Which camera are u using?

[dc_publius]

If you take pics outside of fairly steady objects, pretty much ALL cameras are good enough. There is so much light outside, you can take great pics with 5 year old cell phone cameras.

 

But once you start taking pics inside, or need to capture action, it comes down to sensor size and lens - and basically, the more expensive the camera, the bigger the sensor and faster the lens.

 

It really comes down to your budget.

 

I've had S95 and LX3. Good enough; shit compared to my DLSR but good enough. Both broke after getting just a little wet. That's what I don't like about P&S - they are shit build quality. In contrast, I've really dinged around my D7000. Even dropped it on concrete from a few feet several times, had it in torrential downpours, etc. It still works. P&S are mostly pretty fragile... You gotta baby them around or poof! you just lost $400.

[findybear]

Canon 450D for good pics.

Nikon AW100 (outdoor camera) for quick shots and underwater pics/videos.

To be honest I was looking forward to using the nikon, but the fotos are not persuading me :(

They are definitely better than my old Casio Z80.

[nrvous]

I have used all sorts of brands... Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Panasonic etc. I went to panasonic point-n-shoot because it could zoom while doing video without noise and I didn't want a DSLR to lug around and be worried about it. I had the DMC-zs7 (western model number) and then recently upgraded to the DMC-zs20 (aka DMC tz-30). It has 20x zoom and 1080p. It also has GPS but I don't care (the zs19 excludes gps). My buddy (a retired commercial photographer) with a very nice DSLR and I had a challenge of 10 photos. I go around and copy his shots (he shoots, I shoot). I then stripped the exif info etc. (also set to same res). No color corrections. He picked 6 of 10 that he thought were his were actually mine. My (at the time) $200 zs7 was generally good enough to compete with his $2k camera setup. btw I even left mine in iA. I could have done slightly better. Now, does his camer kick mine to the curb with handheld night shots. yep. but I lean against a pole or tripod it etc, his is still better but not by much. During the day, it is a crap shoot.

 

I really have no need for a DSLR anymore as I am not making money with the photos and I try to limit the numbers of pics I take since I don't have anyone to show them off to. Now half the stuff I take is from my camera phone (very high mp but pretty crappy as compared to my panasonic).

 

Action shots and instide shots are fine. Crisp and clear generally. but super dark night shots down some alley's. it is a bit grainy as compared to a $2k canon with a $1k lense on it. I do hear good things about the Panasonic GH2 (hacked). And of course you can't usually go wrong with Canon or Nikon.

 

1080p, 20x zoom, and good optics for a point and shoot were the selling points for me. Oh and to be able to put it in my pocket instead of a bag or around my neck like a tourist.

[Spanky99]

I do hear good things about the Panasonic GH2 (hacked). And of course you can't usually go wrong with Canon or Nikon.

 

 

The GH2 is more of a movie making camera than anything else. That is where it really shines. As a camera it does compete with the higher end APS-C DSLRs. I primarily use a Panasonic G3 which has a new sensor and takes great images. Reading reviews about it on the web you would assume it was the biggest pile of crap on the planet but it really is a very good camera with an electronic viewfinder, decent quality at high ISOs, and while I think it's evil, built in flash. The camera itself is cheap and as with any micro 4/3 camera you can adapt old manual focus lenses from any manufacturer. The native lenses are brilliant with the Panasonic Leica 25mm 1.4 being the most raved about followed by the Olympus 45mm 1.8. Both are brilliantly sharp. The great thing about any micro 4/3 camera is that its all the features of a DSLR without the weight. Which makes them easy to carry around during the day.

 

For the general "monger cam" I use a Canon 1400IS which is small, lightweight, and tough. It has ridden in my pocket for a few years and has even smashed the floor a few times without an issue.

 

There is no right or wrong with a camera. If the final image makes you happy I say go with it!

[findybear]

If I would have the choice now, I would go fo the slim 4/3 camera, as the CCD sensor is big, the lenses high quality and it is small enough to carry everywhere.

 

As a DSLR I would choose a Nikon, as the quality of the fotos is better, the lenses quality too and the autofokus is working faster and more precisely as the one from Canon.

[Piece Corp]

Canon Powershot A640

[maki]

My Canon 5D Mark II is still with me Awesome camera.

Used to have a Hasselblad 2D with Phase One 39 Mpixel digital back, so I know what I'm talking about ;)

 

Maki

[Apex Photographic Studios]

My Canon 5D Mark II is still with me Awesome camera.

Used to have a Hasselblad 2D with Phase One 39 Mpixel digital back, so I know what I'm talking about ;)

 

Maki

 

And now they can be had for 58,900 baht (body only). Which is a very inticing considering its successor is costing 109,000 baht (body only).

[altec123]

And now they can be had for 58,900 baht (body only). Which is a very inticing considering its successor is costing 109,000 baht (body only).

 

Yes it is very enticing to get the MK 2 over the MK 3 with that price difference. It is also enticing to get a D700 body (66,000 baht) over a D800, especially if you do not care abut video. Bottom line is that all of the cameras on the market these days are excellent and exceed the abilities of most photographers.

[Apex Photographic Studios]

Yes it is very enticing to get the MK 2 over the MK 3 with that price difference. It is also enticing to get a D700 body (66,000 baht) over a D800, especially if you do not care abut video. Bottom line is that all of the cameras on the market these days are excellent and exceed the abilities of most photographers.

 

I agree with you...

The big sell for the D800 over the D700 would probably be the resolution difference. Where as the MK 3 vs the MK 2 is only a matter of 1mp difference in resolution. Camera Labs has a very good review between the MK 3 and MK 2, also the MK 3 and the D800... He put them side by side and tested ISO performance, etc.... Very interesting read for someoone who already understands it.

[Spanky99]

The Nikon D3200 is a real nice camera at a great starting price (least here in the US) of $699 and that includes the kit lens. It would be a great starter DSLR or just a decent DSLR if you want something more than a point and shoot.

 

Here is a non-technical review by respected photographer, Kirk Tuck. Here are his images using it as portrait camera and his further adventures with it as a walk around camera. He's not a technical type of reviewer. He's more into how the camera feels and how the images come out.

[Redster]

[beejman4000]

Just got the Cannon PowerShot S100. A great, truly pocket-sized camera.

[Luv2Phuket]

Just got the Cannon PowerShot S100. A great, truly pocket-sized camera.

 

Same here -- I decided to bite the bullet and get a S100, instead of a cheap $100 or so point and shoot camera.

 

I have uploaded the massive instruction booklet and am hoping to have some time to learn to use it as more than a simple point and shoot camera.

 

Early photos that I have gotten back (fight weekend in Las Vegas) seem much better than the ones from my old point and shoot camera.

[mainframe]

I'm fairly new to the whole photography hobby, i've bought a few items this year. A few weeks ago i've bought a Canon S100 for carrying along on crawls and an waterproof case is on it's way to combine my diving and photography hobby.

There are still a few items on the wish list, like a 34mm and 50mm prime.

 

 

Canon S100 (not in picture)

Canon 350D

Canon 7D + batterygrip

Canon kitlens 18-55mm F3.5-5.6

Tamron 55-200mm F4.0-5.6

Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS

Canon 28-300 F3.5-5.6 IS USM

Canon speedlite 420 EX

Canon speedlite 580 EX II

[Spanky99]

There are still a few items on the wish list, like a 34mm and 50mm prime.

 

You can get a 50mm 1.8 for around $100 US and I have seen the 50mm 1.4 for around $300 on sale. I have the 1.4 and its spectacular. I would not mind getting a 1.2 but I would have to sell a major organ for that. For something with a bit more range I bought the 85mm 1.8 and it is a fast focuser and decent in low light.

 

Canon just released a 40mm 2.8 pancake lens as well that is getting good reviews.

[Apex Photographic Studios]

I have been a 4/3 user since the intro of the Olympus e330. Have a couple of E520s & E30. A nice selection of glass ranging from 7mm to 400mm (14mm to 800mm for you Full Frame users)... However, I have recently made the switch to Full Frame. and added a bit of Zeiss

 

I

[Spanky99]

I have been a 4/3 user since the intro of the Olympus e330. Have a couple of E520s & E30. A nice selection of glass ranging from 7mm to 400mm (14mm to 800mm for you Full Frame users)... However, I have recently made the switch to Full Frame. and added a bit of Zeiss

 

I

 

Micro 4/3 is where its at these days! You can get an adapter that will fit on either a Panasonic or Olympus body and all that 4/3 glass is usable. If you want to stick with Olympus you can get a OM-E5 their latest or find a deal won a E-P3 or E-P2. They are both 12MP but can easily be found for a song. The only downside is the EVF is separate or you use the LCD to frame the shot (hate doing that). If you want a built in EVF you can get the Panasonic line of Micro 4/3. Same adapter works for either camera as they use the same mount. The lenses are interchangeable. A good resource on all thing Micro 4/3 is MU-43.com.

[andyaus]

I have used all sorts of brands... Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Panasonic etc. I went to panasonic point-n-shoot because it could zoom while doing video without noise and I didn't want a DSLR to lug around and be worried about it. I had the DMC-zs7 (western model number) and then recently upgraded to the DMC-zs20 (aka DMC tz-30). It has 20x zoom and 1080p. It also has GPS but I don't care (the zs19 excludes gps). My buddy (a retired commercial photographer) with a very nice DSLR and I had a challenge of 10 photos. I go around and copy his shots (he shoots, I shoot). I then stripped the exif info etc. (also set to same res). No color corrections. He picked 6 of 10 that he thought were his were actually mine. My (at the time) $200 zs7 was generally good enough to compete with his $2k camera setup. btw I even left mine in iA. I could have done slightly better. Now, does his camer kick mine to the curb with handheld night shots. yep. but I lean against a pole or tripod it etc, his is still better but not by much. During the day, it is a crap shoot.

