Ultra zoom choice

[tonay]

I've decided against a DSLR for finacial reasons, my wife is technologically impaired and I'll wait until IS in body is more readily available. I currently have an Olympus C765. May major problem is the speed between being able to take pics. I've tweeked all the setting but lag makes taking pics of the little ones tough. So, I figure I'll settle for an upgraded UZ for the next few years.

Budget

* $400-500 USD. Looking for top in class ultra zoom

Size

* Size doesn't matter but like sturdy build quality

Features

*megapixals - they are all fine.

* What optical zoom will you need? (None, Standard = 3x-4x, Ultrazoom = 10x-12x, Other - Specify) - again, most are in the same class

* How important is “image quality” to you? (Rate using a scale of 1-10) 9-10

Do you care for manual controls? - I like to change ISO and the wife likes the sepia's/B&W etc...

General Usage

* What will you generally use the camera for? Family photos - kids 3 months and 3 yrs old

* Will you be making big prints of your photos or not? 8x10 at biggest

Will you be shooting a lot of indoor photos or low light photos? Yes

Will you be shooting sports and/or action photos? Yes

Miscellaneous

Are there particular brands you like or hate? No, value and quality are my main concern

Are there particular models you already have in mind? Canon S5 IS, Sony DSC H7 (the H9 only really has night vision right?), Oly SP 550 UZ

(If applicable) Do you need any of the following special features? (Wide Angle, Image Stabilization, Weatherproof, Hotshoe, Rotating LCD) I prefer IS, wide angle option would be niceweather resistance is nice, hotshoe no, rotating LCD - prefer less moving parts.

[speaklightly]

tonay-

The hotest and optically better cameras seem to come from Canon. The Canon S-3 and S-5 are on today's camera market, all at the very same time. If you want to save more than few US dollars, then you will first look at the Canon S-3 first, followed by the Canon S-5, or even perhaps the Canon G-7 (a really GREAT camera in its own right) that should also be considered if you are very serious in your camera search.

Sarah Joyce

[John_Reed]

I might beg to differ with you on the wonderfulness of the Canon ultra-zooms, but rather than argue with you, I think from what the originator said, it seems like low light indoor photos are very important, and so maybe the Canons wouldn't be the most suitable, but rather something like a Fuji S6000fd, to allow decent indoor photos in low light.

[tonay]

The fuji seems very interesting but "shot-to-shot speeds of 2/4 seconds (JPEG/RAW) were good, but not great" concerns me.

I like the non-extending lense and the ablity to manually focus like an SLR.

Cnet gives slow speeds on the S9100 also.

Any thoughts on the Panasonic products?

[speaklightly]

Attention John Reed:

Yep, it is me. I have very honestly and sincerely tried photos with both the Panny TZ-1, and the TZ-3 and the FZ-7. Unfortunately, when compared, optically, to either the Canon S-3 or the newer S-5, those Panny models, the TZ-1 and the TZ-3, are only a shallow shadow of the Canon Cameras.

Yes, John, you raised me up to have a critical eye for photo quality. And I am sorry to say that your favorites, the Panny TZ-1 and TZ-3, come in BEHIND the Canon S-3 or S-5.

As always, i am willing to discuss this topic in great detail, but hat is how I see it today.

Sarah Joyce

[David Metsky]

John never mentioned the Panasonics, he was talking about the Fujis. And I agree, it would be worth looking at the Fuji S6000fd if the OP is looking at a lot of low light shots without flash. There really isn't a better camera out there for low light non-flash shooting.

I own an S3 and love it, but low light shooting isn't its strong point. Shot-to-shot speed is important, but the S3/S5 will be limited by waiting for the flash to recharge in low light situations.

[tonay]

I've been reading the other posts on ultrazooms. Originally I was waiting for the Evolt 510 as it was supposed to be like sliced bread. Then I read reviews of the Pentax K10D and feel in love till I heard about the banding issues. Will the Pentax 100D really perform better than the other super zoom's @ the same price? I don't really want to "junk" a camera but all things being equal - if it will out preform an ultra zoom and I'm not really zooming any thing, I care about light and speed shot to shot - why not? If I need to buy a lense then I'll stick w/ pentax as they really seem to be my type of company giving huge bang for the buck.

For 449 from buydig w/ a 50 rebate - can I go wrong?

Opinions?

[AlexMonro]

Any DSLR will be capable of far better results than an ultrazoom in all but ideal conditions, and even then it'll be somewhat better. However, to get the best results from a DSLR, you'll need good lenses (more expensive) and climb the steeper learning cureve, including putting time into post processing your pictures on a computer (RAW conversion, sharpening etc.) The Pentax K100D gives you built in anti shake in the body, and compatibility with a wide range of older Pentax mount lenses, available 2nd hand relatively cheaply, as well as new 3rd party lenses such as Sigma, many of which are excellent.

However, if you do want to settle for an ultrazoom, for weight, size, convenience etc. as well as price, I'd agree with John that the Fuji S6000 would probably be your best choice for low light action photos.

[Rooz]

i agree, i'd be looking at the fuji's seriously aswell.

[tonay]

Thanks for the opinions and puting up w/ my endless questions.

On the fuji - 2/4 sec shot to shot concerns me as that's the main reason I'm up grading from my C765. Is there anything on the horizon that may be quicker? My low light action shots are indoor pics of kids doing kid stuff.

On the pentax K100D kit lens - how bad is that lens?

Thanks all

[Rooz]

Thanks for the opinions and puting up w/ my endless questions.

On the fuji - 2/4 sec shot to shot concerns me as that's the main reason I'm up grading from my C765. Is there anything on the horizon that may be quicker? My low light action shots are indoor pics of kids doing kid stuff.

On the pentax K100D kit lens - how bad is that lens?

Thanks all

its not a bad lens at all but its no ultrazoom. it has a VERY limited focal range compared to what your looking at.

low light action shots means you MUST go for a camera with good iso performance, period. IS will be completly useless to you in these circumstances unless you tell your kids to freeze motionless every time you try and take a picture.

[fabi]

Something about shot-to-shot delay of fhe Fuji S6500/6000 from a nice german site (http://meinekamera.00hensche.de/):

"If you find the 1.5 seconds preview is too long - you cannot switch it off - you may find this trick helpful: in the continuous picture mode no preview is shown. And there is no need to take a series of pictures, one is enough. So you can take the next picture after 0.7 seconds instead of 1.5 seconds."

[tonay]

I just don;t know what to do

[Rooz]

I just don;t know what to do

lol unfortunately there is no such thing as the perfect camera that does everything the best. they all have their pros/ cons which makes things so difficult.

imo, if low light action indoors of your kids is THE most important thing then you really need to look closer at the fuji's cos they are by far the best iso performers out there. alternately, you need to accept the range, size and cost limitations of dslr.

all that being said though, i haven;t come across an S3 owner who wasn;t happy with their purchase.

[fabi]

...imo, if low light action indoors of your kids is THE most important thing then you really need to look closer at the fuji's cos they are by far the best iso performers out there...

Yes, but - i knew there must have been some indoor pictures of my daughter and i found them on my harddisk - i just could get shutter-speed from 1/80 - 1/210 depending on the zoom with ISO 1600, nothing less.:(

So, as already said, to receive images with considerable quality theres no way beside dslr with a good = fast (expensive) lense.

fabi

[tonay]

Buydig even has a $50 rebate on the fuji.

I'm gunna hunt for one locally to try it out.

[tonay]

Well, no stores locally have the fuji.

Question: if I were to go w/ the Pentax K100D body only - what would be a fast, good value, and meeting 90-95% of my needs lense to buy (considering the value aspect).

Still calling around to find a fuji to try

Thanks - you are the best group I've bounced ideas off.

[speaklightly]

You might consider a Pentax K100D body and the Tamron 18-250mm lens as a single lens option. In 35mm terms that would cover a focal length span of 28mm to 375mm. The tamron 18-250mm lens has received excellent reviews and user comments.

Sarah Joyce

[fabi]

You might consider a Pentax K100D body and the Tamron 18-250mm lens as a single lens option. In 35mm terms that would cover a focal length span of 28mm to 375mm. The tamron 18-250mm lens has received excellent reviews and user comments.

Sarah Joyce

Shooting in low-light with such lenses???????


At first, I never would leave the good kit-lens in the shop to save 35 Euros.

My suggestion is the Tamron SP AF 28-75mm 2.8 XR Di LD IF Makro, ~ 280 Euros

Verdict of www.photozone.de (tested with a Nikon D200):

The Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 SP XR (forgive me for using a shorter variant of the name ...) proved to be a very good lens in the lab. The resolution figures are among the highest tested among the standard zoom lenses - the center resolution is generally excellent and the borders follow closely on very good to excellent levels. The distortions are very low as is the amount of vignetting and even CAs are very well under control. Nonetheless it should be mentioned that this is the 2nd tested sample of this lens and both showed centering defects - this is worrisome. The build quality of the lens is decent but nothing to rave about. If you can live with the rather odd zoom range within the APS-C scope the lens is worth a deeper look - assuming you can get a good sample.

regards fabi

[tonay]

Yikes

In general - are lenses so much more than a body? Jimminy Christmas!

[Rooz]

Yikes

In general - are lenses so much more than a body? Jimminy Christmas!

lol they are actually very cheap lens'.

[tonay]

lol they are actually very cheap lens'.

So it would be like putting 20 inch rims/tires on a 1989 Honda Accord.

