PDA

View Full Version : Low light/Fast action performer?



Knittingfor4
06-10-2007, 07:58 PM
Is there a non dslr that performs well indoors, low light, and fast action? I've been looking at the H9 which has "Advanced Sports Mode" but I've seen extremely mixed reviews on pic quality. And of course the Canon S5 isn't out yet so no reviews. As far as controls, well I'm not sure I care too much about having much control. So far my P712 has never been out of Auto or the Scene modes and I've been extremely happy with picture quality. I'm very unhappy with it's shutter lag and shot to shot time. I'm looking for a faster perfomer, and I shoot mostly indoors.

Oh, and if it helps I added a link to a photo album of mine where the pics were taken with my current P712. http://s207.photobucket.com/albums/bb129/Knittingfor4/

sjseto
06-11-2007, 12:37 AM
I know you were considering getting the Canon Rebel XTi at one point. Nothing beats a DSLR for low noise, minimal shutter lag, and fast shot-to-shot time. But you must have your reasons for not wanting to go that route.

I'm assuming that you're looking for an ultrazoom. For taking pictures of moving subjects in low light, you'll need to use higher ISO's to get a fast enough shutter speed to freeze that movement on the recorded image.

The Fuji S6000fd is a good choice because of its superior image quality at higher ISO's (high ISO capability will be more useful than image stabilization when it comes to moving subjects). However it doesn't have the fastest shot-to-shot time; in Jeff's review, he measured it to be about 2 seconds in JPEG mode and 4 seconds in RAW. If that's not fast enough for you, then the other popular ultrazooms from Canon (S3/S5), Panasonic (FZ8 and FZ50) and Sony (H9) will likely be faster, although not as good at higher ISO's. However, the Canon and Panasonics feature lenses with faster maximum apertures at maximum telephoto (i.e. they can let in more light) than the Fuji, so you might find yourself needing high ISO less.

I like that the Fuji and Panasonic models allow you to shoot images in RAW. Jeff showed in his reviews how shooting in RAW (with noise reduction turned off) and then using noise reduction software can greatly improve high ISO image quality over shooting in JPEG. That might be more than you want to do, however.

Stephanie

Knittingfor4
06-11-2007, 01:13 PM
Yeah, I'm probably going to have to end up with the XTi. I was just hoping (grasping at straws) that there was another option. Anything over 1sec shot to shot is not doable I think. Mine is 1.7 and it's hideous. I played with an S3 and it seemed faster but I couldn't find the burst mode. The menus seem bare. I didn't see alot of adjustments in them. Maybe I wasn't looking in the right places.

The thing is, I don't want to be missing shots while I either scroll through menus (p&s) or fiddle with a bunch of numbers (dslr). I like the speed of the dslr, but will it be nullified by how much I'll have to manipulate the settings everytime they run from one room to another?

Dear God, please make a p&s with only auto mode that catches every expression, in any light and only needs one lens and no bulky external flash and has IS and a bunch of other stuff - but only two buttons, the power button and the shutter button!

Visual Reality
06-11-2007, 04:25 PM
Dear God, please make a p&s with only auto mode that catches every expression, in any light and only needs one lens and no bulky external flash and has IS and a bunch of other stuff - but only two buttons, the power button and the shutter button!
But how will you review/delete your bad shots? ;)

My S3 can do 2-3 frames per second depending on the light. Indoors it is probably closer to 1 but its still pretty quick for a non-DSLR. It does suffer from noise though, especially indoors.

Knittingfor4
06-11-2007, 07:48 PM
But how will you review/delete your bad shots? ;)

My S3 can do 2-3 frames per second depending on the light. Indoors it is probably closer to 1 but its still pretty quick for a non-DSLR. It does suffer from noise though, especially indoors.

No bad shots with God's camera! It captures what you see exactly, all the right colors and sharpness, right when you touch the shutter button :p

I'm so tempted to try the S5, but I'm afraid if I have another non-business hrs baby my birth photos will be ruined by noise :( BTW, they should have come up with a better name, like just sticking with grain. Do you know how long I went thinking people were complaining about how loud the camera was!

barb1686
06-12-2007, 09:55 PM
Hello. :) Thought I'd butt in here. I'm a newbie to the DSLR world, and I just bought the XTi about a week ago. I've got to say it's a great choice, and if you are worried about figuring it out - don't be. It's so easy to use, and believe me, you'll be dying to learn more! If you don't want to leave auto mode then I guess you don't have to, but you'd be wasting all the features of the camera. The XTi is targeted toward new SLR users, so it's got loads of auto modes, including sports. You just have to play around with it. It's a great camera - the best investment I've ever made.

I've got a few photos in my gallery (in my siggie), but like I said, I'm a beginner as well....so they're nothing special...oh, and they were all done in auto modes (full auto, macro, landscape, etc). I have some learning to do before going manual. lol

Just don't be nervous. I really would get away from the point and shoot cameras if you can.

And this maybe an option to consider. Have you ever rented equipment from a rental store before? Maybe you could try renting it before buying it? I've never done it, but I have read of people doing it, and when I was younger my mom rented a video camera for special occasions. Even if it's the XT, because they're basically the same thing, aside from a few features. Just make sure they include a lens, otherwise the camera is pointless. lol :p

Good-luck...and buy and SLR. You won't regret it! ;):D

speaklightly
06-12-2007, 10:43 PM
knitting4four-

There just still might be a digicam/ultrazoom answer for you. I just received my Fuji S-700 today and I noticed that it did very well in the Auto Mode. It is a small (smaller than the Canon S-3) camera that has 7mp, 10X optical zoom, a wonderfully sharp lens, uses SD cards (this is the first Fuji camera in years to use anything else other than an XD cards). It has an excellent video mode, great Macro and Super Macro modes, it works well in Auto, it is very easy to use, and sells for just $(US) 200.00!

Here is a sample photo taken in the full Auto Mode. The Fuji S-700 might be worth a good look. The S-700 camera also has Fuji's Intelligent Flash System. Here is how it works. The S-700 is able to analyze the amount of ambient light and then the S-700 adds just enough flash to avoid those harsh shadows. Look at the sample photo. Note that there is indeed a shadow but it is very small and light behind my husband's head.

You can find more photos from the S-700 posted in the Fuji Folder, if you would like to see more samples.

Sarah

flippedgazelle
06-12-2007, 10:47 PM
Hi Knittingfor4,

First, congrats on the impending arrival! :D

From everything I've read, the Nikon D40 seems to be simplest, best DSLR for those migrating from the P&S world. In many ways, it *is* a point-n-shoot, with extra settings there if you want them. I cannot say it's better than the XTi, but its worth a look to see if you like the handling and feel of it more.

As for barb's comments about "get(ting) away from the point and shoot cameras if you can", that is not really a fair and educated statement. I've seen plenty of photos taken with a DSLR that, frankly, stink. A DSLR cannot teach a person to compose, frame, anticipate the shot. A DSLR cannot instruct you on proper technique. If you don't know how to use a drill, buying one with more bits simply means you can make more holes.

Also, please note that with a DSLR, you cannot frame your shot through the LCD (except for some Olympus DSLRs, in a limited capacity) and you cannot take video clips.

I'm really not arguing against a DSLR, just simply trying to be accurate.

Above all else, remember the #1 rule in photography: get the shot.

barb1686
06-12-2007, 11:01 PM
Sorry, I just meant that SLR's are more fun (in my opinion of course), and have more advanced features. I just think if you able (and can afford) to get away from a point and shoot, then I would. I will always have my A610 there for back-up and travel, so I'm not totally opposed to them. But I definitely recommend trying out an SLR. That's all. Should've worded that a little better. ;) Sorry.

fionndruinne
06-13-2007, 12:47 AM
I wouldn't describe the D40 as a "point-and-shoot" DSLR any more than I would use the term for the XTi, or most other entry-level DSLRs. They all have the auto mode, they all have the scene modes, and you can use any of them like point-and-shoots. What the D40 does best is depict/describe/make sense of the advanced settings. So, far from its strong point being relying on the auto modes, it's the perfect first-time learner DSLR. All in all, Nikon did a great job of making those advanced settings as available as could be for an inexperienced user.

Knittingfor4
06-13-2007, 10:13 AM
I do like the d40, but the things that concern me are the lenses. I don't want to be stuck spending way more on lenses because it has no motor in it. Also, I want more pixels so I can crop and zoom w/out worry.

