visual statment that transcends it's 'everyday' character.

Not sticking a camera in front of a bug...



Actually, intelligence is measured by a man's ability to think independently and to make correct associations in his thinking.

Speaking of intelligence and relating it to what one sees every day, when a grown man has been surrounded by words every day ... and yet he still can't spell them correctly ... even to the extent he forgets to place apostrophes where they belong (and places other apostrophes where they don't belong) ... then one has to seriously question that man's intelligence.

Jack
Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #46 on: May 26, 2008, 07:32:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Here are a couple of illustrations of my challenges with little cameras, in this case a Panasonic TZ5.  28-280mm lens (35mm equiv.).

The landscape was shot in very good light about an hour before sunset, and cropped to 3072x2304, then reduced in size to 2048x1536.  You can still see the effects of aggressive noise reduction in the "leaves" on the trees, for example.  This is why I say that the wide angle in small cameras (lesser cameras than the Canon G9 mostly) is basically useless, since landscapes of this kind mostly produce pixel smear, making a 9mp camera effectively a 3mp camera.

The bee was also shot in bright light, and while the quality and clarity of some of the image isn't the best, it still shows what's possible with a little camera when you have a long zoom like 280mm.
Logged
JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #47 on: May 26, 2008, 09:59:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Not sticking a camera in front of a bug...



I agree with you that it takes virtually no intelligence whatsoever for me to place a camera before a bug and push a button; it is only my appreciation for the intelligence of Nature (God, whatever your beliefs are) that prompts me to do so. I merely use my camera to attempt to preserve the majesty and beauty I see outside in the world around me when I feel truly moved by it. My reverence is for Nature not anything I do.

However, if there "is" any human intelligence involved in the photography I attempt to take, then I defer it to the geniuses who first invented the digial camera to begin with, and to those who have followed and refined the designs of these tools, so that I as a layman can merely push a button and preserve the things in life that I find extraordinary. Any further genius would rest with the designers of Photoshop, and the computer/software on which it runs, who have enabled me to sit there and tinker with my images until they suit me.

I am not so arrogant as to compare my paltry intelligence to what truly has dwarfed it by comparison.




Quote
i.e. maybe wide angle too? lol (arc d' triomphe)

Well, here again Mr. Leonard, it is all a matter of perspective. In my opinion, the actual architect of that construct, the engineers and master builders ... the ones who actually planned, designed, and created that beautiful structure ... are the truly talented and intelligent parties behind what you have merely recorded digitally. If there is any further intelligence behind your image than this, then again such intelligence would rest with the designers of your particular camera, as well as with the designers of the software and computer you use yourself.

But I suppose you think that because "you" happened to walk underneath this object, looked up and pushed a button on your very complex tool you call a camera (and tinkered with it on your computer) ... that you feel "you" are the genius here today ... because you happened to notice some symmetry above you.

That's funny

Jack
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 10:45:58 AM by JohnKoerner » Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #48 on: May 26, 2008, 03:27:07 PM »
ReplyReply

In fairness to the people who hang out here, most or all of them care about the images they produce, and it's just that - caring - that makes the difference worth paying some attention to.  My biggest ongoing gripe is the myopia that declares (universally it would seem among the "critics") that little cameras should have wide-angle lenses to capture "landscapes".  That opinion I think is absurd, but other than the unwashed masses who are buying the superzooms in droves, I've gotten no support on my contention.
Logged
JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #49 on: May 26, 2008, 05:02:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In fairness to the people who hang out here, most or all of them care about the images they produce, and it's just that - caring - that makes the difference worth paying some attention to.

Of course we care about our images, but the degree to which we "care" is what varies. Some people are sooo focused on absolutely perfect images, and sooo overly concerned about the technical craft of photography, that they forget to have fun taking pictures

It's like the difference between professional football and enjoying a game of football with your sons or friends: the professionals are so serious about the business of football that it is no longer a fun sport anymore. By contrast, you and your kids can just relax and have a fun game ...

At the end of the day, it's all about money. If I am playing football for millions, and scores of people are watching, I have to be deadly serious about my business, which means I have to throw the fun out the window. But when I play football recreationally, there is nothing like that distracting me, so we all can actually just have fun

In the same fashion, I do not try to make money with my photos, and I have no intention of doing so, which allows me just to enjoy my camera ... and I wouldn't have it any other way




Quote
My biggest ongoing gripe is the myopia that declares (universally it would seem among the "critics") that little cameras should have wide-angle lenses to capture "landscapes". That opinion I think is absurd, but other than the unwashed masses who are buying the superzooms in droves, I've gotten no support on my contention.

Well, you raise a very good point -- here and in the previous posts. A 28 mm lens doesn't do for me what my eyes themselves can't already do for me: see a landscape. If I decide to photograph a landscape, it is merely an attempt to preserve what I see as I see it (either commercially or for pleasure).

