Re: Digital Cameras
 

After much research here is what I found to be best in class digital cameras:

(First...if Tigerdirect.com sells it expect the best price and their service is great.)

Best $ 200.00 Digital...Olympus D-580...very nice crisp colors 4 MMP.

Best $ 300.00 Digital....Olympus C-60....6.1 MMP...simply outstanding.

Olympus owns the $200-300 market. Some of the Canons are good too. MInolta is not the same since they merged with Konica..read that "Made in Taiwan".

The the Panasonic/Leica FZ-20 can be had for $ 450-500

Then the Canon Digital Rebel about equal to the FZ-20 if you want an SLR but it is made in Taiwan and comes with a cheap lens and can only accommodate Canon accessories. I personally am sad to hear all this as I was going to buy one.

Then the next move is to a Nikon D-70 system at say $ 1,500.00 before adding a long range zoom lens and eventually expect to sink around $ 3,500.00 into it. Worth every cent.

Then the Contax digital system when you have 10 grand to sink into a really serious W. German camera and Zeiss lenses. Skip the Leica as the Contax kills everything in it's path.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

You have been doing your home work :D

Re: Digital Cameras
 

You may notice that many retail Photography stores will not sell Olympus point and shoots. There is hardly any mark up and they outperform most of the other brands they make a lot of money on.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

I picked up an Olympus Stylus 300, it is small enough to fit in your pocket and was really surprised how good the pictures were.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Olympus cameras are the most reasonably priced digitals that take crisp clear vivid color pictures and the only thing about them is you have to go to Target to buy them. There is hardly any mark-up on most models up to the $ 300.00 price point. Camera stores can't stay in business selling them.

The ccd and lenses are great; reliability is the best in class and they are easy to use.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Got mine off one of the sites I use. Did you have a good day? Benn rainy and cold here.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Circuit City, Best Buy, Comp USA, B&H, Office Depot all seel Olympus...

Re: Digital Cameras
 

anyone interested in accessories for the FZ cameras should look at this web page

http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam/User-Guide/FZ-10/

http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam...e-Compare.html

the second link tests a FZ10 with the Canon TL-55 and a few others also... btw the Olympus TCON-17 had the least distortion in my opinion.. now I'm gonna go look at it's price

Ernie

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Nice Bike :drink:

Re: Digital Cameras
 

I also have a new digital Rebel and I love it. I have a quantaray zoom lense from our 35mm Rebel and it works fine. I have alot to learn with photography so jeaston can you suggest any books that I can read for the basics on up?

Re: Digital Cameras
 

There are several out there, I quit reading because can't seem to remember what I read by the time I get to the camera. Think Hydrocruiser may have some good recommendations, seems to be very well informed of the digital world. :drink:

Re: Digital Cameras
 

The left pic is with the a TL-5 and the right with the Olympus TCON-17.
The Canon has the least amount of distortion. The purple fringes on the Olympus lens are bad. The Canon pic can be fixed using Photoshop but you can't get rid of all that fringing on the Olympus lens.

The Olympus has a bit more magnification but it is flawed. The only lens bettef than the Canon is the Sony which is twice the price unless you go for the Panasonic/Leica at $ 600.00.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

What was the distance?

Re: Digital Cameras
 

I believe it was zooming in on a newspaper that was against a wall 50ft away using only optical zoom no digital. All it shows is which lens is less likely to distort. Every lens extender out there excet for the Canon and Sony cause lots of distortion and purple fringing at full zoom. The Canon is 1.4x for $ 89.00 and the Sony is around $ 200.00 at 1.8x. If you have the moeny and need more Zoom go with Sony. I am very happy with the Canon if you can eget no distortion on newspaper print from 50 ft away you will get "normal" zoom shots in clearly. You may sacrifice a bit of zoom but it's a cleaner picture.

Kind of crazy

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Most Canon and Nikon D-70 owners say that they don't get the vivid colors some digitals are getting.

The top left picture is taken with the Nikon D-70 and the right picture taken with the the SLR Canon Rebel EOS 6.3 while the bottom is the Panasonic/Leica FZ-20. All three pictures had camera settings that were equal with equal lighting conditions taken by a professional digital camera tester.

