A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Point & Shoot Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Canon and Panasonic: updated models



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old May 29th 10, 04:36 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
Dudley Hanks[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,282
Default Canon and Panasonic: updated models


"David J Taylor" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:IQULn.5311$z%[email protected]
[]
In my case, my SX120 has a f/2.8 IS lens and an ISO 3200 setting which
help it outperform my XSi in certain low-light situations, since I don't
have a large-apertured, long focal-length lens for the XSi.


Nor do you with the SX120 - at its longest focal length (60mm, 360mm
equivalent), it's f/4.3, not f/2.8.

The ISO 3200 image I found with a quick search was not full resolution,
but 1600 x 1200.

Cheers,
David


I was wondering when somebody would point that out...

My only lenses for the XSi are either 3.5 - 5.6 or 4.0 - 5.6, so the f/2.8 -
4.3 is still larger, even at long focal lengths...

As for the ISO 3200 not producing the full resolution, that would only be a
problem if I intended to produce low light, large format prints, which I
obviously would not, and the image size is plenty big enough for posts to
Usenet, my site, etc...

I forgot to put the smaller end of the aperture range, as I do not shoot at
full zoom very often. Most of my pics are at the shorter to mid focal
length of the 36 to 360mm lens. So, even at 3.5 for about 180mm, the
aperture is as large as the lowend of my other lenses, which seems like a
large aperture zoom to me...

Take Care,
Dudley


  #52  
Old May 29th 10, 05:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
David J Taylor[_16_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,116
Default Canon and Panasonic: updated models


"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
[]
I was wondering when somebody would point that out...

My only lenses for the XSi are either 3.5 - 5.6 or 4.0 - 5.6, so the
f/2.8 - 4.3 is still larger, even at long focal lengths...


The aperture (as an f/number) may be slightly "smaller" (i.e. higher
f/number), but more light is collected because the actual physical
aperture is greater (i.e. more photons get in).

As for the ISO 3200 not producing the full resolution, that would only
be a problem if I intended to produce low light, large format prints,
which I obviously would not, and the image size is plenty big enough for
posts to Usenet, my site, etc...


Of course, but applying the same resolution reduction, the DSLR will work
as well at 6400 12800 etc. ISO.

I forgot to put the smaller end of the aperture range, as I do not shoot
at full zoom very often. Most of my pics are at the shorter to mid
focal length of the 36 to 360mm lens. So, even at 3.5 for about 180mm,
the aperture is as large as the lowend of my other lenses, which seems
like a large aperture zoom to me...

Take Care,
Dudley


Normally, I have similar lenses to you (16-85mm, f/3.5-f/5.6; 70-300mm,
f/4.5-f/5.6), but I treated myself to an f/1.8 lens for my DSLR recently.
The f/1.8 combined with the ISO 3200 allowed me some shots of the aurora
borealis, with which I was very pleased. For low-light and night-time
shots, I would be in envy of the full-frame DSLR and f/1.4 lenses! G

Cheers,
David

  #53  
Old May 29th 10, 05:59 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
Dudley Hanks[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,282
Default Canon and Panasonic: updated models


"David J Taylor" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
[]
I was wondering when somebody would point that out...

My only lenses for the XSi are either 3.5 - 5.6 or 4.0 - 5.6, so the
f/2.8 - 4.3 is still larger, even at long focal lengths...


The aperture (as an f/number) may be slightly "smaller" (i.e. higher
f/number), but more light is collected because the actual physical
aperture is greater (i.e. more photons get in).

As for the ISO 3200 not producing the full resolution, that would only be
a problem if I intended to produce low light, large format prints, which
I obviously would not, and the image size is plenty big enough for posts
to Usenet, my site, etc...


Of course, but applying the same resolution reduction, the DSLR will work
as well at 6400 12800 etc. ISO.

I forgot to put the smaller end of the aperture range, as I do not shoot
at full zoom very often. Most of my pics are at the shorter to mid focal
length of the 36 to 360mm lens. So, even at 3.5 for about 180mm, the
aperture is as large as the lowend of my other lenses, which seems like a
large aperture zoom to me...

Take Care,
Dudley


Normally, I have similar lenses to you (16-85mm, f/3.5-f/5.6; 70-300mm,
f/4.5-f/5.6), but I treated myself to an f/1.8 lens for my DSLR recently.
The f/1.8 combined with the ISO 3200 allowed me some shots of the aurora
borealis, with which I was very pleased. For low-light and night-time
shots, I would be in envy of the full-frame DSLR and f/1.4 lenses! G

Cheers,
David


You and me both ...

My next lens will probably be either a macro (not sure which one) or the
f/2.8 85mm lens. With my old A1 camera, I had a nice 130mm lens which was
great for portraits, candids, etc, and I think the 85mm will yield similar
results with the XSi.

Take Care,
Dudley


  #54  
Old May 29th 10, 06:44 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
Bowser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 435
Default Canon and Panasonic: updated models

On Sat, 29 May 2010 09:29:45 -0500, George Kerby
wrote:




On 5/28/10 11:50 AM, in article ,
"Bowser" wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 07:17:56 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:02:59 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 16:45:06 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 19:22:29 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:

Uh, not really. I own an FZ35 and while I love it, it's clearly not in
the same league as any DSLR with regards to image quality or AF speed.
Not to say it's bad; it's quite good. But nowhere near a DSLR.

Uh, really. I own an FZ28, which is excellent, and the FZ35 I borrowed
for a day was ever better. Autofocus speed is excellent *if* you
configure the cameras properly. Image quality likewise.
I routinely get better shots (in all respects) than those shooting the
same subjects with dSLR cameras. Perhaps you need more practice with
the FZ35.

