NewsView
04-10-2006, 05:03 PM
Forgive me for this re-post. The last two posts didn't work (they cut off).
I'm looking for a pocketsize camera in the 5-7MP/<$400 range that can shoot everything from low-light scenes to small reflective objects with minimal fuss. I have a list of specific questions below, but first some background.
I'm in the process of making a giant leap from a six-year-old Panasonic PV-SD4090 with SuperDisk drive, which is bulky and SLOW. It is only 1.3MP with very few manual controls and no macro, but I've been able to get prints out of it that are quite good. Examples of shots that I have obtained in the past include night landscapes from the top of the Space Needle in Los Vegas — virtually no noise and all the Vegas skyline illuminated; pictures through glass at an aquarium; droplets of water suspended in mid air — at night — surrounding a softly illuminated fountain; close-ups of rocks and gemstones; and pictures of a garden at night, with flowers in focus and not generally overexposed even with flash.
Since I have been accustomed to obtaining decent pictures of challenging subjects in a variety of lighting conditions with no control over anything but the flash — albeit with a lot of patience — I expect to find a camera that is capable of doing the same today, but so far I have been disappointed. I've tried an Olympus FE-140, Konica/Minolta Z6 and a Fuji FinePix F10. I’ve also had the opportunity to observe the performance of family members’ cameras, which are comprised primarily of Sony and Canon point-and-shoot digitals.
Though my existing digital camera struggles to focus in low light, it can eventually be coaxed into just about any shot I want to take, though the results tend to become noisy under low light and the colors require correction in Photoshop. I can also get my Panasonic to focus on small reflective objects, such as jewelry, with surprisingly good detail. Moreover, I have never seen the dreaded “purple fringe” effect on my Panasonic despite having taken 100s of pictures per year over a six-year period. Unfortunately, the battery is dying — and is still as expensive as ever to replace — and the body is cracked such that the SuperDisk drive door falls out of the hinge. In other words, my Panasonic PV-SD4090 is on its last leg.
Six years ago, I paid roughly $300 for my Panasonic; however, it wasn't a bestseller at the time. As a result, I figured with the technology improvements, digital prices coming down and the features going up, I should be able to replace my old Panasonic with a point-and-shoot for about the same price I paid in 2000. I also made the assumption that today’s name-brand digital cameras are light years ahead of my oversized, slow dino, so I jumped into the market based mostly on name, megapixel count and pricepoint. Unfortunately, though there are a ton of choices compared to six years ago — and though the shutter lags and startup delays are practically a thing of the past — I’m having difficulty making an equivalent purchase on today’s market. That's why I came here — in hopes that you can bring me up to speed. :)
My first purchase this past weekend was the relatively new Olympus FE-140, a 6MP camera that was on sale for $149. Unfortunately, I chose a ring as my test subject and the results I got — even in image stabilization mode — were more blurred than the shots I've taken out of a car moving at 80mph with my Panasonic PV-SD4090! I figured it was a camera defect until I read in the PDF manual that small reflective surfaces are not suitable for the camera. Back it went.
I then did a bit more homework and settled upon the 6.3MP Fuji FinePix F10. Despite reviews that claim better performance and ISOs than even most 7MP cameras — and an image quality that rivals SLRs — I have found that the auto focus feature is sub par, compared, once again, to my old Panasonic. When the F10 focuses, the pictures are very, very good with much truer color and longer-range flash. But when they are bad they are either overexposed or blurred, and frequently preceded by an the AF! alert on the LCD. It seems to get the best performance out of this camera, you have to be willing to hunt through the menus to do EV adjustments, lighting adjustments, etc. That's not a bad thing if you're used to it, but if you are used to having a camera willing to cooperate under less than ideal conditions, taking time out to set up the shot really slows you down.
Whatever happened to a camera that just works as a point-and-shoot? If I wanted a manual camera, which I do, it would be the Canon 5D, but since the Fuji F10 offers very few manual controls I wasn't expecting to have to dig into the menu system in order to obtain the kind of results that reviewers rave about.
To make matters worse, the Fuji manual expands on the list of things that its auto focus is not suited for, including pets (fur) and reflective surfaces (as large as an automobile!). Indeed, when I tried to shoot my parakeets the only decent pictures I could get in AUTO were the pictures where my birds sat perfectly still while staring at this frightful foreign object pointed at their tiny faces. By contrast, with patience, I could eventually eek out a few good shots with my ancient Panasonic even if the birds were bobbing their heads or flapping their wings. Looking at the viewfinders on more recent cameras, however, the results tend to be choppy when trying to move (pan) with the subject. And that too the manual advises against — moving subjects and moving with the subject!
All in all, the cameras I’ve tested seem more finicky than my old one. The Fuji F10, for example, simply refuses to focus if the AF conditions are not ideal. Additionally, when the macro mode is used in conjunction with the flash (indoors), all I get is a washed out image, whereas my old Panasonic's flash is so comparably anemic that it rarely washes out the subject to the point where some quick adjustments in Photoshop can no longer compensate.
