can someone find me a Camera that has this demends ?

On May 3, 5:03 am, Michael Meissner
wrote:
Over G writes:
ok first thanks.
yes, I could be more clear , I agree.

You are welcome. Yeah, I thought people were misreading the question.

but, it is good t o see people open thier mind,
and instead of answering "sophisticated" answeres on DSLR
understand my question.

your answer is exectly what I asked,
I wonder what is the fuji stabilizer do then ?

It just increases the ISO to compensate for camera shake and subject motion.
Which is ok, if you can tolerate the heavy noise reduction done. I bought a
Fuji F30 because everybody was raving about how great the high ISO's were, and
I find evidently my standards are too high, and I find I dislike everything
over ISO 400.

--
Michael Meissner
email:

yes,
I as well don't like the iso 400 ,
infact, I try to take pictures at iso 80 as much as I can.
so the fuji, so called solution, to shaking is quite lame..
altough they meet all the other criteria I wanted .

the S9000 series.

On May 3, 6:26 pm, SMS wrote:
Over G wrote:
On May 1, 1:37 am, "Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)"
wrote:
On 30 Apr 2007 15:19:44 -0700, in rec.photo.digital Over G

wrote:
1) 28MM lens . )start with this mnumber
2( have azoom of 10 andmore.
3( LCD )turning around .
4(stabilizer.
Why don't you go search dpreview.com yourself?
--
Ed Ruf )http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photog...ral/index.html

I am sorry to bother you from your peaceful life,
why you read news groups if you don't want to help people ?

Some people's entire repertoire of responses is "go check dpreview.com."

In reality, as you have found, the dpreview database engine is very
limited, and many criteria can't be specified, i.e. the articulating
LCD. Also, have you ever seen a camera that didn't get at least a
"Recommended" rating on dpreview? The baseline for readers of dpreview
is to not buy anything that is not "Highly Recommended." I think that
any camera that earns a review of less than "Recommended" simply doesn't
get its review included on the site. I found one camera, once, that
didn't get a "Recommended" or "Highly Recommended" rating.

I find the reviews athttp://dcresource.com/more informative.

In any case, the bottom line is that there is no camera that meets your
requirements on its own. The S3 IS, with the wide converter lens and
adapter is as close as you'll get unless you drop the requirement for
the articulating LCD, and IMVAIO, this is not a requirement that you
should drop.

One advantage of the S3 IS over some other cameras is the wide range of
accessories, including the wide angle converter, a telephoto lens that
increases the telephoto range even more (to 648mm!), a close up lens,
and a slave flash.

The one negative about the S3 IS in terms of features is that it uses AA
cells rather than a Li-Ion battery pack. Canon did this to save money,
but it's very annoying to have to use AA cells.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

yes,
but the canon lens expander cost so much.,.
so it is not an option..

Over G wrote:

yes,
but the canon lens expander cost so much.,.
so it is not an option..

Okay, then there is no camera that meets your requirements. Give up.

On Fri, 04 May 2007 13:23:36 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

All it buys me is a camera that I can fit in my pocket. Not counting
my E-1 since a DSLR is an unfair comparison, both my Olympus C-2100UZ
and Canon S1 produce better ISO 400 pictures than the Fuji. I hate
the NR smearing that the camera does (I have cats whose fur details
is really smeared badly by heavy handed NR).

Michael,

Thanks for that - I have heard a number of people saying how wonderful the
Fuji is, so it's good to have a different opinion for once. It seems that
an important difference is the image processing - certain processing
styles suit different people better, but its subjective, of course.
Important for those who don't use raw.

Several weeks ago I mentioned having seen an F10 review that
demonstrated how it was possible to get poor noise performance :

Something else I recall but unfortunately have
been unable to rediscover is that at least two reviews mentioned
(and one in great detail with several charts) that the F10's high
ISO/low noise performance was actually not particularly good at
higher ISOs such as 400 if the (and here I don't recall the
specifics) ISO was automatically selected by the camera. This might
explain the smeared detail MM experienced.

I finally located the review that I had seen. It said :

Noise Auto ISO (3.22)
We test the automatic ISO setting in bright light, so users can see if their
Florida family reunion pictures will have random purple pixels dancing
across them. The Fujifilm F10 performed similarly to other compact
models, most of which score in the 2-3 range. The F10 earned an
automatic ISO noise score of 3.22, which is mediocre and should be the
cause of some concern for straight automatic users. Unless you are
shooting in bright daylight, in automatic ISO mode, the F10 will display
significant noise. Note: the automatic ISO setting can be chosen at any
time, but it does not automatically activate in the Auto mode; users must
set it to Auto.

Noise Manual ISO (11.42)
Fortunately, the F10 performed much better when the ISO rating was
manually adjusted. The FinePix F10 offers the following ISO ratings for
manual adjustment: 80, 100, 200, 400, 800, and 1600. This range goes far
beyond what most compact digital cameras offer. To test the walk behind
the talk, we tested noise levels at each of the ISO ratings and entered the
data into a regression analysis to determine the overall score. The noise
levels are depicted on the graph below on the vertical axis, with the ISO
ratings shown on the horizontal axis.

[chart here]

The Fujifilm F10 surprised us with an overall manual ISO noise score
of 11.42. Most compact models score in the 4-5 range on this test, so
reaching this level is pretty unbelievable. Images are virtually noise-free
and they rival SLR photos. The F10 displayed less noise using its ISO 1600
than any camera released this year that we have tested at ISO 400
(including the Canon PowerShot SD500, the Konica Minolta Z5
[at ISO 320], the Kodak Z740, Panasonic FZ5, etc.). This is truly
unbelievable! With results like these, you’re much better off adjusting
the ISO yourself.


http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/con...erformance.htm

ASAAR wrote:
[]
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/con...erformance.htm

Thanks for that. I have found it important to establish early on when
using a new camera how the auto-ISO behaves, and whether the gain-up steps
occur at an exposure value you would choose yourself. From my own tests,
many cameras appear to try and avoid camera shake at shutter speeds where
I would still be happy to use the lower ISO, and therefore adjust to a
higher ISO sooner than I would with manual control. I believe that you
can program these adjustment points on some Nikon cameras.

Talking of brands and noise....

It is most unfortunate that noise and MTF measurements are made
separately, because it means that you can get a lower measured noise
figure (averaged over the image) simply by making the picture less sharp,
whereas the signal-to-noise ratio at higher spatial frequencies may
actually be worse. Different observers may prefer either the
noisier-but-sharper or the less-noisy-but-softer image, depending on just
what image processing the camera has by default (and some softening may
suit certain subjects, of course). I am still convinced that the
processing defaults make quite a difference to people's camera
preferences.

Cheers,
David