|
|
| *SoulEyes Photography>>>Landscape Photography |
Super-zoom cameras and RAW format... PLEASE help!? |
I've been to dpreview.com and read tons of reviews on many different cameras and I just can't decide what to do. I began looking at the Canon S3 IS, but once I actually saw it in the store, the pop-out screen is TINY and the store model was defective so the employee suggested the Panasonic DMC-FZ8, which unlike Canon supports shooting in RAW but also has much bigger noise issues. I'm looking for something with at least 12X optical zoom, as I'm big into nature photography, at least 6 megapixels, and just overall versatility as I photograph whatever inspires me at the time, in all kinds of environments (low-light concerts, outdoor sports, landscapes, indoor portraits, etc). I still don't really understand the benefits of shooting in RAW either, to see if that should be a priority feature for me or not, so would someone be nice enough to explain it to me in real-world terms? And if you personally own a super-zoom camera, which one do you have and why did you choose it? I suggest the canon S5-is will be out in a few weeks it has the larger screen it is worth waiting for $499 Maybe you will need to look into a DSLR. They have larger sensors and can use super wide and super long lenses. Low light shoots will require fast lenses (f/2.8 or faster), outdoor sports (400mm f/2.8 is a good start up to around a 600mm lens), landscapes (12-24mm) portraits (a fast 24-85mm is good). RAW takes ALL the information that is on the sensor as you expose it to light and stores on your memory card. No processing is done in the camera except a record of the "as shot settings" is attached to it. Shooting RAW in difficult lighting situations (like low-light concerts) will give the photographer a better chance of getting a usable image. Editorial, sports and glamour photographer The newer Canon ultrazoom was just announced, and it looks pretty good http://www.dpreview.com/news/0705/070507... However, from the way you talk, I think it's time to step up to a dSLR. ALL compact cameras use a small sensor, which either gives you lots of nise, or not very good color saturation in your pics. The much larger image sensor will give you MUCH better photos. Look at the Nikon D40x http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/ni... with the 18-135 lens, or the 18-200 IS lens for a low cost but very nice dSLR. Yes it's more money, but the sense I get from you, it will be a very good investment! Check out http://www.stunningnikon.com/picturetown... I don't believe that the S5 is worth the extra money. It's a very slight improvement over the S3 but $200 more. Between those two choices, I'd buy an S3 instead and spend the $200 on extras. RAW takes the light information before the camera has done much with it. This allows you to copy the image into an application like Photoshop and do your own post processing. The biggest benefit RAW has over JPEGs is that you don't lose any quality when you save a RAW file while you lose quality EVERY time you modify and save a JPEG. If you have no desire to work on your own pictures, I don't see the need for RAW. There will be many times though that you will take a picture and be able to improve on the processing the camera did. If you have the image in RAW, it could be a stunning pic. If it's just in JPG, you may throw it away. Unfortunately, compact cameras / non-DSLRs don't do well with low-light uunless you have a tripod. The issue here is physics. Each camera has a component called a sensor that interprets the light the lens gathers. The larger the sensor, the more processing that can be done on each dot of light. Compacts have TINY sensors, a DSLR has a sensor 12 times larger on average so a DSLR will get much better low-light shots, even before the user uses a lens designed for low light. In the compact world, I like the Panasonic FZ-50 and the Olympus SP-550 (which I own). In the beginning DSLR space, I like the Pentax K100D. I bought the SP-550 for a couple of reasons. It has an underwater housing, it has a superzoom (18x but anything past 15x makes the autofocus hunt a lot) and it does RAW. I needed a better underwater camera that did RAW but would be good on land as well. It does a nice wide angle 28mm where most start at 35mm. It will also shoot up to 15 frames per second in short bursts, at a lower resolution. The effect of wide angle is that you don't have to step as far back to get everything into the frame, since you may not be able to go any further back. As soon as you throw "low-light" into the mix, you need to go back over to dpreview and read this article: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/compact... |
| Related information |
Photography Categories--Copyright/IP Policy--Contact Webmaster |