To have three current-generation cameras disappoint compared to an obsolete relic is quite a shock. Sure, I could study the Fuji F10’s manual from cover-to-cover and eventually learn how to compensate for the poor AF, but I paid for a point-and-shoot. What is the purpose of auto focus if it’s simply too fussy to perform in that mode? Moreover, in all these years why hasn't there been any apparent improvement to the flash technology such that perhaps a "high beam" and a "low beam" could be designed for variable uses/environments? Okay, so enough of my rant.
I have a couple of random questions about the state of digital camera technology today:
1. Did some technological compromise have to take place to get a CCD that functioned in a pocket-sized camera? In other words, were the large CCDs that were in use six years ago just better, or was my Panasonic — not the CCD technology in use at the time — simply more flexible and forgiving in its AF design?
2. Does there exist a 5-7MP point-and-shoot on the market today that is capable of shooting everything from landscapes and night shots to gemstones and water droplets with minimal fuss?
3. Would it be entirely unrealistic to find a camera in this MP range that can also print up to 13x19 with minimal fringing and noise (the max paper size of my Canon i9900 printer)?
4. For those of you with current generation cameras, how many of you have read disclaimers in the manual to the effect that your camera is not designed to focus upon pets and even cars?
5. Lastly, I have seen the results of some of my family member’s newer Sony and Canon point-and-shoots and they seem to be blurred roughly 30-40 percent of the time. Once again, the problem of camera shake was not an issue with my Panasonic, so why is it so prevalent with today’s point-and-shoot cameras — even despite the use of so-called image stabilization?
I'm sure there are cameras that cost three times as much that won't have the problems I've described, but I can't help but feel somewhat like the lobster that got dropped into a pot of boiling water. Instead of heating up gradually like those who are in the market every year or so for a new digital camera, I'm facing the sudden realization that while the megapixels are increasingly higher and the bells and whistles are more numerous, point-and-shoot digital cameras seem to lag where it counts most — the ability to produce a high percentage of pictures in auto mode that are suitable for printing (focus, exposure, minimal camera shake, etc.).
Sorry for the long post, folks. My hope is that those of you who are using a variety of makes/models can point me toward a camera that can take a variety of shots — from night scenes and water droplets to landscapes and jewelry — that are more likely to "come out" than not. If there's a point-and-shoot that can deliver print-worthy, relatively consistent results with virtually no camera shake under normal conditions, minimal focusing fuss and flash overexposure, I'd sure like to hear about it! Thanks!
:)
I'm looking for a pocketsize camera in the 5-7MP/<$400 range that can shoot everything from low-light scenes to small reflective objects with minimal fuss. I have a list of specific questions below, but first some background.
I'm in the process of making a giant leap from a six-year-old Panasonic PV-SD4090 with SuperDisk drive, which is bulky and SLOW. It is only 1.3MP with very few manual controls and no macro, but I've been able to get prints out of it that are quite good. Examples of shots that I have obtained in the past include night landscapes from the top of the Space Needle in Los Vegas — virtually no noise and all the Vegas skyline illuminated; pictures through glass at an aquarium; droplets of water suspended in mid air — at night — surrounding a softly illuminated fountain; close-ups of rocks and gemstones; and pictures of a garden at night, with flowers in focus and not generally overexposed even with flash.
Since I have been accustomed to obtaining decent pictures of challenging subjects in a variety of lighting conditions with no control over anything but the flash — albeit with a lot of patience — I expect to find a camera that is capable of doing the same today, but so far I have been disappointed. I've tried an Olympus FE-140, Konica/Minolta Z6 and a Fuji FinePix F10. I’ve also had the opportunity to observe the performance of family members’ cameras, which are comprised primarily of Sony and Canon point-and-shoot digitals.
Though my existing digital camera struggles to focus in low light, it can eventually be coaxed into just about any shot I want to take, though the results tend to become noisy under low light and the colors require correction in Photoshop. I can also get my Panasonic to focus on small reflective objects, such as jewelry, with surprisingly good detail. Moreover, I have never seen the dreaded “purple fringe” effect on my Panasonic despite having taken 100s of pictures per year over a six-year period. Unfortunately, the battery is dying — and is still as expensive as ever to replace — and the body is cracked such that the SuperDisk drive door falls out of the hinge. In other words, my Panasonic PV-SD4090 is on its last leg.
Six years ago, I paid roughly $300 for my Panasonic; however, it wasn't a bestseller at the time. As a result, I figured with the technology improvements, digital prices coming down and the features going up, I should be able to replace my old Panasonic with a point-and-shoot for about the same price I paid in 2000. I also made the assumption that today’s name-brand digital cameras are light years ahead of my oversized, slow dino, so I jumped into the market based mostly on name, megapixel count and pricepoint. Unfortunately, though there are a ton of choices compared to six years ago — and though the shutter lags and startup delays are practically a thing of the past — I’m having difficulty making an equivalent purchase on today’s market. That's why I came here — in hopes that you can bring me up to speed. :)
My first purchase this past weekend was the relatively new Olympus FE-140, a 6MP camera that was on sale for $149. Unfortunately, I chose a ring as my test subject and the results I got — even in image stabilization mode — were more blurred than the shots I've taken out of a car moving at 80mph with my Panasonic PV-SD4090! I figured it was a camera defect until I read in the PDF manual that small reflective surfaces are not suitable for the camera. Back it went.