However, with macro and zoom, these tools allow me to see the world differently. They amplify my own eyesight, allowing me to see the world more closely and intensely than I ever could without them. I can't stick my eye up to a tiny organism and see it in the same detail as I can with a macro photograph ... and by the same token I can't project my eye up close to a beautiful songbird up on a tree to see it up close either. Therefore, I agree with you, these tools (macro and telephoto) are therefore the most important tools of the high-end P&S camera to the average person.

This is not to undermine the tremendous work done with landscape and seascape at all. But it is a fact that these kinds of photo merely allow us to preserve what we already can see, as we see it, to where we can transfer the experience to be appreciated by others. Macro and telephoto are greater than this: they enable us a similar transference of experience, yes, but they also amplify our ability to appreciate the world along with it.

So good point.




.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 05:07:57 PM by JohnKoerner » Logged
mrleonard
Guest
« Reply #50 on: May 26, 2008, 06:16:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Speaking of intelligence and relating it to what one sees every day, when a grown man has been surrounded by words every day ... and yet he still can't spell them correctly ... even to the extent he forgets to place apostrophes where they belong (and places other apostrophes where they don't belong) ... then one has to seriously question that man's intelligence.

Jack
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=198027\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Actually..I think I do quite well ,considering im dyslexic and I don't use spellcheck.

Nice do btw Jack, at least you don't look like the rapist anymore...opps  I meant a 'therapist'...spellcheck! darn...
Logged
JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #51 on: May 26, 2008, 06:48:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Actually..I think I do quite well ,considering im dyslexic and I don't use spellcheck.

That's funny, last time you said your "keyboard" was making you spell poorly, but now it's an inherited conditition combined with an unused software function  




Quote
Nice do btw Jack, at least you don't look like the rapist anymore...opps  I meant a 'therapist'...spellcheck! darn...

Mr. Leonard, I am sure you are a much more intelligent person than your spelling and philosophy suggest, and I am equally sure that if we were in person looking each other in the eye that you would be a much more pleasant individual to communicate with than what is being offered here. No doubt we would be discussing our differences as gentlemen over some tea and pound cake.

If you are satisfied with your LX2 then I am happy for you, because on my end I am more than satisfied with my G9.

It has been an interesting discussion and thanks for offering your review.

Jack




.
Logged
mrleonard
Guest
« Reply #52 on: May 26, 2008, 07:18:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
That's funny, last time you said your "keyboard" was making you spell poorly, but now it's an inherited conditition combined with an unused software function  
Mr. Leonard, I am sure you are a much more intelligent person than your spelling and philosophy suggest, and I am equally sure that if we were in person looking each other in the eye that you would be a much more pleasant individual to communicate with than what is being offered here. No doubt we would be discussing our differences as gentlemen over some tea and pound cake.

If you are satisfied with your LX2 then I am happy for you, because on my end I am more than satisfied with my G9.

It has been an interesting discussion and thanks for offering your review.

Jack
.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=198186\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's because it's nobodies bizness jackjohn.

You have bean anything but a gentleman and donut think wearing an english fruitcap can change that.

We tirelessly hear and get bugged out by your G9 lovin...it grows reelly tired actually. My conparisons are based from reality...from owning and using the kameras. KNOT gleaned from ...gee,actually...where do you get all your data and infomation...youre' like a living libary...oh wait...the INTERNET. Very original...
Logged
mrleonard
Guest
« Reply #53 on: May 26, 2008, 07:26:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Gee..I thought intelligence could be measured by ones interpretation of the everyday..what everyone sees...and then seeing something that the others are missing. The use of strong composition and interpretation of content to make a strong visual statment that transcends it's 'everyday' character.

Not sticking a camera in front of a bug...

i.e. maybe wide angle too?  lol  (arc d' triomphe)[attachment=6773:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=197984\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I was subbing intelligence for creativity actually... There's no point to correlate one's lens choice to intelligence....thats nuts. Of course I'll  only get flack from cornhole from this oversight...
Logged
mrleonard
Guest
« Reply #54 on: May 26, 2008, 07:31:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you are satisfied with your LX2 then I am happy for you, because on my end I am more than satisfied with my G9.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=198186\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I am actually not satisfied with my LX2. Just that I use it more than my G9 because of it's size and 28mm lens. I couldn't give a rats ass who makes what. I'd prefer my GX100 but I find the build quality a bit flimsy. I don't baby my cameras...I out then in my jacket pocket without a case.

Clear yet?
Logged
mrleonard
Guest
« Reply #55 on: May 26, 2008, 07:48:50 PM »
ReplyReply

And finally...could you PLEASE  just ignore me jackjohn. You SEE I started the thread....just stay out of it. I don't care for you or your opinions..really.
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4891



« Reply #56 on: May 27, 2008, 06:27:59 AM »
ReplyReply

OK kids. If you can't play nice, no supper.

Michael
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad