 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
74.215.224.21
except how to push the button. I am looking for a compact digital camera. It must be compact (one without lense attachments) so I can take it into concert venues. I've read that the pixel count is not so very important in a compact digital camera, but that the degree of zoom is (at leat 10x being preferable.)
My questions are whether there any specifications that can tell me how a camera performs in subdued lighting, and can tell me how clear a picture it can produce with the zoom fully extended?
Anyone have any suggestions for compact digital cameras able to do better in subdued lighting, and from a distance?
Thanks for the help.
Follow Ups:
I like the Canon Powershot series myself, for several reasons-they have an optical viewfinder so you're not limited to the LCD display to compose your photo, and they use AA batteries instead of proprietary cells (read, expensive, and impossible to find at a far away minimart.) Plus, the case design uses the AA battery shape to form a 'grip'. And the photos are great.If you opt for a model with the swivel display, you'll be amazed at how handy it is.
There's a review at the link of one of (many) Powershot models. And btw, that site has-by far-the best digital camera reviews of any I've seen: they test all camera modes, show the results, and use the same methodology for each test. No affiliation, I just like the linear, diligent, and consistent approach.
Edit: After the fact, I note that 'rtbarr' recommended the same review site. Lesson learned-read first, post later.
"dammit"
Edits: 05/27/09
is my advice as a former professional photographer. If you can afford the first row, nobody is going to block your view!
The best current compact IMHO is the Panasonic LX3 which sports a fast f2-f2.8 Leica lens and very effective image stabilization. Unfortunately, its zoom range is small, so you have to be close. But it will perform admirably in concert conditions. It is so highly desired that it has been backordered for months. List price is $500, street $430 when available. (The Leica D-Lux 4 is virtually identical, available, but retails for $700.)
The next-best low light camera is probably the Fuji F200EXR which allows you to optimize low light capability, dynamic range, or resolution. (It has replaced the other Fuji's mentioned by another poster below.) Its zoom range, however is only 5X which is more than the Panasonic LX3, but half your desired 10X. About $350 and readily available.
I think you begin to see the problem with these two examples. The longer the zoom range, the worst the low light capability! Panasonic (and others) does in fact make an ultra zoom compact, the TZ7: 12X zoom! But its low light capability is mediocre at best.
Good luck! (Don't the compromises involved mirror audio equipment?)
*
I own a Panasonic digital camera which is about 7 megapixels and has a 3X optical zoom lens. It is fair on low light conditions, but others are likely better.
Zoom lenses are available up to about 12X. Cameras with zooms higher than 5X usually are less compact than those with lesser zoom ratios. What you get will depend on how important it is for the camera to be pocketable and concealable.
One important thing is to be able to disable the flash for available light shots. I also like to be able to force the flash for "fill-in" flash on people pictures to reduce shadows in high contrast lighting situations. Not all cameras seem to have these obviously useful features.
Light sensitivity is measured as ISO, similar to the ASA rating of regular film. My camera allows the ISO to be either specified or left to the camera to adjust according to the situation. There is no free lunch, the higher ISO settings result in grainier pictures. But a grainy picture is often better tha no picture.
Several digital camera review sites include actual photos taken with each ISO setting so one can judge how much image degradation results from increasing the ISO. One good site is linked below. I also like the camera reviews at www.photo.net.
Another important consideration is that digital SLRs have much larger image sensors than point and shoot cameras. They can take much better available light photos, but are nowhere near pocket sized. I doubt one could sneak one into a concert venue very easily. The are also quite expensive.
I have a friend who is a professional photographer. He buys much of his equipment from KEH photo in Atlanta, GA. He likes them because they sell gently used cameras and lenses for reasonable prices, and also take his spare gear in trade or pay cash for it. I have no connection to this business other than knowing a satisfied customer. If you decide to buy a point and shoot camera, just about any internet site (such as Amazon) will have about the same price.
I plan to buy a digital SLR this summer, so I have been researching the choices. I haven't made a decision yet.
RT Barr
According to dpreview.com, is the FujiFilm F50 fd, or the older models, the F30 and F31. There are other makes of compact cameras that are just as good in other areas, for example Panasonic makes compact cameras that have larger telephoto lens and are better for landscapes, but they can't do better in low light then a Fuji F50.
I have a FujiFilm F10 with I use soley for concerts and art galleries, where flash is not allowed, but I use a different camera for landscapes.
In fact, I liked it enough to buy another one for me. The lens offers 5x optical zoom and in this case is the equivalent to 28-140mm if comparing to a typical 35mm film camera. It's not a long zoom but a good all around range. 28mm is wider than most digital cameras making it better suited for cramped indoor shots w/o always having to backup into a far corner to get everyone in the picture, or for wide scenic photos.
This Sony has done significantly better than a lower priced Canon A590 that was highly recommended by Consumer Reports. The Canon was a total waste of money. Super grainy images unless in ideal lighting. The Sony is so much better in low light and in general plus it's more compact (but it does cost more). The Sony also has an "Easy" mode so it's a no brainer and an Intelligent mode (also a no brainer) that takes several variables into account (strong backlighting, high contrast scenes, multiple metering and focus zones, etc) to always get you a great shot.
There are so many choices out there and you simply have to decide which features are most important to you. There are usually trade-offs associated with long zoom lenses which typically translate into picture quality issues especially at the extremes and slow lens speed at the longer focal lengths.
The Sony W290 also has a high-definition video recording mode and a couple other small features. If you don't need that, consider the less expensive Sony CyberShote W230 with similar specs for about $175.
We found the Sony W290 to be an all around good performer - but if you want the longest zoom - look elsewhere and be prepared for the trade-offs.
Sony W290 in Blue $228 at Amazon.com + Accessories
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
