Superzoom cams and some general questions

[calun]

Hi

Great review of the IS-200 by Jeff Keller, he really got all around. I do have a couple of questions though :):

I’m not so camera savy, but I like to have a nice camera and have, for that reason, changed cameras a lot of times…

1. Why are cameras like the IS-200 and DMC-TZ7 so bad under low lighting conditions (i.e. making pictures of people at night) ? (I have a Sony W300 and it makes much better pictures). I borrowed a DMC-TZ7 and it disappointed me at night at a family gathering, maybe I'm using it right, but I'm expert enough to handle manuel settings.
2. Does it have anything to do with the F value ? Can anyone tell me what the F value is all about ?
3. I’m looking for a camera with around 10-12 times of zoom in the sizerange of the DMC-TZ7 or W300, which would you recommend ?
4. Sony are not making any cameras like the DMC-TZ7 or like any of the other compacts on the market with superzoom, have you heard any rumours of something new happening ?
5. Some cameras have a 1/1,7 CCD and others have 1/2,3, which is best and why ?

Thanks a lot.

Carsten

[jekostas]

1. Superzoom cameras, by virtue of having a long-zoom lens stuffed into a small body, must have very small sensors (physical necessity). The smaller the sensors, the less distance between each pixel, the less distance between each pixel, the more crosstalk or "noise". This is especially important in low light, as the signal from each pixel, noise or crosstalk or whatever, is boosted to make a reasonably well-exposed picture. As megapixel amount goes up, this gets progressively WORSE, not better.
2. F value is roughly the amount of light that's let into the camera lens. F is defined as the current focal length divided by the smallest diameter of the lens. So, for example, a 50MM focal-length lens with a 25MM maximum diameter is 50/25 = 2, or an F2.0 lens. A smaller F-number means a larger aperture, and larger apertures are better for low light conditions as it means more of the available light is getting through the lens and to the sensor.
3. The TZ7 is probably your best bet, but don't expect good low-light performance out of any compact superzoom camera.
4. Nope
5. Generally, the larger the sensor, the more distance between each pixel, the better (Fuji has a way of getting around this somewhat). 1/1.7" will be on average better than a 1/2.3" sensor. Pixel density (pixels per square inch) is a much more important statistic than megapixel amount in determining final picture quality. That's why a Nikon D40 (a dSLR with a 6MP sensor) will consistently provide better quality pictures than any 12MP compact camera on the market, all other things being equal.

[calun]

Hi

Thanks a lot for your answers, this was very informative, I think I might be buying an SLR camera instead, but that juset leads to other questions :-):

1. I've been looking at the Sony A200 package with Sony DT-objektives, 18-70 mm and 75-300 mm the latter lense with F4,5 - 5,6. Will I be disappointed with the last lense at
night ?
2. Any problems on compability with the Sony mounts ?
3. Any suggestions on something else to look at, in the same pricerange ?

Thanks again.

Carsten

[David Metsky]

You might want to start a thread in the Sony DSLR forum to get a wider audience. A lot of folks you want to hear from probably aren't reading this thread.

[calun]

Great idea, thanks !

Carsten

[stanj]

When buying a DSLR you are not buying a camera, you are investing in a company. When you buy a Sony(or Nikon, Canon etc) and start acquiring lenses and accessories, they only work with that brand so any upgrade will need to be within that brand. Note that Sony lenses are quite a bit more expensive than competing, and usually superior lenses from the other major brands. You should spend some time figuring out which brand you want to get married to, by looking at their community of users, their range of lenses and industry support. All these will determine whether whatever you get today is actually a good long term investment. Until you get into the a900 Sony you might find that they are not competitive with some of the brands that have made SLRs and DSLRs longer, and are used by pros. An a300 or 350 for example is beat out in almost every criteria by similarly priced Canons and Nikons. But the Sony line is getting better as it learns more about DSLRs, it has been doing it for a relatively short time. They do make good sensors but the same sensors in other brands produce consistently better performance.