The ZLRs I own

I thought I would post something germain to the topic of this newsgroup.


First the Sony F828:

The BIGGY with this camera for people who are thinking of getting it is
probably the "purple fringing" (sometimes, I think, incorrectly called ca).

The first thing I noticed when I got the camera is that the fringing isn't a
big problem except under specific conditions.

Those conditions a If you take a picture of a tree line with a VERY bright
sky above and behind it, you WILL get fringing unless you under-expose.

The fact that I can "make it go away" most of the time by under exposing
tells me it is definately NOT chromatic aberation from the lens, it is
fringing from the sensor. Thats the bad news. The good news is, it can mostly
be avoided by framing/exposing so as NOT to put the sensor into a situation
where you have fine detail that is VERY brightly back lit.

The second biggest complaint is high noise at anything over ISO 100.
The bad news is: REVIEWERS ARE CORRECT!. There is NO good news on this
front.

Does it take good pictures? YES. At ISO 100 or lower it does a GREAT job
and I can't fault it for speed, clarity, color, contrast, or saturation. I
use the camera with color set to "REAL", contrast and sharpness set to the
neutral setting.

If you use the Constant Auto Focus, there is very little lag in this camera
and you can get into the rythm of using it to capture the frame just the way
you want it.

MORE BAD NEWS:

The camera seems to take about a week and a half to save a RAW file.

In actual practice it takes about 10 to 12 seconds to save a RAW file, but
that can seem like a week and makes it unusable for sports/action
photography.

Overall, this is a lot LESS camera than it should have been for a thousand
dollars (US $999)

If the Sony F-717 could shoot RAW it would be a better camera than the 828
even though its only 5MP.



--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

I have the 828 and a D70.
The 828 is slower to start up, has more shutter delay and takes longer than
it should to write any kind of file but RAW is worse of all. However after
doing alot of comparison shooting with this camera image quality for RAW and
TIFF is not that much better than jpeg: cyan blues are a little more
accurate in RAW but not too much else.
The camera is slow to handle and the EVF makes tracking and trying to
capture fast moving objects a matter of luck.
Purple fringing is a rare issue and easily gotten rid of. I cannot recall
any image that I have made where I thought it ruined the image.
Noise at much above ISO 200 is real but how objectionable depends on the
image; easily disguised with Photoshop in most images anyway. I have made
multiple comparison shots as different ISOs and I am not sure what users
expect when you turn the gain up that high on any digital sensor.
For average shooting, despite the limits, I would rate overall image and
lens quality as often stellar, seldom disappointing. The 828 is definitely
not fast handling and should not be purchased if you have the fantasy of
shooting high ISO digital images.
The D70: handles like an SLR, fast to start up, writes files nearly as fast
as you can shoot, particularly with RAW files for which Nikon wisely uses a
compressed format.
Moire is a constant problem on any image that has detailed areas of linear,
small stroke texture. I take alot of pictures of birds and many cannot be
printed larger than snapshot size because of moire visible where there are
expanses of light or neutral feathers. Purple fringing also is easily seen
in high contrast images. Noise is obvious above ISO 200 but not as ugly as
the 828 at top ISOs. Reviewers who downplay the real problems with the D70
are lying to you or oblivious.
The D70 is all but useless shooting in jpeg with image quality that is no
better or worse than most mid-level P&S cameras even if you are using your
very best Nikon glass.
However if you shoot RAW, are adept at Photoshop and do not print images
larger that 8.5x11 you can coax great images out of the D70. In fact it can
be addicting.
For what it is, I love the 828 despite its foibles. I agree the 828 is
seriously overpriced.
I use my D70 constantly, more than the 828, but cannot help but wish it
were better because it should and could be.
Put it this way: I do not regret buying the 828 but I wish I had waited for
the next generation Nikon dSLR.

In article ,
says...
I have the 828 and a D70.
The 828 is slower to start up, has more shutter delay and takes longer than
it should to write any kind of file but RAW is worse of all. However after
doing alot of comparison shooting with this camera image quality for RAW and
TIFF is not that much better than jpeg: cyan blues are a little more
accurate in RAW but not too much else.

snipped for space not content

Since most of the shooting I do is under-exposed because I dont use anything
higher than ISO 100 on the Sony (probably limiting myself but its what Ive
been doing) I find slightly more advantage with RAW on the 828. Simply using
the exposure slider in Photoshop CS raw plugin gets the picture where I want
it (usually) with less noise (hopefully) than I would get with the higher ISO
setting.

When I bought the 828 I was going by my experience with the 717 and figured
it would perform at least as well plus give me the RAW files. Though its NOT
exactly what I expected, I wouldn't say I regret buying it, as I sold enough
photos from it to pay for it several times over in the first 3 months I had
it.