The Leica/Panasonic combo has the absolute best white color balance of the group. That is an indicator of how accurate the colors will be and how well the CCD performs. All pictures taken with studio lighting at iso 100.

The Panasonic/Leica has the best performing lens in sharpness and exposure control from what I see here. The Panasonic/Leica and Nikon have the sharpest lenses but the Leica is sharper than the Nikon if you look closely at detail. The Panasonic/Leica has the most vivid colors. The Canon had the least vivid colors. Only very expensive Canon ED glass lenses can touch the Nikon. These 3 cameras are considered the very best of what is on the market. You decide.

Oh..fyi the Nkion costs 3x and the Canon 2x what the Panasonic/Leica costs. That is why it is being touted ( except by stores looking to make a larger profit) as the best Zoom digital of 2004.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

I will try that tomorrow with ambiet light canon 28/135 and see what happens. Interesting

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Those zoom pics were taken with the Panasonic/Leica at a total optical zoom of 650mm.

Zooming only to 135mm is not an "apples to apples comparison" as 650mm is extreme zoom. 135mm is a portrait zoom.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

I just want to see the difference, may try it with 400 and 2x to see the difference. Never really have compared, most of my shots are moving and the 8 fps sure help.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Give it a go and see what you get. I have taken about 2,000 "practice" digital pictures with the FZ-20 to get to where I am at and I consider myself about at a pro level with this camera now.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

This is the new Minolta/Konica priced at $ 900.00. It is actually about as good in these tests as the D-70 Nikon but not as good as the Panasonic/Leica. My conclusion is that the right Digital SLR is still under development. A picture from the Nikon $900 Coolpix 8800 on the right.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

I think there are really great things coming in the near future.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Right now the Canon 1DS and the Contax are the best pro-digitals I hear. They are very expensive and require investments at or around $ 10-12,000 with lenses etc.
The Canon 1DSW is only 4 million megapixels too.

I think the best digital SLR's will be affordable in 3-5 years. Until then the pro-sumer market can only bear the Rebel and D-70. The Panasonic?Leica really does not have any competition in it's price range or even 2-3x it's price. You go from $ 600.00 to well over $6,000 to see much better performance. I read today where most British and german photo-journalists are going this route.

Don't throw your 35mm cameras away just yet. My Nikon N8008 with Kodaks High-Resolution film and developed by Kodak is still better than any digital SLR out there. I just get the film developed and add in a CD so I can do further editing. But My Pana/leica is fast becoming my favorite.

http://www.cambridgeworld.com/Canon_...tal_camera.htm

Re: Digital Cameras
 

I have a 1DS because of the one to one focal length got the new mark II for the speed think it is 1.6 or 1.3 the newer mark II has the 1 to 1 but takes half the fps. Kind of a trade off for the shots you are trying to get.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

The 1DS is the best SLR on the market I have been told. Make sure to always get Canaon ED multicoated lenses and you will have it made. Great piece.

How much do you have invested in the system?

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Mark II only beats it in fps. Mark II's capture plate has a little better quality but in photo prints you can't really see it.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Canon 1ds @ $8,500 on the left and the $ 500.00 FZ-20 Panasonic/Leica on the right.

The background is not the exact same...I like both pictures.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

What lens on the 1ds?

Re: Digital Cameras
 

That was with the Canon EF 16-35mm f2.8 USM lens. It's a $ 1,250.00 lens. I think the Panasonic/Leica and the Canon 1DS with this lens are about equal and the total cost of the Canon is $ 8,500.00 vs. $ 500.00 street price for the FZ-20 Panasonic. Amazing?

A lot of folks don't know Canon makes two grades of lenses. It's the USM lenses that are comparable to Nikkors,Zeiss and Leica lenses

http://www.digitalfotoclub.com/sc/fr...ate=12_03_2004

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Well no argument until you take the picture to 28x40 for prints. That is where I have had problems in the past.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

So after I compared the D-70 to the FZ-20 I took my D-70 back. In 5 years the digital SLR's will be where they ought to be and until then it seems like Panasonic with their electronic expertise and Leica being one of the best lens manufacturer's in the world came up with the best most high perforamnce and affordable camera of 2004. Who can complain with built in 36-436mm Zoom and external flash capabilities.