Nah, it's configured just fine.

Apparently not.

Every time we go down this road I ask
you to prove what you say, we banter, and you never provide proof.
Some other time, John.

I've provided more than adequate proof repeatedly (again today), but you
are still entitled to your opinion, no matter how unfounded.


OK, just this once:

You claim that the Panny FZ35 AF is as fast as a DSLR. Prove it. Not
your opinion, not a statement that "it's fast" but real proof. Some
third party testing that shows it's as fast as, say, my Canon 5D II.

When you've conquered that one, post a few samples shot at ISO 3200
that match the 5D II.

We're all waiting.


Don't hold your breath...


I wasn't, trust me, George. And now the slimy little **** denies ever
saying it. Even though it appears in his post just a day ago.
Honestly, I think he has issues.
  #55  
Old May 29th 10, 06:47 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
Bowser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 435
Default Canon and Panasonic: updated models

On Fri, 28 May 2010 10:21:46 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 12:50:35 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 07:17:56 -0700, John Navas
wrote:


I've provided more than adequate proof repeatedly (again today), but you
are still entitled to your opinion, no matter how unfounded.


OK, just this once:

You claim that the Panny FZ35 AF is as fast as a DSLR. ...


I haven't said that. Do you have a reading comprehension problem, or is
your position so weak you have to put words in my mouth?

When you've conquered that one, post a few samples shot at ISO 3200
that match the 5D II.


I have no interest in ISO 3200. Is your position so weak you have to
resort to fringe situations?

The FZ28 and FZ35 do the job for 99% of the things I want to do,
and I'm not terribly concerned about the other 1%.


Then that explains why you're so satisfied with the Pannys. You have
very modest demands and can live within the confines of a P&S. 99% of
the time. For some of us, who need to get shots at ISO 6400, well, we
need more capable tools to do the job.

Happy snap shooting.
  #57  
Old May 29th 10, 07:31 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
George Kerby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,798
Default Canon and Panasonic: updated models




On 5/29/10 12:44 PM, in article ,
"Bowser" wrote:

On Sat, 29 May 2010 09:29:45 -0500, George Kerby
wrote:




On 5/28/10 11:50 AM, in article
,
"Bowser" wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 07:17:56 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:02:59 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 16:45:06 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 19:22:29 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:

Uh, not really. I own an FZ35 and while I love it, it's clearly not in
the same league as any DSLR with regards to image quality or AF speed.
Not to say it's bad; it's quite good. But nowhere near a DSLR.

Uh, really. I own an FZ28, which is excellent, and the FZ35 I borrowed
for a day was ever better. Autofocus speed is excellent *if* you
configure the cameras properly. Image quality likewise.
I routinely get better shots (in all respects) than those shooting the
same subjects with dSLR cameras. Perhaps you need more practice with
the FZ35.

Nah, it's configured just fine.

Apparently not.

Every time we go down this road I ask
you to prove what you say, we banter, and you never provide proof.
Some other time, John.

I've provided more than adequate proof repeatedly (again today), but you
are still entitled to your opinion, no matter how unfounded.

OK, just this once:

You claim that the Panny FZ35 AF is as fast as a DSLR. Prove it. Not
your opinion, not a statement that "it's fast" but real proof. Some
third party testing that shows it's as fast as, say, my Canon 5D II.

When you've conquered that one, post a few samples shot at ISO 3200
that match the 5D II.

We're all waiting.


Don't hold your breath...


I wasn't, trust me, George. And now the slimy little **** denies ever
saying it. Even though it appears in his post just a day ago.
Honestly, I think he has issues.


Sad sack of a little man with a bloated ego is our little friend NavAss...

  #58  
Old May 30th 10, 04:07 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
Bowser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 435
Default Canon and Panasonic: updated models

On Sat, 29 May 2010 13:31:15 -0500, George Kerby
wrote:



I wasn't, trust me, George. And now the slimy little **** denies ever
saying it. Even though it appears in his post just a day ago.
Honestly, I think he has issues.


Sad sack of a little man with a bloated ego is our little friend NavAss...


He truly is pathetic. First he makes wild claims about how his P&S
focuses as fast as a DSLR, then he claims image quality is as good,
then he claims he shot some night football under weak lighting using
his P&S, but as usual he offers nothing but his bull**** opinion and
resorts to weaseling out of anything he's said. Truly, truly a
pathetic excuse for a human being. It's impossible to carry on a civil
discussion with him.

There is good news, however, since he's saved us the trouble of
killfiling him.

As we say up here in MA, "wicked mega luzah"
  #60  
Old July 19th 10, 04:27 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.point+shoot
John McWilliams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,945
Default Canon and Panasonic: updated models

zulu wrote:
How would you know this unless you were nothing but a psychotic
net-stalking troll with no life?- Hide quoted text -


Troll hunting fun, you good target


NO, it's not fun for anyone here; it's way too easy, unless you're brand
new, or a pest yourself.

Please refrain from replying!

--
john mcwilliams
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CHDK Now Supports 25 Canon Powershot Models trent_tagger[_2_] Digital SLR Cameras 0 March 28th 08 12:18 AM
New Canon PowerShot A models announced Wayne J. Cosshall Digital Photography 0 January 18th 07 12:18 PM
Swivel LCD models besides Canon? [email protected] Digital Photography 4 May 23rd 06 09:31 PM
For Canon aficionados? Differences Between Canon S410, A80 and SD10 models. Steve Lee Digital Photography 3 June 29th 04 12:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.