Its MUCH faster than any other Point & Shoot I have ever used except the Sony
V-1. (its about equal to the V-1, MAYBE a little faster)

I must add here that getting shots I can sell is a priority, but its not my
only priority, and thats why Im a little dissapointed with the 828. I have
often gotten pictures that would have been "just a little better" if the
camera had lived up to my expectations and I hate to sell them that way.
Sony, however, is not responsible for my expectations, so I guess my only
REAL complaint is that the camera was (and still is) overpriced.

When I got the 828 my choices in the same price range were limited. (July
04).

For a thousand dollars I could get the 828 or a Digital Rebel, everything
else in the price range didn't seem to be "value for money".

I almost got the Rebel, but then I did the math... I NEEDED the full range of
the lens on the Sony, and if I were to get it I would need to buy the Rebel
and at LEAST two more lenses. The kit lens on the Rebel would only be
suitable for "Posed" shots (about 10% of my shooting)

Ive never been able to settle for "cheap" lenses, so if I were to get what I
needed from the Rebel, I'de need to spend about $3000 up front. Ya' cant do
that on a 1000 dollar budget.

Knowing the quality of the lens on the F-717 was a selling point for the 828,
and I must admit that the 828 is the ONLY camera I ever bought without
holding/shooting/testing first. I have experienced NO disapointment with the
lens on either the 717 or the 828

The final clincher (for me) was the cf-card slot on the camera.

One of my regular photo customers is a specialty clothing designer (Western
Wear for Western Riders), and she uses her photos to advertise the stuff she
is wearing in the picture.

I have found the VERY SLIGHT color inacuracy in the Sony is sometimes a
hindrance in this, so when I'm shooting her I usually use the Fuji S7000 if
she is wearing any shade of GREEN or LIGHT BLUE.

The Fuji SEEMS a little more accurate for that kind of shooting.

The Sony doesn't seem to discriminate well between the "Greenish-Blues" and
the "Blueish-Greens" she seems to favor.. (probably due to the "emerald"
sensors) Outdoors in Sunlight, carefull exposure settings and NO AUTOMATION
except focus can make the Sony get the colors right, but most of my pictures
arent taken under those conditions.

The subtle differences show up better with the Fuji set on "Chrome" color.
(Im not sure what that setting is SUPPOSED to do, but I THINK it makes the
picture look more like it was shot on FUJICHROME film, probably should get
around to RTFM)

Right now I'm thinking about what to do for the oncoming season (my shooting
season is April through October for horse shows) I'm hoping the income from
the first couple of shows will be timed right for a good DSLR. (I must admit
to yearning for the Oly E-volt with the self cleaning sensor gadget, but the
lens range isn't there yet for any price.)

Here again Im looking at a camera that doesn't inherantly have the lens range
I need!

This is why I've been stuck in the ZLR area for so long. I dont want to be
out in the middle of the show ring, changing lenses!!!

When Im in that ring I need 30mm to 210 equivalent MOUNTED AND READY and to
get that on a DSLR with a high quality lens is NOT going to be a small matter
of "pocket change".

The "Show Rings" I shoot in are getting BIGGER, figure 100 ft. by 200 ft.
(minium) and the picture I want can be ANYWHERE in that ring at any time
during the class Im shooting!

In reality, I can only cover about 1/4 to 1/3 of the ring at any given time,
and my flash can only fill a given area, so having the lens ON THE CAMERA for
the whole 7 to 12 minutes of the class is imperitive.

Picture in your mind, taking photos in a room where they are sand blasting a
car body with no ventilation and you can get an idea of the environment I
shoot in. Luckily the dust level is usually only bad at the END of the class
and I get my pictures during the first 3/4 of the class, but I cant exit the
ring until the horses do, so the camera is exposed to ALL the dust.. I
usually tuck it under my vest for the last minute or two of the class to
protect it as much as possible.

Granted the dust is (mostly) non-abrasive (its 80% ground-up horse-dung) and
can be brushed off the camera with a soft make-up brush,and blown away with a
bulb, but it gets INSIDE every DSLR I have seen in the ring, almost
immediatley. (its probably the major reason most horse show event
photographers dont do what I do unless they are using film). So far Ive not
had it intrude on the inner workings of either the 717 or the 828.

If my incomming e-mail is any indicator, I may well have more business than I
can handle this coming season, and the price of a new E-volt with a perfect
(for me) lens wont be out of the question. My print costs are LOW and I'm
finding more people are willing to pay for several (or a dozen or more)
pictures on cdrom than are willing to pay for individual prints. I do, of
course, put Logos on ALL photos on a cdrom, and include a warning label about
copyright rules on all cdroms delivered. So far, all of my pictures that I
have seen published have been done so with my permission (and my thanks). I
have had only ONE case where the photo had my logo trimmed off by the
publisher, and no credit was given. I di recieve an apology (un-solocited)
from the publisher.

Hope I haven't rambled on too much..

