Ultra Compact Camera for low light conditions [Archive] - Digital Camera Resource Page Forums

View Full Version : Ultra Compact Camera for low light conditions

madkat

12-11-2005, 02:05 AM

Hi everyone,

Long time reader first time poster. Been looking into buying a ultra compact camera and well with the wide range of models and features I'm having a little trouble deciding which model to buy.

I'm looking for something that'll take nice indoor shots (low lighting) and hopefully some outdoor scenary shots when I go backpacking in europe next year ~:p

Please have read of the questionnaire I have answered and see if you can help. Cheers :D

Madkat

P.S first time poster, please be gentle if I've said something stupid

Budget

* What budget have you allocated for buying this camera? Please be as specific as possible.

$400-450

Size

* What size camera are you looking for? Or does size not matter at all to you?

Ultra Compact

Features

How many megapixels will suffice for you?

5-6 Mega pixel

* What optical zoom will you need? (None, Standard = 3x-4x, Ultrazoom = 10x-12x, Other - Specify)

3x

* How important is “image quality” to you? (Rate using a scale of 1-10)

8.5-9: Image quality is pretty important, I will be using the camera in low light conditions (i.e. clubs, family dinner outings and what not)

Do you care for manual controls?

Manual controls would be nice, but I know that most ultracompacts are 'point and shoot' and don't have manual controls

General Usage

* What will you generally use the camera for?
Out doors and indoor low lighting conditions (with flash), people and landscape

* Will you be making big prints of your photos or not?
Not likely, but if some photos are really nice maybe... It probably won't be bigger than A4 though

Will you be shooting a lot of indoor photos or low light photos?
As stated before there'll probably be alot of low light conditions, ie at clubs and maybe outdoor city areas

Will you be shooting sports and/or action photos?
I probably won't be taking alot of sports shots, however 'action' shots are likely

Miscellaneous

Are there particular brands you like or hate?
Been looking at Sony cameras, only because I already have a 2Gb MS stick duo pro (Thanks to psp)

Are there particular models you already have in mind?
Sony DSC-T9
I like the 'Super SteadyShot', which should help in taking photos in low light conditions. It's got a fairly good battery life and a small form factor. Still waiting for Jeff's final review on image quality and perhaps comments on performance in low light conditions.

Panasonic DMC-FX9
Been looking at this camera as well, since it also sports the Image stabliser system, good battery life and image quality. I'm worried about the purple fringing, slower startup time (compared to DSC-T9) and its performance in low light conditions. Can any owner verifiy it's performance in low light conditions?

Canon SD450
Haven't really read much into it, but I was recommended to purchase this camera over the Panasonic and Sony. The sales person said that Canon cameras are usually better because it is what they specialise it. Having a brief look into a few of the review, I'm worried about the average battery life (150 compared to Sony's 240 and Panasonics' 270), since I still have a s45 which just chews up its battery. On the positive side, I think it's performance it good in low lighting which is definately a plus.

I might have missed other models, so if you know any that will suit my use, please do let me know :)

(If applicable) Do you need any of the following special features? (Wide Angle, Image Stabilization, Weatherproof, Hotshoe, Rotating LCD)

Image Stabilization, from what I've seen in the reviews, it looks like this feature really helps when taking photos indoors. Does any one know if the performance is improved when using the flash?

Jason25

12-11-2005, 11:54 AM

For low-light shooting, you might also consider the Fuji F10, since it has higher image quality at higher ISO levels.

Rex914

12-11-2005, 12:44 PM

Fuji F10, but it's also worth looking at that Sony because I'd take IS over high ISO provided that the image quality is inherently comparable.

JungleRoom

12-11-2005, 02:00 PM

Since I didn't get any replies in my thread I want to ask the same question here because I guess it's the same one that madkat is askin:

So here's the deal: I'm about to buy my first digital camera. I need something good (my budget goes up to 550 dollars) but at the same time something extra small. In other words I need a good ultracompact camera. I'd keep it with me almost always (I'd keep it in the inner pocket of my jacket or something) and especially when my and my boys go on a night on the town. Here's three possible scenarios where I would need the camera:

1) My and my boys have just come out of a bar and are on the street in the middle of winter (bare in mind I'm talking about Finland now, so the winter's are dark and cold). The street lights are on and suddenly we feel the urge to start fooling around: making funny faces or somersaults. Of course, this is where I need the camera.