I realize most people here are all for dslrs. And I understand the statement get away from p&s... but *my* personal opinion is - If I can do what I need to w/out getting a dslr, I'll be in heaven! I know that's not popular, but there it is. My main concerns are - shot to shot time, and low light performance. I haven't been able to find any p&s with a less than 1sec shot to shot, and I don't want to be searching through menus for burst mode only to miss the shot I needed! I also don't want to crank up the ISO only to find that the pics aren't printable. So it seems like I'm just going to be stuck with the XTi. I will look into renting though, that sounds awsome! If I can get the right lens. I need the 2.8 one, and I need an external flash.

I do realize that the camera doesn't make the picutre. My friend brought her d70 to my last birth and most of the pics are bad. She didn't use the flash so everything looks sepia toned and it's all so blurry! I think I'd rather have the onboard flash instead of that if I had to pick! So that's what I'm trying to avoid this time. I'm not sure what she did wrong. I wonder if you can tell just from looking at it?

speaklightly
06-13-2007, 10:53 AM
knitting4four-

I suggested that you take a look at the new Fuji S-700 which is a NON DSLR camera. It is an ultrazoom. Did you not see my post?

Sarah

flippedgazelle
06-13-2007, 12:20 PM
I wouldn't describe the D40 as a "point-and-shoot" DSLR any more than I would use the term for the XTi, or most other entry-level DSLRs. They all have the auto mode, they all have the scene modes, and you can use any of them like point-and-shoots. What the D40 does best is depict/describe/make sense of the advanced settings. So, far from its strong point being relying on the auto modes, it's the perfect first-time learner DSLR. All in all, Nikon did a great job of making those advanced settings as available as could be for an inexperienced user.

You're right, fionndruinne - and I didn't word my opinion of the D40 properly. I meant that the D40 seems to function pretty well in auto mode, and has some of the ease-of-use attributes that had previously only been available on P&S cameras.

flippedgazelle
06-13-2007, 12:34 PM
I do like the d40, but the things that concern me are the lenses. I don't want to be stuck spending way more on lenses because it has no motor in it. Also, I want more pixels so I can crop and zoom w/out worry.

I realize most people here are all for dslrs. And I understand the statement get away from p&s... but *my* personal opinion is - If I can do what I need to w/out getting a dslr, I'll be in heaven! I know that's not popular, but there it is. My main concerns are - shot to shot time, and low light performance. I haven't been able to find any p&s with a less than 1sec shot to shot, and I don't want to be searching through menus for burst mode only to miss the shot I needed! I also don't want to crank up the ISO only to find that the pics aren't printable. So it seems like I'm just going to be stuck with the XTi. I will look into renting though, that sounds awsome! If I can get the right lens. I need the 2.8 one, and I need an external flash.

I do realize that the camera doesn't make the picutre. My friend brought her d70 to my last birth and most of the pics are bad. She didn't use the flash so everything looks sepia toned and it's all so blurry! I think I'd rather have the onboard flash instead of that if I had to pick! So that's what I'm trying to avoid this time. I'm not sure what she did wrong. I wonder if you can tell just from looking at it?

I believe the 55-200mm lens for the D40 is available for around $220 or so, so you are not paying a premium for that caliber of lens.

If you want more megapixels, the D40X is very similar to the D40, but has a 10mp sensor.

If you upload one of your friend's "bad" pics, we probably could tell what she did wrong.

Any chance you could go to a store that has a liberal return policy - like Walmart or Target - where you could buy a camera and then return it if you don't like it, without penalty? I've seen both the Rebel XT and XTi at my local Walmart, as well as a few superzooms.

Knittingfor4
06-13-2007, 02:25 PM
I couldn't find any official reviews on the s7000, but I had ruled out the s6000 because it's slower than what I have now. I can certainly go to a store and handle one. I didn't mean to ignore you.

I'm wondering about the d50, it has the motor in it right? So I can use cheaper lenses on that. But then I can on the XTi and it's a newer camera so I guess it's better anyway right.