I even tried the Contax and it's ccd is not as good as a D1.

So for top enders we have 3-5 years to wait. Panasonic has a new camera coming out next fall that will be the same with 8 million megapixels. But who needs more than 5-6 anyways? The FZ 20 is a 5.36.

They say 2008 will have a newly designed D-70.

Also, if you go with a digital SLR there is no cutting corners on lenses. You have to go with the more expensive ED glass lenses and get comfy with paying $ 1,500.00 for a zoom lens and you will need two of them.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Hope to discuss this with you in 4 to 5 years. Or maybe over a beer sometime where it is sunny and an ocean. :drink:

Re: Digital Cameras
 

It's been a good discussion. I think the bottom line is knowing there is a lot of much better stuff coming out soon and to save your $$ for the more revolutionary new 64 bit processors and 4" CCD's.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Point made, point taken. Has been a good discussion, there was one person who had asked about reading material and I refered him to you. Don't really have to wait 4 to 5 years for the beer. :drink:

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Hydrocruiser, Sorry if this was covered already, but could you give me an idea of how effective the 430mm zoom lens is in real life while handheld?? I have the Fuji S5000 with a 370mm zoom and find it's really difficult to gt a steady shot/non-blurry pic when fully zoomed?! :( Tri-pod would do the trick, but not practical for real life conditions. :) Really considering an upgrade to the DMC-FZ-20 ... what to do with the s5000 though lol

Re: Digital Cameras
 

As you know the max optical zoom on a Panasonic/Leica is 436mm. That's a huge telescopic lens. One factor in whether you need a tripod or not is going to be shutter speed. So on a sunny day with a shutter speed at say 1/500 th of a second or higher with the lens stabilizer you can take handheld shots all day long. Any shutter speed below 1/60th of a second and you need the pod.

Also, on any camera...using a tripod or monopod will always give a slightly better picture. At boat races a monopod is not a bad idea. But you don't have to have one with higher shutter speeds usually.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

If you have a Panasonic/Leica DMC-FZ-10;15 or 20 and a Sunpak 383 or Quantary 383 flash..(same units made by Sunpak)...here are the perfect settings:

Set the camera as follows:

Ext flash to "manual".

Aperature setting to "f4 and iso 100"

White balance to "Auto"

Metering to "Center Weighted"

Auto focus to "One area focusing"

Set flash to:

Yellow Auto mode

iso 100 (corresponds to f4)

This gives 7 1/2' to 60' Auto flash .


The camera program mode is set to all "auto" settings.

SO when you put the external flash on you just set the camera to "a" aperature and the iso 100 and f4 show up as having been preprogrammed.

take the external flash off and put the camera on "p" program and it is fully automatic.

Very simple when you have it all programmed into the camera.


It took me 2,000 test pictures and 2 weeks to get it perfect.


Here is a test picture of a poster my kid has on his wall. His friends have a good laugh when they come over. :D Boots or flip flops??.. Boots won :p
But the sign is perfectly exposed using that flash. Looks pretty good for a $ 600.00 set-up?
My Nikon can't do as well sometimes.

White Balance; Focus; Color Saturation; exposure; absolutely everything is crystal clear and perfectly rendered. Taking picutres outdoors is a no brainer just put it on the "P" program mode and it's a point and shoot if you desire.

Below is a very tricky shot of a (Zoomed-in from 25') Christmas floral arrangement. It is supurb for a digital camera or any 35mm camera for that matter.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Got a PM...lens on the camera and hood have a 72mm opening. Adapters can reduce the need to use such large filters. A 55mm PD-55 works great. Use the larger lens shade system for outdoor shots if you like.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

Was asked what a Leica Zoom goes for on their SLR's

Take your pick.

http://www.epinions.com/elec-Photo-L...cus_Lens-Leica

Re: Digital Cameras
 

I was also asked why I am not more pro-SLR digital vs. the Panasonic DMC-FZ20?