2) I'm at someone's house having a party. The lights are dimmed a little bit and of course I want to take some pics of my friends.

3) I'm in my room, the lights are on and I want to take pics of my cat jumping around chasing her fake-mouse.

I bet at least someone immediately says that ultracompact is totally the wrong way to go if I want to take pics in kinda low-light situations outdoors. Well, this may be the case sometimes, but I really need an ultracompact because it HAS TO FIT IN MY POCKET WITHOUT FEELING LIKE A STONE or something. On the other hand, my friend takes pics outside in the night when it's cold and snow is on the ground and he has this camera:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec...ony_dscu20.asp

So if a 2-3-year old 2MP camera can take acceptable pics in winter in the night in kinda low-light situation (though the street lights are on) then I'll bet the modern ultracompacts can do an even better job.

Okey, so I have other criterias as well. The ultracompact must be available in black (or in black/silver) and it must be at least somewhat stylish. One of my criteria was that the camera has to be an all-weather model due to the fact that I'm using it in Finland in winter (don't want the cold to ruin the camera) but someone told me that if, say, a mobile phone can survive the winter, so can the camera. So I guess I don't need the all-weather feature.

Right now, I have three choices and one that is kinda uncertain.
1) Sony DSC-T9
I know pros don't like Sony very much and their T-line is somewhat toyish. But still T-line gets kinda good reviews all the time. Ts are very stylish and I like the fact that T9 has that lens cover thingy (as I'd keep it in my pocket, I wouldn't want the lens to get scratches). In a review of a very big mag here in Finland, T9 won the test in its price class (though together with Panasonic FX9). T9, due to its form, would fit great in my pocket.
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/so...ew/index.shtml

2) Panasonic DMC FX9
This camera is a multiple test winner here in Finland, and specswise it seems to really dominate in its class. But I don't necessarily like the design as it feeld more Canon Digital Ixus 750ish than something that is simple and ultracompact. Still, specswise it seems to rule.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec...nic_dmcfx9.asp

3) Olympus Stylus Verve (or Mju mini) Digital S
Specswise, this camera isn't as good as the other two but the design is kinda nice and this is an all-weather camera so it's more suitable for Finland's conditions. Many people have liked the quality in pictures it produces but I think due to the all-weather aspect it doesn't really have the same versatility that Sony and Panasonic have.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec...ylusverves.asp

The surprise contestant= FujiFilm Finepix Z2
This is similarly constructed as Sony but lacks the lens cover. Z2 is hyped to have better ability to take pics in low-light situations than other cameras in its class. There is, however, one kinda big nuisance. You can't reload the batteries (or connect to computer) without the dock. So if you go on a trip you have to bring to dock and the cables with you. This isn't good.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec..._finepixz2.asp

So there you have it. Now I'd really appreciate it if you could give me some advice (as I really don't know that much about cameras). Which camera out of the four would you pick? Bare in mind that A) I live in Finland B) absolutely need an ultracompact model (<180g) C) would take most of the pics outside and D) would only view them from my computer screen (so no printing).

So I'm pretty much looking for what madkat is looking. I don't, however, consider that Canon model because it doesn't come in black. PowerShot SD30 does come in black but I don't dig the desing that much.

About the Fuji F10/F11, a bunch of people have recommended these models to me in other forums but I guess they just don't understand that I'm looking for an extra small ultracompact which has to weigh prefarably a lot less than 180g. I know that with F10/F11 you get better flash and that way better pics in low light situations but I prefer small size over a little better picture since it's vital that the camera is really small.

Anyway, my options are Sony T9, Panasonic FX9 and, if there is no other choice, Fujifilm Finepix Z2 or Olympys Stylus Verve Digital S (Mju mini Digital S). I did read a kind of negative review about Fujifilm Z2 that stated the picture quality is not all that it's cracked up to be. There is one more option though. I wasn't excited about Sony N1 due to its touch-screen and high price tag but then I started to think about it. One of my worries is that if I keep the camera in my pocket the lcd will scratch. But if Sony N1 has a touch-screen wouldn't that mean that Sony people have made the LCD extra-durable. On the other hand, N1 does not come in black (or does it?)