Okay, I found some appropriate pics. Didn't think anyone wanted to see me naked in the tub LOL! Here is essentially the same picture with flash (http://us.share.geocities.com/knit_for_food/DSC_0142.JPG) and w/out flash (http://us.share.geocities.com/knit_for_food/DSC_0141.JPG) It's 3am and no natural light. I forget which light was on, I think the bathroom light, but not the bedroom overhead light.

fionndruinne
06-13-2007, 02:54 PM
I really don't think you need to worry about megapixels if you're getting a DSLR. 6MP is a pretty huge picture at 100%, and (this'll be a huge difference you'll find between P&S and DSLR) when I get a good photo, it looks beautiful - pristine - at 100% resolution. Bear in mind I haven't printed any photos yet, but on my computer, sharpness and noise levels are still awesome at normal ISO levels, and even above normal.

Now, for a fast lens you will pay rather more if you've got a D40 - if you're willing to use a prime (non-zoom, so you step up or move back to frame your shots - shouldn't be a big problem indoors), there's a 30mm Sigma f/1.4 which would be excellent indoors. $420 is a bit steep, but it has its own focus motor, meaning faster autofocusing than a non-motorized lens, and also it is of Sigma's EX high-quality line, so it's a very sturdy, quality lens. That would run you a little under a thousand for D40 (+ kit lens, pretty much the only option - it's a nice lens, especially for wide-angle, but not a low-light performer) + 30mm. That is quite a lot, especially since you've been looking at point-and-shoot cameras. But it would be a great combination.

You can probably get the XTi + a good low-light lens for less, especially if you get the Canon 50mm prime... $600 for XTi body + $100 for the 50 is only $700, however the 50mm f/1.8 is a cheaply-built lens, not really comparable to Sigma's EX line at all, even though it gets great photos. I'm not as knowledgeable about Canon's other low-light offerings, others can fill you in here. Whatever you choose, just keep in mind that for the quality you'd really like, there's a rather high price tag. If you want to make concessions, that's alright too.

And, flippedgazelle, you're right that the D40 has a good auto mode. I shoot on program auto ("P") most of the time right now, and it does really well most of the time. I recommend this rather than auto mode, so you can have control over the flash (which I dislike using at all, ever), and get exposures right. Keeping only ISO sensitivity, exposure compensation, and metering mode (pattern for a balanced effect, spot for something more dramatic) in mind, you can have a lot more control over the photos that come out.

ZCarroll
06-15-2007, 01:16 PM
I've been looking for a low light, fast action cam myself for quite some time. I think I'm just going to end up getting the s6000... also having a birth in August. I really love having the video capabilities, as a parent over the years that has always come in so handy as well as being able to control shutter speed (I've been using a casio z750 for the last couple of years), I just can't even imagine being without. I've tried borrowing a Nikon D50 and a Canon Rebel and it just doesn't work for me... too much hassle and not enough of the features I really want, although that fast shot to shot action really is something else the other issues take precedence for me I've found. I'm still not even sure the s6000 won't just be too big for me, but I can't come up with a better solution at this point. I had a Canon S2 and I had a lot of trouble getting it to focus accurately as well as it ultimately failed on me... I also didn't like dealing with so many batteries (but then the s6000 will be the same there). I've never been able to find a camera that compares to Fuji for low light and that seems to be the biggest issue for me with kids being able to keep a fast shutter and still get a decent shot... yes, dslr would be great for that too, but then I miss out when that cute smile turned into something video worthy, not to mention it's too hard to get it out and ready and take the shot one handed... even with the more planned events I've experienced missed shots with a dslr. I've actually been at events where there were multiple dslrs in use and I had my casio z750 and I ended up catching the best shots that every parent wanted and were thrilled to have (no doubt the same shot would've been *much* better with a dslr -but I got the shot and that's the key!). Part of that is it's compactness... so still not sure the s6000 will be the complete answer, but at least it's not as major a financial dent as so many of the other choices.

Looking at the specs at dpreview the s3 and the s6000 don't seem that different with timing...???

Knittingfor4
06-16-2007, 07:30 PM
I went camera shopping today :D I'm just about sold on the Sony CyberShot H9. It is lightning fast in sports mode, I'd say just like the d40 I tried. Of course there's no flash in that mode. Anyway, it's just a bit smaller and lighter than my current camera. I really really liked it alot! I also tried a Fuji s5700 and oh man, I had trouble putting it down. It's hands down THE MOST comfortable camera I've held :) Unfortunately it's slow as molasses so was ruled out instantly :( But anyway the H9 was great! I may rent a dslr in case I have another very low light birth, but at that time it should still be quite summery out so we should have tons of natural daylight in the bedroom from about 6am to 8pm. We'll keep our fingers crossed ;)

When is the Canon s5 due out? That's the only other one I'd like to compare. I've heard Canon has excellent pic quality and it's to have the newer #3 processing chip. Nothing was said about the speed though.