 

I really have no need for a DSLR anymore as I am not making money with the photos and I try to limit the numbers of pics I take since I don't have anyone to show them off to. Now half the stuff I take is from my camera phone (very high mp but pretty crappy as compared to my panasonic).

 

Action shots and instide shots are fine. Crisp and clear generally. but super dark night shots down some alley's. it is a bit grainy as compared to a $2k canon with a $1k lense on it. I do hear good things about the Panasonic GH2 (hacked). And of course you can't usually go wrong with Canon or Nikon.

 

1080p, 20x zoom, and good optics for a point and shoot were the selling points for me. Oh and to be able to put it in my pocket instead of a bag or around my neck like a tourist.

 

I have just gone through the process of buying a new camera. Now my circumstances are that I have my Digital SLR which is the Cannon 1000D with a few lenses, flash guns tripods etc. I like taking pictures but I admit that I am too lazy to set things up properly so I tend to se this as a point and click.

 

The camera that i purchased was a compact that I could keep in my pocket for those opportunity shots. I didn’t need all the fancy equipment like GPS and interchangeable lenses. So i grabbed a fellow BM and we visited a large discount store in Perth. Staying away rom the SLR’s there were 58 different compact cameras from $129 to $797.

 

 

I looked at the waterproof options thinking of Songkram but honestly this is a rare occasion and 98% of the time it is not a feature I require. This cut out 10 cameras and ignoring the pretend SLR’sI reduced the numbers further.

 

The Cannon IXUS500HSS 10.1MP DIGITAL is a very good looking camera. With square styling this is the best looking compact camera on the market. It looks and feels in a different class. Although it is $349 ,I would guess it was much more expensive. It is only when you start comparing features that you realise that it is over priced when compared to others. Is it worth extra for the Cannon Name. The S100 cannon at $467 had much lower specs and didn’t offer the style of the IXUS500.

 

I looked at the cheapies and amongst these the SONY DSCW630B 16.1MP DIGITAL was a stand out. It had a full set of features and at $198 seemed a great buy. I have used the Cybershot in the past and i think it is a good little camera but nothing outstanding. I was hoping for more.

 

After talking to several sales people, I finally found a young Panasonic Rep who bothered to spend some time with me and after some prompting she offered me the Panasonic DMC SZ1. Now I like the quality of the Panasonic and it looks good with a reasonable feature set. The price was a surprise at $229 and I was interested.

 

 

In the end though the thing that “sold me” was a demonstration of the operation. There were no miniature dials with obscure symbols that needed manipulation but a simple backlit display giving you 5 choices from Automatic, normal, miniture, scenic or 3D options. Exploring these options I found the scenic mode had 16 choices including a sunset mode, night portrait and a panorama mode that allows you to take a 360 degree photo.

 

 

Every other review I have seen talks about the pixels, shutter speed and lenses but with the Panasonic you don’t need to worry about any of this. Simple controls means that anyone can take great photos without needing a training course.

 

In the end I decided to upgrade to the Panasonic DMC SZ7 which cost me $279. This gave me 3D photographs, 10 frames per second burst mode, Full HD movies with stereo sound and CCD sensors.

 

Turns out there is a lot more to buying a compact camera than I first thought

[Encora]

Micro 4/3 is where its at these days! You can get an adapter that will fit on either a Panasonic or Olympus body and all that 4/3 glass is usable. If you want to stick with Olympus you can get a OM-E5 their latest or find a deal won a E-P3 or E-P2. They are both 12MP but can easily be found for a song. The only downside is the EVF is separate or you use the LCD to frame the shot (hate doing that). If you want a built in EVF you can get the Panasonic line of Micro 4/3. Same adapter works for either camera as they use the same mount. The lenses are interchangeable. A good resource on all thing Micro 4/3 is MU-43.com.

 

I think you misinterpret the previous poster. Yes, the likes of 4/3 and similar (Sony Nex) are a welcome addition, since they cut the weight of gear to drag along, and can give great results. But there are times where the quest for top quality is parpamount, and the weight less important. Then of course a full frame 35 mm digital (or bigger) runs rings around small sensors.

 

I'm not putting 4/3 down. I got myself a NEX5N this year, to complement my fullframe Canon, and it is great to take when you on't want the weight. But it doesn't replace bigger sensors.