Well, on a purely technical point-of-view FX9 seems to be the winner. I've been adviced to get the cam that has the best flash and FX9 seems to be better in this respect. But can I getter over the fact that T9 is just so darn stylish?

Rex914

12-11-2005, 02:37 PM

If you want a black bodied Canon that's compact but still substantial in features, try the S80 which used to go for $550 but is easily found for $400 something now.

JungleRoom

12-11-2005, 03:03 PM

If you want a black bodied Canon that's compact but still substantial in features, try the S80 which used to go for $550 but is easily found for $400 something now.

:D Wow, no offense but wouldn't you know it: the second I clearly state that while a little bigger cameras like Fuji F10/F11 have better flash and are more versatile what is important is that the camera must weigh under 180g, then someone suggests again Fuji F10/F11 type camera. Maybe you didn't realize this but Canon S80 does NOT weigh under 180g. In fact, it weighs close to 300g.

Let me draw you a mental image. You are in a nightclub, you are dancing and the camera is in the inside breast pocket of your jacket. Now, it might be just me but wouldn't a camera like Canon S80 or Fujifilm F10 or F11 feel a little bit too big in that pocket. I mean as you were dancing the camera would jiggle around in the pocket and if the camera is a little bit bigger, it's a bit uncomfortable.

I don't mean to critisize experts since I think they clearly want the best for us and do not want us to sacrifice performance over stylishness or size, but the fact is that both madkat and myself are looking for ULTRA compacts and I belive that Canon model and those Fujifilm models are compacts, NOT ultracompacts but compacts. Again, I don't know about madkat but I'd appreciate that from now on you'd only suggest cameras that weigh under 180g (although some ultracompacts so weigh closer to 200g).

Thanks for your suggestion though, Rex914. I appreciate all the help I get and Canon S80 is indeed black and performs better than, say, Sony T9 (or so I believe). But it's just too big for me.

Rex914

12-11-2005, 03:25 PM

JungleRoom

12-11-2005, 03:39 PM

Sorry about that. But your post is rather on the large side isn't it? I glossed over and missed that key part where you said you wanted ultra ultra compact. That's a tough call though because ultra compact and club/low light use don't mix.

One thing that I'd note is that weight isn't the most important element in ultracompacts. Volume/spatial size is, and the F10 straddles between the two categories at 9.1 cubic inches. By comparison the Canon SD500 comes in at 7.5 cubic inches, so it's not a whole lot off. Have you taken a look at any of these models in store? Granted I'm a DSLR user and I'm only used to dealing with the big cameras, the F10 is a very small camera, and it might just work.

However, Jeff is publishing his T9 review on Monday night, so you should take a look at that once he does. Unfortunately, the T9 (I think) is based directly off the T5 which wasn't terribly strong in the image quality department. However, a so-so camera with IS will probably still take better pictures than one that falls victim to camera shake. Will you be taking pictures of moving subjects, or will they generally stay still?

Well, I think I'll probably take pics of objects or people that are still. I have indeed looked at the compact models but they just feel too big for my purpose (I know this is rather riduculous since S80 for example is very small relatively but I need something smaller). As for the clubs, I don't plan to take pics inside the place so much as outside the place. The most probable two situations are 1) in the middle of a wintery night on the street with the street lights on and 2) at somebody's house with mood lighting (but nowhere near dark).

Thanks for the info on the T9 review. I'll be checking that out. Have you any comments on Sony DSC-N1? I'd love to hear them.

Oh and by the way, my friend has this camera:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec...ony_dscu20.asp

With this camera he has taken pics in similar situations than I want to, and the pics have come out fine. In fact, it's because of his camera that I want my own digital camera. However, being a bit spoiled I guess, I have to have something a bit more stylish and a bit better (in other words: more expensive).