Also, I wonder if there's anyway to diffuse onboard flash? I've seen some kind of slipcover for the extra flashes on dslrs. I may not mind flash, especially if diffused since the baby and I won't be looking at the camera!

flippedgazelle
06-16-2007, 08:05 PM
Have you checked out photo samples from the H9? There seems to be some disappointment expressed by reviewers regarding image quality. Perhaps it just may be nitpicking - I'm not sure...

Knittingfor4
06-16-2007, 08:52 PM
Yes, I've read very mixed reviews about it. I've read excellent reviews on the Canon Powershot S3 but it was very un-ergonomic and not comfy. I wouldn't mind it if it performs well. I'm highly considering waiting for the S5 though. One concern is that with the H9 the sport mode is on the dial at the top of the camera, which means I have instant access. Most cameras keep their burst/continuous modes within the menus, meaning it takes more time to select that mode. It's a major point in favor of the H9!

I am not a photographer and have not noticed any dissapointment in image quality from my Kodak P712. So I'm wondering if I will even notice the "defects" others report on the H9? I've seen the pics at cameralabs and they look fine to me! It seems to me that very advanced photographers write extremely poor reviews of p&s cameras because they are not up to par. But all the p&s users love them. So I'm sure it'll be fine. 98% of my pics will only ever be viewed online, I hardly ever print any out. I go to a studio to get hard copies for family distribution and framing.

I found some rental places in the phone book. I think I'll call and see if anyone has a H9 to rent. I may rent one and a S3 if I can. That'd be perfect!

speaklightly
06-16-2007, 09:43 PM
Knitting4four-

I am glad to here the discussion changing once more to ultrazooms again. I am not against DSLR cameras at all I own more than a few. However when a $(US) 214.00 camera (the S-700, which uses SD chips by the way) can take a photo just as good as the Nikon D-40, it must amount to something.

I will post a S-700 photo for you and ask why you felt that the S-700 was slow when you tried it out in the store??

Sarah Joyce

Knittingfor4
06-16-2007, 11:43 PM
When I say slow, I only mean the time between taking pics. We (the sales lady and I) could not find a continuous shooting mode - where you just hold the button down and it keeps snapping off pics. The shot to shot delay was hideous even with high speed shooting turned on! When I turned the dial to sports on the H9 and held the button it clicked about as fast as a d40/XTi. I've also read that the S3 can do 2.5fps, which is equivalent to the dslrs I've been looking at but is 1/4 of the price!

Anyway, this is what cnet had to say about the s700 speed:
Shooting speed is the big disappointment, mostly because of the slow focusing system. On one hand, it wakes up and snaps in a flash--1.3 seconds--and in good light there's only about 0.6 second lag between pressing the shutter and capture. But when the light's not so good, capture lag jumps to an unacceptably high 2.2 seconds; typical shot-to-shot time is a seriously sluggish 3.3 seconds, which jumps to a snailish 4 seconds with flash. The S700 constrains the number of burst frames to about 8, with an effective typical continuous shooting rate of 0.5fps and at best 0.7fps.

That's way worse than what I have now :eek:


ETA, while I was there I checked and there is a review on the S5. Unfortunately I guess it's dissapointing. So I think I'll look into renting the S3 and H9 and take and print some pics before I decide anything.

barb1686
06-17-2007, 12:10 AM
I found some rental places in the phone book. I think I'll call and see if anyone has a H9 to rent. I may rent one and a S3 if I can. That'd be perfect!

Most rental places only carry a few models of certain things. My guess is they'll have a few different SLR's to offer, maybe one. They aren't a retail store, it's more about having something last minute incase what you have is in the repair shop or you just want something for that certain occasion.