[David Metsky]

So it would be like putting 20 inch rims/tires on a 1989 Honda Accord.
Not really. A camera body is essentially just a method of using lenses. There are differences between camera bodies, but in the final measure lenses are what determine the quality of the image. The camera body is just a fancy way of holding the CCD. :) People swap camera bodies all the time, but once you invest in good glass you stick with it.

[e_dawg]

I might recommend the Fuji S6000/6500, Canon S3, and Canon S5 (with a Canon 430 external flash at a later time if needed) in that order. The Olympus SP-550 is okay, but the Fuji and Canon are a little better. The Sony is probably a bit behind the Olympus, bringing up the rear.

[Visual Reality]

Not really. A camera body is essentially just a method of using lenses. There are differences between camera bodies, but in the final measure lenses are what determine the quality of the image. The camera body is just a fancy way of holding the CCD. :) People swap camera bodies all the time, but once you invest in good glass you stick with it.
To a point...a lot of people swear by this, but I don't agree. You can put the most amazing $20,000 lens on a 1996 Sony Mavica and the final image will still be useless :)

[tonay]

I took this qoute from another post as I didn;t want to highjack -
"The Pentax K100D is currently the lowest priced consumer level DSLR camera, thanks to the Pentax Summertime Rebate Program. A K100D with the Pentax 18-55mm lens and the Pentax 50-200mm lens can be had (after reabate of course) for around $(US) 540 to $(US) 560 right now."

buydig.com 686 w/ 150 in rebates.

I can't find the fuji anywhere locally to trial and I hate to buy on recommendation/review only.

1. Would this be a worthy alternative?
2. DSLR is something I want to invest in the future. Would be buying this set and updating the body down the road be a good choice w/ pentax or would I be better off w/ a D40 Rebal XT, getting decent/good lenses as I can and getting a better body down the road?

Thanks for putting up w/ my waviering

[Rooz]

I took this qoute from another post as I didn;t want to highjack -
"The Pentax K100D is currently the lowest priced consumer level DSLR camera, thanks to the Pentax Summertime Rebate Program. A K100D with the Pentax 18-55mm lens and the Pentax 50-200mm lens can be had (after reabate of course) for around $(US) 540 to $(US) 560 right now."

buydig.com 686 w/ 150 in rebates.

I can't find the fuji anywhere locally to trial and I hate to buy on recommendation/review only.

1. Would this be a worthy alternative?
2. DSLR is something I want to invest in the future. Would be buying this set and updating the body down the road be a good choice w/ pentax or would I be better off w/ a D40 Rebal XT, getting decent/good lenses as I can and getting a better body down the road?

Thanks for putting up w/ my waviering

its definately a worthy altenative as long as you understand that you're not getting the focal range of an ultrazoom all in one compact body. thats what we discussed at the very beginning.

the k100d is a good choice in that twin lens kit, as is the d40 with the kit lens and the 55-200VR. both are great entry level cams. in the thread you took that quote from there are links to d40 reviews. the same places have k100d reviews. i suggest you spend a little time reading up.

[tonay]

I personally like the feel and interface of the nikon best. I guess it really come down to I like Brandy on a Bud Light budget.

[e_dawg]

If you're willing to shoot uncompressed RAW and want the best camera now instead of building with a system for the longer term, the Pentax K100D probably gives you the best bang for the buck. It has built-in (CCD-shift) image stabilization AND costs less than a Nikon D40 or Rebel XT. You can't get IS on the Nikon or Canon without spending $$ on a new stabilized lens.

Having said that, the Pentax has a few potential drawbacks:

1. Limited RAW output options: uncompressed RAW only, no RAW + JPEG option available

2. Auto ISO function does not work in conjuction with exposure compensation

3. in-camera JPEG processing not quite as good as the competition

4. flash system not as good as Nikon's

5. not as much choice for lenses

6. CCD-shift image stabilization, while comes standard and will work on every lens, is ultimately not as effective as optical IS on the lens itself

[tonay]

Thank Dawg

This is really what I'm torn by:
1. Buy an UZ (Fuji 6000fd or 9000) that I know I'll out grow soon, plus I can't trial the ones I find features I like best
2. Buy into a DSLR system (pentax K100) that has a lot of feature's I'm looking into but is limited in to many other ways
3. Buy into a DSLR system (Nikon D40) that I see draw backs on currently but is a better system and a better long term investment as long as I buy the good lenses (is there a second party version of the 55-200 VR or equivalent?).

[AllanM]

I am also getting a super-zoom camera and on the Fujifilm website there is no S6000fd only a S6500fd. Is this just an updated version?

[AlexMonro]

As far as I can tell, the Fuji S6000 and S6500 are identical, for some reason Fuji give different model numbers to cameras sold in different countries.

[tim11]

I am also getting a super-zoom camera and on the Fujifilm website there is no S6000fd only a S6500fd. Is this just an updated version?
I replied to your question in Fuji thread. You seemed to miss it.
Click here to see my answer again. (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=246340&postcount=4)