[Spanky99]

I think you misinterpret the previous poster. Yes, the likes of 4/3 and similar (Sony Nex) are a welcome addition, since they cut the weight of gear to drag along, and can give great results. But there are times where the quest for top quality is parpamount, and the weight less important. Then of course a full frame 35 mm digital (or bigger) runs rings around small sensors.

 

I'm not putting 4/3 down. I got myself a NEX5N this year, to complement my fullframe Canon, and it is great to take when you on't want the weight. But it doesn't replace bigger sensors.

 

I will argue that point on the difference more so to get a debate going than a pissing match. Let's be realistic, how often do you print your work out? Even if it's used in print work, and I have actually seen this, there are very few times anyone can tell a real difference between a ASP-C, full frame, or even a Micro 4/3 senor. Hell, most images anymore are purely digital and sized down for internet consumption which means quick loads and compressed jpegs. This argument is coming from professional photographers who are seeing their business model get destroyed by someone with a 8mp camera on a phone. Unless you are doing artistic shoots in some high end studio, and those are now being shot on digital medium format cameras than even full frame DSLRs, no one can tell and then even if you have the camera, it comes down to lighting and technique. Too many times we as photographers get hung up in gear because we know what the gear can do and we forget that someone else is just looking at the image we created and will either enjoy it or not. Hell, we get too critical in our own work and forget why we picked up a camera in the first place which was we enjoyed it.

 

For full disclosure I own a full frame Canon 5D II and I will say that the images are stunning. When I'm done with post processing and resizing and turning over the final product no one could tell the difference which images I have shot with a Micro 4/3 and which were shot with the Canon. To them they were just happy with the images.

 

Again, its more a debate issue than anything else. It's been rattling around my head for some time as I look to invest in more freaking Canon L glass. I'm a sucker for the full frame too, but I genuinely prefer the Micro 4/3 gear as it is just more fun to shoot with. I throw some old 20 - 40 year old lens on the body with an adapter and go out and shoot. There is a challenge and a joy to it to me.

 

To anyone that reads that, thanks for humoring me as I sit here bored and not in Pattaya.

[findybear]

For full disclosure I own a full frame Canon 5D II and I will say that the images are stunning. When I'm done with post processing and resizing and turning over the final product no one could tell the difference which images I have shot with a Micro 4/3 and which were shot with the Canon. To them they were just happy with the images.

 

Again, its more a debate issue than anything else. It's been rattling around my head for some time as I look to invest in more freaking Canon L glass. I'm a sucker for the full frame too, but I genuinely prefer the Micro 4/3 gear as it is just more fun to shoot with. I throw some old 20 - 40 year old lens on the body with an adapter and go out and shoot. There is a challenge and a joy to it to me.

 

Well try to shoot in the night. You need something like 16k or 32k ISO and a good lens to get good foto. You have to be lucky to get a good foto with the handy cameras or even with the "icrack" camera.

 

In any other situation I agree with you. And...it is the photographer taking the pictures not the camera ;)

[Encora]

Spanky >Let's be realistic, how often do you print your work out? <

 

My personal answer must be : Frequently at A2 size, often taken at 3200 Iso on my 5DMkII

 

But I take your point.

 

To play devils advocate to my own argument: I have little experience with 4/3, but plenty with my Nex5N, and must admit that performs remarkably well at 3200 ISO, especially if combine with my Leica 50mm/f2......

 

 

But yes, many run of the mill situations with good daylight, it would be hard to dicern difference

[Encora]

But right now I'm looking at a close-up of waterdrops on a lovely goosepimpled brownskinned bare bottom, taken recently with my Nex5N and its mediocre standard zoom at 3200 ISO, and I know it would be so much sharper end less grainy if I'd used my 5D MkII and my 100 mm Macro.

 

The thing is, I carry my Nex almost always, but my MkII only on occasions of planned jobs. This occasion, the job fell through, partly because the model felt intimidated by the big camera and setting, so I left the big camera at home. Later, in privacy, she relaxed, was happy for me to take pix with the little NEX.

 

So sometimes, the litle cams let you do what the big ones don't.

 

But the big one would have given me better results

[Spanky99]

 

The thing is, I carry my Nex almost always, but my MkII only on occasions of planned jobs. This occasion, the job fell through, partly because the model felt intimidated by the big camera and setting, so I left the big camera at home. Later, in privacy, she relaxed, was happy for me to take pix with the little NEX.

 

 

That's funny. Thats my daily routine. THe MkII sits at home and either the Olympus or Panasonic are heading out with me today to do some shoots at a botanical garden. Normally I would take the Olympus because of the in body stabilization but prefer my Panasonic more these days. Taking nothing but legacy glass, a Yashica 135 2.8, a Yashica 55mm 2.8 Macro, and a CPC Phase 2 28mm 2.8 Macro. If I'm not overly lazy I'll process some of the images tonight and share one out. That is if I don't die from the heat being around 41 today.