Rex914

12-11-2005, 03:44 PM

JungleRoom

12-11-2005, 03:56 PM

The N1 is a very, very new camera, and I haven't seen any reviews on it quite yet.

I overlooked the Panasonic FX9, and on further thought, I think that it might do the trick for you. I know that you mentioned up there that you didn't like its design, but it's got IS, great image quality, and pretty much everything you've asked for on top of good battery life. :)

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fx9-review/camera-black.jpg

Jeff's Review (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fx9-review/)

Got any other thoughts on it?

Well, to be complitely honest with you, the biggest thing that has bothered me in FX9 is that it's made by Panasonic. When I hear Panasonic, I instantly connect it to TVs and VCRs (VCRs that were always broke in my childhood). I think the brand-image is my biggest hurdle. I guess it shouldn't be since almost everyone is recommending it to me and it has won almost every group test in Finland's testing magazines (although quite surprinsingly in one of the tests, it won together with Sony T5).

Of course Sony is a known TV- and VCR-maker as well, but Sony has always been a bit more versatile than Panasonic and Sony does have longer traditions in the camera business (or am I wrong).

When I said I didn't like FX9s design I meant that its design is more like the design of the compact cameras (Canon's models instantly come to mind). Anyway, I think I'll end up choosing FX9. It's a Panasonic but watcha gonna do. There is the question of Sony N1, but it doesn't come in black so I guess that's that.

Thank you Rex914. I've got to say that you have been one of the most helpful people to me and my dilemma.

EDIT: FX9 takes SD memorycards which is a good thing but it does not seem to have true USB2.0 so that's a bad thing. I wonder when's the next model in this series arrive and will it improve on these things...

Rex914

12-11-2005, 04:01 PM

You're right about the brand image. In fact, before I joined this site about a year ago, I honestly didn't know that Panasonic made digital cameras. But after browsing around and reading up, they've been around for several years in this realm and along with Konica Minolta, they've pushed image stabilization into every camera they've released and have offered this functionality in an affordable and practical package whether it's an ultracompact, compact or ultrazoom. You can't go wrong with a Pansonic. Enjoy your new camera. :)

JungleRoom

12-11-2005, 05:40 PM

Thanks again. The fact that you seem to trust in Panasonic really boosts my faith to that brand. So, I guess my first digital camera will be Panasonic FX9. I started from thinking about buying an all-weather model (thinking that one second in the cold winter of Finland would ruin the camera) and ended up in choosing the one camera that I had kinda iffy feelings from the get-go. I'm glad you helped me in this (although I didn't put my destiny completely to your hands) because in all honesti I probably would have bought Sony T9 and then perhaps been a little bit dissappointed about the performance. And if you're interested, here are all the models I seriously thought of buying (Sony T9 specs weren't available so I put T5 in its place):

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=oly_stylusverves%2Cpanasonic_dmcfx9%2Csony _dscn1%2Csony_dsct5%2Cfuji_finepixz2%2Ccanon_sd30% 2Cpentax_optiowpi&show=all

It's funny because something in my head still says that I should consider the Olympus Stylus Verve Digital S because of its all-weather structure and durability (since I'm using the camera in Finland and right now it's winter) but, then again, eventhough it has received awards for its design the technical specs just aren't there and in low-light conditions it may be even worse than, say, Sony T9.

Anyway, thank you Rex914, and I will be sure to post my thoughts on the FX9 when I get it (which will probably be within a month or so). I'm one who doesn't buy anything unless A) I've done a lot of research B) I've been recommeded by several people to buy a specific product C) it's a quality product (expensive) and D) the product has received praise from the press or from official reviewers. I think with FX9 those criteria, if you will, are met.

Cheers!

David Metsky

12-11-2005, 08:57 PM

Cold temps will have no effect on camera operation, other than battery life. I've use cameras down to -20 F without problems, though I've had to keep the batteries warm. Beyond that, cold temps really have no impact on the electronics and there are fewer moving parts in a digital camera vs a film camera.

I think you'll find that even outside clubs near streetlights that nighttime shots will still be quite low light situations. Expect to use the flash the majority of the time.