Knittingfor4
06-17-2007, 12:50 AM
Hmm, thats kind of a bummer! I'll call and see. I've just been looking at some galleries of the S3, H9 and Panasonic Lumix FZ8 which is also pretty fast. And you know what, up to about ISO 400 they all look great to me. After that, yeah I can see "noise" now that I know what it is. But I'm just not that nitpicky! I'm a bit paranoid about the birth since the last pics aren't usable, but hey, my friend was using a d70 and if that screwed up then why the heck am I spending so many hrs a day researching cameras? I should get one and be done :rolleyes:

speaklightly
06-17-2007, 08:55 AM
Knitting4four-

Here is an example of what the FZ-7 (very similiar to the FZ-8) can do without flash at ISO 200 indoors, handheld.

Sarah Joyce

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o129/ORgal/A-26AndyBuengerB122106FZ-7.jpg

Knittingfor4
06-17-2007, 09:08 AM
I don't see anything wrong with that picture but I suppose you think there's noise?

speaklightly
06-17-2007, 09:48 AM
Knitting4four-

Why are you interpting things incorrectly, or feeling that I have some ulterior motive? I was not saying that there was, or there was not noise at all. I was just attempting to share with you that the FZ-7 and its virtual twin the FZ-8 can indeed take very good indoor photos, without flash, and when handheld.

It was as simple as that. I am attempting to find you a digicam that you like. I suspect that you would be more pleased with an ultrazoom camera than a DSLR camera. However, if you feel that I am not assisting you in the process of moving you toward a "final solution" to the camera selection process. Just tell me so, I do not have tender feelings. I have lots of other posts to answer.

Sarah Joyce

pas49ras
06-17-2007, 10:27 AM
I'm a bit paranoid about the birth since the last pics aren't usable, but hey, my friend was using a d70 and if that screwed up then why the heck am I spending so many hrs a day researching cameras? I should get one and be done

I think thats the best thing to do...I looked at your friends D70 photos and they used to long a shutter speed for low light pictures,blurry pictures..not the cameras fault, it must be set correctly to give you the pictures with good quality. All P/S cameras are going to give you less quality pictures indoors w/o the flash. DSLR's excel in higher ISO and faster shot to shot pictures in low/available light conditions. Most quality P/S cameras when focused, will click off pictures quickly...picture quality should be more of a driving factor than speed alone.

Knittingfor4
06-17-2007, 11:49 AM
I don't mean to be snippy, it's just that all the pictures are of still subjects and the point I'm trying to make is that I won't be doing any of that. I looked in the Fuji s700 folder and sure those are all great photos. But I take almost no photos that are posed, still and thought out. Everything is taken while life happens very quickly, usually indoors. I'm just thinking that the s700 will not meet those needs. I would like to go back to the store and try the FZ8 or FZ7. I did not mean to offend you. I think that pic is great, but I also need to take pics in rapid succession most of the time. Waiting 2.2 sec while the flash recharges is just not feasible. I've missed so many shots because of that, and also I've missed so many shots due to the time it takes the camera to focus and capture once I've pressed the button. If the thing would just snap off as soon as I press the button then I would get what I saw and wouldn't need the rapid succession feature quite as much. Maybe I'm just not explaining my needs well enough, or maybe I'm being unreasonable not wanting to get a dslr. The thought of it just makes me fill with dread.

flippedgazelle
06-17-2007, 12:09 PM
Waiting 2.2 sec while the flash recharges is just not feasible. I've missed so many shots because of that, and also I've missed so many shots due to the time it takes the camera to focus and capture once I've pressed the button. If the thing would just snap off as soon as I press the button then I would get what I saw and wouldn't need the rapid succession feature quite as much. Maybe I'm just not explaining my needs well enough, or maybe I'm being unreasonable not wanting to get a dslr. The thought of it just makes me fill with dread.

Hi Knittingfor4, unfortunately, there are no non-DSLRs that do what you are describing, and some DSLRs also. All cameras need time to focus, though DSLRs generally do so faster, Also, all cameras that use the on-board flash have a flash recycle time, and that obviously varies from camera to camera, and also varies by how much flash is needed. A 2.2 sec flash recharge time is pretty quick.

If the camera were to "snap off" when you pressed the button, and didn't have time to focus, then many shots would be blurry. Even DSLRs, if not pre-focused, require a heartbeat or 2 to obtain it.