If anyone is interested, some time this weekend (probably Sunday) I will post
my experiences with the Fuji S5000 and the Fuji S7000.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

[Larry:]
I thought I would post something germain
to the topic of this newsgroup.
First the Sony F828

The Sony F828 is an EVF camera, not a reflex camera, and thus is off-topic
in a group supposedly dealing with reflex cameras such as ZLRs.

Because of its aspect, which for untrained eyes may resemble that of
reflex camera, some people fraudulently refer to the Sony F828 and other
EVF cameras as ZLRs and thus as reflex cameras.

The acronym "ZLR", one should remember, stands for "Zomm-Lens-Reflex"
cameras, a subset of SLRs, or "Single-Lens-Reflex" cameras. Reflex cameras
in general are characterized by far superior image quality and features,
and much higher prices, than EVFs.

However, this newsgroup is fully commited to spread, support and further
the marketing fraud that EVFs are ZLRs or reflex cameras.

Anyone who buys an EVF thinking that it is a reflex camera, or even an
association of customers, might consider the civil and even criminal
liability of anyone directly or indirectly involved in furthering this
fraud, even without the apparent purpose of achieving personal gain.

Whatever may be the case, the fact remains that this newsgroup became,
assuming that it was not from the start, a source of intentional
misinformation intended to make customers believe that they are buying a
reflex camera while they are buying merely an EVF camera. A crooked
resource on the internet.

Wish you all good luck!

Julio.

"J.S.Pitanga" wrote in message news

I own a Panasonic DMC FZ-20 5mp 12x zoom digital ZLR camera and because of that I can post
to this group and talk about it as much as I like. I really enjoy using this type of ZLR camera. It's the
best in its class. What type of ZLR camera do you own?

"Ken" wrote in message
.. .

"J.S.Pitanga" wrote in message
news

What type of ZLR camera do you own?

I would suspect he doesn't Ken, at least not by his definition. All he is
intent on is destroying this NG.
The ZLR I own is a Nikon CP8800 and BTW it also has an EVF.
Kind regards,
Leo

"Leo R." wrote in message ...
"Ken" wrote in message
.. .

"J.S.Pitanga" wrote in message
news

What type of ZLR camera do you own?

I would suspect he doesn't Ken, at least not by his definition. All he is
intent on is destroying this NG.

His definition does not count and he is not smart enough to destroy this group.

The ZLR I own is a Nikon CP8800 and BTW it also has an EVF.

I was looking at one last night at the camera store. Nice camera!

[Ken:]What type of ZLR camera do you own?

[Leo:]
I would suspect he doesn't Ken, at least
not by his definition.

As just explained in my previous message, I indeed do not own any
retroflex device, such as ZLRs (Zooming-Long-Retroflex) devices and dildos
in general. But please feel free to discuss them on this newsgroup if this
is your pleasure!

All he is intent on is destroying this NG.

Why should I? I deeply respect the right of users of retroflex devices to
discuss about how long and thick and protruding and enjoyable are their
beloved toys. I aso respect their right to masturbate while thinking and
saying that they have a reflex camera.

The ZLR I own is a Nikon CP8800

Although very thick, your retroflex device (10x) is not as long as Ken's
(12x). This is because of different anatomies and personal preferences.
Anyway it is very protruding and your pleasure can always be increased
digitally (that is, with the help of the fingers).

and BTW it also has an EVF.

Who cares. What is important for the people this newsgroup is intended to
is that it will always be a long, thick, protruding, enjoyable
Zooming-Long-Retroflex.

The best,

Julio.

[Ken:]
I own a Panasonic DMC FZ-20 5mp 12x zoom
digital ZLR camera and because of that I
can post to this group and talk about it
as much as I like.

Of course. It is the inalienable right of every idiot to display his
idiocy for everyone to see, and this newsgroup is here to provide you with
a space to do so.

I really enjoy using this type of ZLR camera.

I'm sure you do, some people have strange habits indeed. They cannot see a
Zooming-Long-Retroflex device without almost fainting in bliss.

It's the best in its class.

It is the longest, it is the thickest and it zooms in and out very fastly
and forcefully. What else someone in love with retroflex devices might
wish?

What type of ZLR camera do you own?

Sorry, but since my natural inclination is for penian rather than anal
pleasure I have never owned any retroflex device!

The best,

Julio

"J.S.Pitanga" wrote in message news

I own a Panasonic DMC FZ-20 5mp 12x zoom digital ZLR camera and because of that I can post
to this group and talk about it as much as I like. I really enjoy using this type of ZLR camera. It's the
best in its class. I should also mention that it takes pretty pictures and I can display them on my
computer monitor. I can also print those pretty pictures with my Canon printer so I can share them
with my friends. My friends really like to see the pretty pictures I take. I won't share them with
you though. I don't think you want to be my friend. I can't imagine that you have any friends and if
you did they are probably not very nice people. It must miserable being you.