-dave-

madkat

12-12-2005, 02:47 AM

Hi guys,

Thanks for the good replies. I actually posted a message at work, but it was lost due to my session timing out. Much to my surprise when I came home I saw the final review of the Sony T9 posted. It looks like Jeff's been pleasantly surprised at the performance of it and well it's made my decision harder to make.

Right now I'm going to compare some of the pictures from Panasonic's FX9 and Sony's T9.

I might reconsider Fuji's F10/11 if I can actually find one here in Australia and have a look at it. Like jungleRoom I feel the size might be a little too big, but until I actually see one, I guess I'll never know for sure.

Madkat

P.S Jeff, if you're reading this... How does the T9 compare to FX9 in terms of flash strength? Thanks for the review by the way, awesome job :D

JungleRoom

12-12-2005, 02:57 AM

Thanks for the info David. Well, right now the weather in Finland isn't too bad but in a month or two you can bet that the temp will be 1 F or below (did I interpret the Fahrenheit scale correctly, I'm talking about temps close to -20 C). Anyway, if I keep the camera in my pocket (and inside a bag) and use it for no longer than periods of 5 to 15 minutes in the cold air, I think the camera will be fine.

Did you guys read this review of Sony T9 from Jeff:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sony/dsc_t9-review/index.shtml

It seems he wanted to complicate my decision by praising the T9. It's small, it's stylish, it has the image stabilization (as does FX9), it has the USB2.0 (something that FX9 doesn't have), you can have a cool dock to put it in, it has a 58MB built-in memory (another advantage over FX9), it has more pixels in its LCD than FX9 (230,000 vs. 207,000). Thanks a lot Jeff :confused:

FX9 is lighter though (although I do prefer the slim structure of Sony) and has a better battery life. In addition, FX9 uses SD memory cards which I think are more universal than Sony's own memory cards (or sticks). Not to mention the fact that SD memory cards are cheaper, too.

Well, I see madkat is interested in finding out which one takes better pics and which one has the better flash. I'd like to know this too. I think that FX9 has the better flash but you never now about the picture quality.

I think the deal-breaker (for me at least) here is that does FX9 take better pictures in low light situations than T9 and if it does is the difference in picture quality so big that there's no sense in choosing Sony T9 because of its stylishness and more pocket-fitting size (the slim structure is a plus when the camera is in the pocket pressed against you).

madkat

12-12-2005, 05:58 AM

Hey JungleRoom,

Doing a bit more research I found this from steve's Digicam http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/fx9_pg5.html

When shooting indoors the flash has a good range of about 13 feet (ISO Auto at wide angle), which is sufficient for most interior shooting (in small to medium sized rooms.)

Note 13 feet = ~4meters

Also another note, FX9 official flash range

The flash range in Wide angle is from 0.98 - 13.1 ft. (0.3 - 4.0m)

T9 official flash range

The flash has a working range of: approx. 0.1m to 2.8m (0.3 to 9.2 feet) in Wide angle when ISO is set to Auto.

Based on that I think it's safe to say that FX9 will be better in night group shots... also I had a look @ startup times

FX9 - from Steve's Digicam
From power up to first image captured measured about 2.4 seconds. Shutter lag averaged about 1/10 of a second when pre-focused and 5/10 of a second including autofocus.

T9
From Jeff's article 1.3s startup time + 0.3 prefocus = ~1.6s to take a shot, which could make the difference between getting that 'action' shot and getting the end of it. Although Jeff did talk about the AF assist light function taking ~1sec to focus from time to time. Not sure if this happens on the FX9 or not.

So a verdict... I'm more confused than ever :( On one hand I've got the 2gb MS Pro Duo already, Sony looks hot, and judging from the images Jeff took looks nicer (during day time), less purple fringing and in my opinion the image stabliser works better than FX9 (looking at some of the pictures from FX9 some had blurs, not sure if Jeff turned off OIS, but why would he?).

On the other hand FX9 is cheaper (on Ebay I can get 1gb SD with FX9 for less than T9 alone), has better flash, longer battery life and some manual controls. However, pictures dont' look as nice as Sony's (during the day and in my opinion) has more purple fringing and has a slower start up time.