Great action photographers have more than great equipment - they use foresight and anticipation to get the shot. The rest of us try to do that, too, and also hope for a little luck.

speaklightly
06-17-2007, 02:46 PM
Knitting4four-

Perhaps a camcorder is more appropiate for your needs. As Chris pointed out in his post, there are few camera, be they point & shoot, ultrazooms, or DSLR cameras that can do what you are describing without the investment of many thousands of dollars.

There are indeed camcorders that allow you to print from a sinle image in the stream of images. That would seem to be better adapted to providing a workable solution to your rather precise requirements.

I wish you luck with your search. Have a great weekend and celebrate Father's Day. It takes two to tango. We have raised 8 children and it could not have done it without their Father in many, many ways.

Sarah Joyce

Knittingfor4
06-17-2007, 07:55 PM
Sarah, that's an interesting point. I did not know you could do that. It sounds great except won't I still have the problem with lighting? Are the stills of pretty good quality, like 4x6 printable?

I've been keeping up w/the other thread and I have a couple of questions about your s700. That cool flash thing, what mode do you have to have the camera in? Do you think then that no diffuser is needed? Where can I download that noise software? At 800 ISO with noise software do you think I could print a 4x6 photo?

barb1686
06-17-2007, 10:15 PM
Are you planning on using the flash during the birth? If so, wouldn't it just be easier to put a few lights on compared to the flash? I think the flash would be more disturbing to the baby than a few lights. Maybe put a few drapes over the shades?

As for the camcorder...I think that's a good suggestion. You can film away, and go through and pick out the frames you want. That way you don't have to worry about your camera not being fast enough, because it will be continuous. If money isn't an option, then maybe you can look at high definition cameras. If I'm not mistaken, they're as low as $1000.

You can't always rely on reviews, you certainly can't go by what sales people say at the stores, and you can't go by how the cameras are at the store. Stores are generally brightly lit, so it's easier to focus and you don't need the flash. When using an on-board flash there's going to be a recycle time, as I'm sure add-ons are as well. I hate flash, I never use it. You have to be the one to make adjustments, learn to use Photoshop, etc. In my opinion, it's you who makes most of the picture, not the camera.

My only suggestion left is, buy the camera in plenty of time to practice with it. Learn how to make the most of no light, learn the camera. And you'll want a tripod for the birth if there's barely going to be any light.

flippedgazelle
06-18-2007, 10:19 AM
You can't always rely on reviews, you certainly can't go by what sales people say at the stores, and you can't go by how the cameras are at the store. Stores are generally brightly lit, so it's easier to focus and you don't need the flash. When using an on-board flash there's going to be a recycle time, as I'm sure add-ons are as well. I hate flash, I never use it. You have to be the one to make adjustments, learn to use Photoshop, etc. In my opinion, it's you who makes most of the picture, not the camera.

My only suggestion left is, buy the camera in plenty of time to practice with it. Learn how to make the most of no light, learn the camera. And you'll want a tripod for the birth if there's barely going to be any light.

Excellently put, Barb! :cool:

speaklightly
06-18-2007, 11:46 AM
Knitting for4-

Yes, it would be quite realistic to get 4" X 6" prints for a single frame of camcorder video. As Barb mentioned, the beter quality the Camcorder, the better the resulting photo print.

Sarah Joyce

speaklightly
06-18-2007, 11:52 AM
Knittingfor4-

Yes, the Fuji Intelligent Flash System is quite good. It can be used in most modes, but it seems to work best in the "P" (on the Mode Selector) for Programmed Auto. No, a flash diffusser is not needed, and flash can be used in the macro mode where it is excellent.

For noise software, just go to Google and type in "Neat Image Download", that will take you right to the download.

Yes, an ISO 800 photo taken with the Fuji S-700 and processed with Neat Image software makes a very good 4" X 6" print.