I then did a bit more homework and settled upon the 6.3MP Fuji FinePix F10. Despite reviews that claim better performance and ISOs than even most 7MP cameras — and an image quality that rivals SLRs — I have found that the auto focus feature is sub par, compared, once again, to my old Panasonic. When the F10 focuses, the pictures are very, very good with much truer color and longer-range flash. But when they are bad they are either overexposed or blurred, and frequently preceded by an the AF! alert on the LCD. It seems to get the best performance out of this camera, you have to be willing to hunt through the menus to do EV adjustments, lighting adjustments, etc. That's not a bad thing if you're used to it, but if you are used to having a camera willing to cooperate under less than ideal conditions, taking time out to set up the shot really slows you down.
Whatever happened to a camera that just works as a point-and-shoot? If I wanted a manual camera, which I do, it would be the Canon 5D, but since the Fuji F10 offers very few manual controls I wasn't expecting to have to dig into the menu system in order to obtain the kind of results that reviewers rave about.
To make matters worse, the Fuji manual expands on the list of things that its auto focus is not suited for, including pets (fur) and reflective surfaces (as large as an automobile!). Indeed, when I tried to shoot my parakeets the only decent pictures I could get in AUTO were the pictures where my birds sat perfectly still while staring at this frightful foreign object pointed at their tiny faces. By contrast, with patience, I could eventually eek out a few good shots with my ancient Panasonic even if the birds were bobbing their heads or flapping their wings. Looking at the viewfinders on more recent cameras, however, the results tend to be choppy when trying to move (pan) with the subject. And that too the manual advises against — moving subjects and moving with the subject!
All in all, the cameras I’ve tested seem more finicky than my old one. The Fuji F10, for example, simply refuses to focus if the AF conditions are not ideal. Additionally, when the macro mode is used in conjunction with the flash (indoors), all I get is a washed out image, whereas my old Panasonic's flash is so comparably anemic that it rarely washes out the subject to the point where some quick adjustments in Photoshop can no longer compensate.
To have three current-generation cameras disappoint compared to an obsolete relic is quite a shock. Sure, I could study the Fuji F10’s manual from cover-to-cover and eventually learn how to compensate for the poor AF, but I paid for a point-and-shoot. What is the purpose of auto focus if it’s simply too fussy to perform in that mode? Moreover, in all these years why hasn't there been any apparent improvement to the flash technology such that perhaps a "high beam" and a "low beam" could be designed for variable uses/environments? Okay, so enough of my rant.
I have a couple of random questions about the state of digital camera technology today:
1. Did some technological compromise have to take place to get a CCD that functioned in a pocket-sized camera? In other words, were the large CCDs that were in use six years ago just better, or was my Panasonic — not the CCD technology in use at the time — simply more flexible and forgiving in its AF design?
2. Does there exist a 5-7MP point-and-shoot on the market today that is capable of shooting everything from landscapes and night shots to gemstones and water droplets with minimal fuss?
3. Would it be entirely unrealistic to find a camera in this MP range that can also print up to 13x19 with minimal fringing and noise (the max paper size of my Canon i9900 printer)?
4. For those of you with current generation cameras, how many of you have read disclaimers in the manual to the effect that your camera is not designed to focus upon pets and even cars?
5. Lastly, I have seen the results of some of my family member’s newer Sony and Canon point-and-shoots and they seem to be blurred roughly 30-40 percent of the time. Once again, the problem of camera shake was not an issue with my Panasonic, so why is it so prevalent with today’s point-and-shoot cameras — even despite the use of so-called image stabilization?
I'm sure there are cameras that cost three times as much that won't have the problems I've described, but I can't help but feel somewhat like the lobster that got dropped into a pot of boiling water. Instead of heating up gradually like those who are in the market every year or so for a new digital camera, I'm facing the sudden realization that while the megapixels are increasingly higher and the bells and whistles are more numerous, point-and-shoot digital cameras seem to lag where it counts most — the ability to produce a high percentage of pictures in auto mode that are suitable for printing (focus, exposure, minimal camera shake, etc.).
Sorry for the long post, folks. My hope is that those of you who are using a variety of makes/models can point me toward a camera that can take a variety of shots — from night scenes and water droplets to landscapes and jewelry — that are more likely to "come out" than not. If there's a point-and-shoot that can deliver print-worthy, relatively consistent results with virtually no camera shake under normal conditions, minimal focusing fuss and flash overexposure, I'd sure like to hear about it! Thanks!
:)