So where am I at the moment... in between two very good and very competitive cameras.. :(

Let me know what you think guys :o

David Metsky

12-12-2005, 07:08 AM

JungleRoom

12-12-2005, 10:53 AM

madkat, tell me about it: I'm confused as well. I thought after talking with Rex914 that FX9 was the best choice for me but now with that positive review of T9 from Jeff I'm yet again undecided. The make matters worse, I read a review of Sony N1 today that was VERY positive. The review included a pic taken in low light conditions featuring a part of a street in the autumn evening of Finland. This picture was great-looking and the reviewer felt the same way too.

So it's back to the drawing board: Sony T9 vs. Panasonic FX9 vs. Sony N1. Maybe I should think about what type of camera I am looking for. I need a fun camera that is really easy to use (I'm don't like making adjustments to the camera too much, I just want to point&shoot) and that is extra small, an ultraportable. I want a camera that has quality and features the newest technology. Of course I prefer the camera being black. Lastly, I need a camera that performs well in situations that I have described (night clubs, lit streets, rooms with mood lighting).

Sony T9: I really like the way this camera looks and the size is great for keeping the camera in my breast pocket. The image quality, according to Jeff, should be top notch. But is this a good camera for low light conditions (well no ultraportable is really good in those situations).

Panasonic FX9: The appearance of this camera isn't so stylish or trendy, I should say. Don't get me wrong, it's not ugly but it's not as special looking as T9. The performance should be there and the flash should be slightly better than the one in T9. But is the performace so good that choosing FX9 would be a better idea than choosing T9. Also, FX9 doesn't feature USB2.0 (I'm a little bit uncertain about this, but I guess this is true) which is a minor con. Lastly, in several reviews FX9 one con has always been noise, and I've got the feeling that the noise (in pictures) is more noticiable than it is with T9.

Sony N1: Well first of all this camera DOES NOT come in BLACK and it DOES NOT have OIS. I think these two are major cons in my book. But N1 is stylish and apparently performs more than decently in low light situations. Also, it does come with that huge touch-screen and PLEASE TELL ME IF THIS IS TRUE: is it just me or does it come to mind that that touch-screen might be more anti-scratch LCD than regular LCDs. I mean if the LCD is designed to be touched, wouldn't it have to be slightly more durable than regular LCDs? Anyway, FX9 and T9 are my top choices but if Sony N1 is way better than these two then maybe I could consider it. But the lack of a black model or OIS are two huge cons.

I think madkat and I would appreciate if you guys would help us out a bit more and offer new perspectives.

madkat

12-12-2005, 06:36 PM

Hey JungleRoom,

Not sure if you've seen this, but there's a review of the Sony DSC-N1 at Steve's digicam (http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/n1.html). I'm also sure you can purchase screen protectors for the LCD on the cameras, so that should stop any scratching.

The flash has a working range of: 0.2m to 5m (0.6 to 16.4 feet) (W) at ISO Auto.

The flash is definately stronger than T9 and FX9. I guess this depends if you're going to be using the flash alot. Well I'm guess you'll be in clubs and dimly lit streets.

The question here is, does OIS help in taking photos with flash? I don't think it does, but I'd like to confirm this. The N1 is also the biggest and heaviest out of the three cameras, so that's probably something we'll need to consider as well.

Thanks again.

Madkat

Edit:

T9 and N1 photos definitely look less noiser and have less purple finging than FX9 so I'm starting to move away from the Panasonic. N1 is probably a bit more than what I'd like to spend so I'd have to read a few more review / advice from people. Also it's almost as big as the fuji F10... which is probably a bit too big... Again I have yet to see the F10 so I'll reserve my judgement

I'm wondering... is it possible to ask Jeff on his thoughts about flash/low light performance of both FX9 and T9? and maybe some photos... Or is that sorta against the rules?

JungleRoom

12-13-2005, 03:22 AM

Well Sony N1 was just a back-up option for me. The missing OIS I can let go but not that it doesn't come in black. Like you I'm now leaning towards getting the T9 and not the FX9. T9 seems like more fun and the performance (flash) shouldn't be that much worse (if it's worse at all) than FX9s performance.