Sarah Joyce

Knittingfor4
06-18-2007, 07:20 PM
Are you planning on using the flash during the birth? If so, wouldn't it just be easier to put a few lights on compared to the flash? I think the flash would be more disturbing to the baby than a few lights. Maybe put a few drapes over the shades?
I have no idea, it depends on the camera and the hour. I would prefer flash to having a repeat of last time. I won't be turning on any lights. Neither me or the baby will be looking at the camera, but the baby will be facing up after she comes out so lights would be more disruptive than flash. I don't remember the flash the few times she used it last time, guess I was busy ;) I was thinking of an XTi with either a 50mm 1.8 or the 17-70 2.8 and either no flash or bounced flash. As much as I would prefer not to get a dslr, I think I'm going to have to for the situations I'm going to spend alot of time in.Guess I just need to get over being lazy and get some books and learn :eek: I would like a smaller one for outings though, maybe that H9 I liked so much? We should also upgrade our old camcorder to a new tiny one that takes those cute baby CDs.

griptape
06-22-2007, 08:45 AM
Just say no to the H9. All of Sony's new generation cameras in fact. They put in camera noise processing that smears any possible detail into complete oblivion. The H5 (previous generation) was a MUCH better camera, and I strongly recommend you look into going H5 instead of H9.

Knittingfor4
06-22-2007, 02:02 PM
Thank you but the whole point of going with the H9 would be the Advanced Sports Mode which no older version has. When I played with it in the store it was nearly as fast at clicking as a dslr. But I'm not going to make any more purchases just yet. I just ordered a Fuji s6000, I'm going to play with that first. I've also put some tape on my Kodak's flash and I'm going to play with that. I still may just end up with the XTi cause just today I tried taking some pics outside and the camera just takes forever between shots. This time it wasn't the flash it was the screen, it shows you the pic you just took for an insane amount of time. I wonder if you can skip that feature and improve shot to shot time when flash isn't needed? Luckily the boys were sitting eating so they were contained, so I didn't actually "miss" any shots, but had they been running around I would have missed 5 shots or so while I look at the one on the screen :rolleyes:

Maybe I should just not take pics while they rough house and instead only take pics of them doing quiet activites. It would sure save on hard drive space LOL!

Visual Reality
06-22-2007, 05:22 PM
Thank you but the whole point of going with the H9 would be the Advanced Sports Mode which no older version has. When I played with it in the store it was nearly as fast at clicking as a dslr. But I'm not going to make any more purchases just yet. I just ordered a Fuji s6000, I'm going to play with that first. I've also put some tape on my Kodak's flash and I'm going to play with that. I still may just end up with the XTi cause just today I tried taking some pics outside and the camera just takes forever between shots. This time it wasn't the flash it was the screen, it shows you the pic you just took for an insane amount of time. I wonder if you can skip that feature and improve shot to shot time when flash isn't needed? Luckily the boys were sitting eating so they were contained, so I didn't actually "miss" any shots, but had they been running around I would have missed 5 shots or so while I look at the one on the screen :rolleyes:
You need to find out how to put the camera in continuous shooting mode, as I suggested before. It is different on every camera, but my S3 has a button right on the top for it.

Knittingfor4
06-22-2007, 08:34 PM
Yes there's a button on top that pops up a menu. But you can only choose first or last 5. The H9 just keeps going. I did figure out today how to set the ISO and put the f at 2.8. I had to turn the dial to M for manual mode. I took some pics but we were outside so it won't tell me much. I'm going to try some inside later when it starts getting dark and see what happens. Still thinking about the XTi though. I have just enough this week for the body, and next week I could get the 2.8 lens and DVDs. This is tough :confused:

Visual Reality
06-23-2007, 05:24 PM
I really have my doubts that the H9 is much faster than the S3.

Can anyone confirm that?

Knittingfor4
06-23-2007, 09:04 PM
From Cnet:
H9
It can shoot consecutive single images 1.4 seconds apart, growing to a modest 2.9 seconds with flash enabled. Continuous shooting is fixed at about 2 frames per second (fps), regardless of image size, and can run for about 18 shots before it starts to slow.

S3
Start-up to first shot takes only 1.5 seconds, which is quite zippy overall, and extremely good for a camera that has a long lens to extend. Shutter lag in bright light runs about 0.4 second and doubles to 0.8 second when the lights get low. The S3 is also relatively responsive: 1.1 seconds typically from shot to shot, plus another second if the flash needs to recycle. Though it maxes out at 1.5fps in continuous-shooting mode, there's no buffer-constraint on the number of sequential shots at maximum resolution

I think I'm going to back to the camera store and play some more. I'm still not sure. But I think I'll end up with the XTi.

Visual Reality
06-23-2007, 10:29 PM
Those numbers are flawed. The S3 can do up to 2-2.3 fps in high speed continuous mode.