Well sinece this new camera has a toatally redecigned lens and CCD here are my findings.

I have a couple Canon, Nikon and Leica 35mm cameras. I still maintain that the day where the digital camera can perfectly math the best SLR's is almost here but not quite.

The Leica lens on the FZ-20 was totally designed by Leica and the new lens is now made form their expensive ED glass. All are designed to eliminate chromatic aberration (color fringing). This is especially important in a digital camera that can pick up such abnormalaites and magnify them. The Leica lens is then multi-coated and totally assembled at the Leica plant and individually tested. The lens itself has the "anti-shake" feature built into it. The lens itself does perform as well as any ED glass multi-coated lens you can buy for a SLR camera. Expect to pay $ 400.00 for an ED glass lens with a short zoom range. You can not buy a lens for an SLR camera that is made of ED glass that zooms from 36-432mm. You usually buy a 20-70mm for $400.00 and then a 70-300mm for about $ 600.00. Then you buy a 400mm or 500mm lens for $ 2,500.00.

In any case you have to switch lenses. Additionally, with a good quality 1.4x telescopic lens you can extend to 600+mm.

So this camera set-up with the extender is a $ 600.00 unit. Until we get an SLR that has excellent ED glass anti-shake lenses I am saving my money. I sent a digital SLR I had gotten back for that reason. I didn't expect the Leica/Panasonic to be as good as it is. The color are more vibrant.

That's my perspective. If I want a "better" picture" that is "digital". I will use my Nikon 35mm and have the prints put on a CD disk. I can then lod it on my computer and use photoshop etc.

I tried the Contax Digital as well and while the lens being a Zeiss is great the pictures are not as colorful as they should be.

Is the D-70 better? In some regards yes..but not worth the spend for the system as everything changes in 2006 I was told with mostly improved CCD's.

Re: Digital Cameras
 

I was also asked why I am not more pro-SLR digital vs. the Panasonic DMC-FZ20?

Well since this new camera has a totally redesigned lens and CCD here are my findings:

I have a couple Canon, Nikon and Leica 35mm cameras. I still maintain that the day where the digital camera can perfectly math the best SLR's is almost here but not quite.

The Leica lens on the FZ-20 was totally designed by Leica and the new lens is now made from their expensive ED glass. All are designed to eliminate chromatic aberration (color fringing). This is especially important in a digital camera that can pick up such abnormalities and magnify them. The Leica lens is then multi-coated and totally assembled at the Leica plant and individually tested. The lens itself has the "anti-shake" feature built into it. The lens itself does perform as well as any ED glass multi-coated lens you can buy for a SLR camera. Expect to pay $ 400.00 for an ED glass lens with a short zoom range. You can not buy a lens for an SLR camera that is made of ED glass that zooms from 36-432mm. You usually buy a 20-70mm for $400.00 and then a 70-300mm for about
$ 600.00. Then you buy a 400mm or 500mm or 800mm lens for $ 2,500.00+.

In any case you have to switch lenses. Additionally, with a good quality 1.4x telescopic lens you can extend to 600+mm on the FZ-20.

So this camera set-up with the extender is a $ 600.00 unit. Until we get an SLR that has excellent ED glass with the "anti-shake" lenses I am saving my money. I sent a digital SLR I had gotten back for that reason. I didn't expect the Leica/Panasonic to be as good as it is. The colors are more vibrant.

That's my perspective. If I want a "better" picture" that is "digital". I will use my Nikon 35mm and have the prints put on a CD disk. I can then load it onto my computer and use photoshop etc.

I tried the Contax Digital as well and while the lens being a Zeiss is great; the pictures are not as colorful as they should be.

Is the D-70 better? In some regards yes..but not worth the spend for the system as everything changes in 2006 I was told with vastly improved CCD's and more ED glass lenses. The non "digital" lenses just are not as sharp.

The DMC-FZ-20 is about 98% as good as my D-70 I sent back. If you try one you will see what I mean.