BTW, as we have talked about accessories, I'm thinking the following (for T9):
512Mt Memory Stick Pro Duo (from Sony or Sandisk)
LCD scratch protection
The dock (does it come with the camera because I didn't see the dock on Sony's accessories page)
The bag: I'm not entirely sure what to get. If I keep the camera in my breast pocket what type of bag should I get. Now remember I'm in Finland and it's about 0 F (close to -20 C). Should I get some kind of smallish bag from Sony or some other brand, or should I just get the zip-locked plastic bag thingy that people here were advicing me to get to avoid humidity getting inside the camera if I take it from cold weather to a warm room?

coldrain

12-13-2005, 03:56 AM

The FX9 (6mp)is rather a noise monster, but its 5mp sibbling is almost the same with a lot less noise. However, I imagine in clubs people will be moving a lot, so IS is rather useless. (It allows for longer shutter times, by reducing camera shake... but it does not eliminate people moving!)

So, I would suggest the Fuji Z1, it has lower noise and higher ISO capability, is compact, and has a biyt better lens than the T5/T9 from Sony. It also has very good colour accuracy compared to the Sony (according to german photo magazines).

This Z1 might just be the best compromise for size, weight, low light performance and style.

JungleRoom

12-13-2005, 04:16 AM

This Z1 might just be the best compromise for size, weight, low light performance and style.

Well I think I'm gonna get either Panasonic or -- most likely -- Sony, but I have to say that wouldn't Z2 be a better choice than Z1 if I chose Fujifilm. Anyway, I've read several reviews where Z1 was deemed worse than (even) T5 so I'm not going to choose Z1 (or Z2). And yes, I know that these tests don't tell whether a particular camera is right FOR ME, but still they do tell something about the camera's quality.

JungleRoom

12-19-2005, 10:13 AM

Wow, usually these Sony Ts get bad press from the get-go but T9 seems to be the exception. I haven't seen any bad reviews of T9 although it may be because it's such a new camera. I'm almost 99% sure right now that's the cam I'm going to buy. Fujifilm Z2 and Panasonic FX9 may be respectable choices but I doubt they have the same performance/style ratio that T9 has.

madkat

12-20-2005, 07:25 AM

Hi JungleRoom,

I have just purchased a T9 online :D , they have promised me that it will arrive just before Christmas (fingers crossed). If it does I'll post some photos / my thoughts here. Hopefully that will help you decide.

The only reviews I've seen of the Sony T9 are here and @ Steve's digicam. Have you seen more else where?

Anyway I'll keep you posted.

Madkat

P.S thanks for all who put their thoughts in there to help me decide!

JungleRoom

12-20-2005, 01:42 PM

That's great, madkat! I'll be waiting for your opinions on this camera. I especially want to hear whether T9 was decent in low light conditions or not. Enjoy your new toy :D

madkat

12-27-2005, 09:09 AM

JungleRoom

12-27-2005, 02:07 PM

Hi JungleRoom,

I'm happy to say that I've recieved my DSC-T9 :D Before Christmas as well... I have yet to take a whole lot of night shots with it esp. in clubs and what not. But out of the shots I have taken, I'd have to say that the flash is on the weak side. However to counter act that, the T9 will go as high as ISO320 on 'most' (read 9/10 shots) night shots. Which does turn out well exposed, but it also means the images themselves do turn out pretty noisey (See Jeff's review between ISO200-400). In normal picture sizes (4" x 6"?) the noises probably won't be very noticeable, I have yet to try this out tho. Give me a few more days and I should be able to post some sample pictures.

Madkat...

Note: Day shots turn out Great! Just these pesky night shots

First of all, Seasons Greetings!

Thank you madkat for telling me about your experiences with T9. Too bad the low light pics didn't turn out to be great... Oh well!

By the way, I went to a camera shop today just to see if T9 has arrived. It hadn't but T7 was there and I held in in my hand. T-serie-cameras are smaller than I had thought: they are really slim. In fact, the slimness was a little bit too much for me because it truly made me question the durability of the camera and wheter so slim a camera would truly have something as good as or better than other bigger ultraportables (Panasonic FX9 for example) have. What do you make of the size, madkat?

So T9 is noisy in low light conditions. FX9 is noisy in general and Fujifilm Z1 is supposedly less noisy in low light conditions than T9 but is weaker in other areas. Don't know about Z2? Actually, when it comes to size I really did like, after all, the Canon Powershot SD30's size and structure really appealed to me. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082203canonsd30.asp

Wow, this is difficult. T9 is still on the top of my list, but Fujifilm Z2 is climbing up in the ranks. FX9's noiseissue bothers me, so I probably won't buy that. And then there's Canon Powershot SD30, but I hear it's not as good as the rest of my choices.

Looking forward to hear more of madkat's impressions of T9!

JungleRoom

02-18-2006, 03:30 AM

Well, I'm glad to say that as I had no clear choice for a digital camera I didn't buy one. In all honesty, if Fujifilm Z2 had appeared in stores in my country of Finland, I would have probably bought one. I'm glad I didn't.

It seems that almost every manufacturer is bringing out ultra-compact that have higher and higher ISO levels available and thus seem to be more fitting to my need. Kodak, Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic, Fujifilm among others are bringing out cameras that all have ISO levels at least up to 1600 (of course for example Fujifilm ultra-compacts have had these kinds of levels in the past). I think I'll wait a bit longer and make my choice among these new cameras.

Kodak and Pentax don't excite me that much and Fujifilm seems to be releasing cameras that are either extra ultra compact (Z2) or just compact (F11). Don't get me wrong, Z2's size would suit me great but if a little bigger camera ment better quality then I can choose a bigger one (although not as big as F11). Panasonic is releasing DMC-FX01 which is the successor of FX9. FX01 has ISO levels up to 1600 and if Panasonic has fixed the noise problem FX01 may just be a no-brainer (as FX9 is a multiple test-winner). I wonder if Sony has anything up its sleeve as Sony ultra-compacts have that reputation as being "fun-cameras" and that's just what I want.

Of course, I truly hope that all manufacturers are getting out black models as well as I really want a black camera. So an ultra-compact that is black, takes decent pics in low-light situations (at night outside a bar for example, and maybe inside a bar as well) and weighs under 185 grams for me please!

EDIT: It seems that the main matchup will be between Panasonic FX01 and Fujifilm F30 (which is going to be about the same size as FX01). Of course, F30 might be better in low light conditions because of its 3200 (!) ISO but then again, Panasonic may be the winner in other areas plus FX01 does come in black and F30 does not (unless I'm not mistaken).

JungleRoom

02-23-2006, 09:14 AM

Well those new camera announcements keep on coming. I gotta say that I'm dissappointed about the Canon announcements. Sure SD600, SD630 and SD700 (with it's Image Stabilization) are going to be great cameras, but Canon yet again has only ISO800 max. To add insult to injury, Canon yet again doesn't take up the trend of making its models available in black. So I guess a Canon won't be the digital camera for me which is a shame since Canon cameras are overall pretty solid cameras.

Casio is bringing out EX-Z850 which is the successor of EX-Z750 which is one of the more respected and popular ultra compact cameras out there. Casio seems to be offering max ISO1600 in Z850 which is a good thing but the appearance of Z850 is a bit too complex for me and, yet again, a black version is nowhere to be seen.

So I guess every major dc-brand has announced their newest models (actually, I'm not sure about Sony though). If you look at the topic of this thread, the best options seem to be to either go with Panasonic FX01 or with Fujifilm F30.
The other options:

Nikons: The new S-models seem to be mediocre and overall Nikon isn't on the top of its game anymore

Canons: Solid cameras but no black style and no high ISO levels.

Pentaxs: The new models are not that exciting.

Olympus': The all-weather body is a definate plus and black style seems to be available. But do Olympus models have any edge over Panasonic and Fujifilm when it comes to image quality.

Sonys: N1 and T9 still are the newest models from Sony I could imagine buying, but I'm not going to.

Casios: EX-Z850 may just be a winner but again, does it have enough to take on Panasonic and Fujifilm in areas that matter to me.