can someone find me a Camera that has this demends ?

Michael Meissner wrote:
[]
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.

... although you might find that you feel the same with other cameras at
ISO 200 or even ISO 100, so the Fuji /may/ have bought you something.

David

On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:15:10 -0700, 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

Why don't you go search dpreview.com yourself? --
Ed Ruf
)http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/
General/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 ?
Because it is goog manners and common sense to do as much as you can to
help yourself before asking others to do it for you.
--
Neil
reverse 'r' and'a' - delete 'l' for email

"Neil Ellwood"
Why don't you go search dpreview.com yourself? --
Ed Ruf
I am sorry to bother you from your peaceful life, why you read news
groups if you don't want to help people ?
Because it is goog manners and common sense to do as much as you can to
help yourself before asking others to do it for you.

Great answer, Neil! That's exactly what I thought when I posted my previous
answer. The original question didn't have enough info and many people were
trying to _guess_ what this poor asker was thinking about. Definitely he was
not asking about pro or semi pro cameras because these people pretty much
know what do they want to get and for what money range. The info in the
original post was very poor and it was having something like "I spent some
time trying to satisfy myself, let's others try to do the same for me".
There were no price range, camera class, size, brand, some general
requirements, and finally the list of the cameras that the original poster
has already seen with the disadvantages for each model that the author
should tell but prefered to keep the silence about. So the original question
had only 4 items if I remember correctly and that's it. In my mind the
question should sound like: "I reviewed this, this and that, I don't like
that (list). What else should I pay my attention to in regards to these or
similar models if my requirements are - the list in DESC order". And even
that is not enough, we saw many people here who didn't like the camera just
because the hand was too large to hold the camera, the grip was bad, etc.

Just D.

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 at http://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.

"SMS"
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.

What do you think would be the difference of the time-to-live between a
special bettery and a AA set, just roughly? Times, maybe 10x times? I don't
think so. Size? Maybe if it's critical. But having AA has its own
advantages, although this is just my personal opinion. First of all we
already got the Hybrid batteries living much longer than the previous trash
provided by many leading companies. I bought that from Energizer, Sony, and
some others several months ago. And we have already discussed this issue
here in this NG. Everyting looking like MAh 2500+ was crap. When I switched
to Hybrid I found that it works much better and recalled the original
batteries of 750, 900, 1200 MAh working much better than current 2500-2700
MAh. So the new generation is much better. Second - you can always go to any
store and get a backup battery set for a day-two if you forgot or simply
didn't have time to charge your primary or secondary battery set. If you
work far from civilization it can be very critical for you. You can't
disagree that it's much easier to get a box with AA than a box with native
LI-Ion batteries working only with this camera and nothing else. Next - if
you get a new generation of batteries like these Hybrids you can start using
them as soon as you get them. Having a special battery you're stuck forever.
And the last - the pro and semi-pro DSLRs often have a special adapter
allowing them to use AA batteries as well.

Just D.

Just D wrote:
"SMS"
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.

What do you think would be the difference of the time-to-live between a
special bettery and a AA set, just roughly? Times, maybe 10x times? I don't
think so. Size? Maybe if it's critical. But having AA has its own
advantages, although this is just my personal opinion. First of all we
already got the Hybrid batteries living much longer than the previous trash
provided by many leading companies. I bought that from Energizer, Sony, and
some others several months ago. And we have already discussed this issue
here in this NG. Everyting looking like MAh 2500+ was crap. When I switched
to Hybrid I found that it works much better and recalled the original
batteries of 750, 900, 1200 MAh working much better than current 2500-2700
MAh. So the new generation is much better. Second - you can always go to any
store and get a backup battery set for a day-two if you forgot or simply
didn't have time to charge your primary or secondary battery set. If you
work far from civilization it can be very critical for you. You can't
disagree that it's much easier to get a box with AA than a box with native
LI-Ion batteries working only with this camera and nothing else. Next - if
you get a new generation of batteries like these Hybrids you can start using
them as soon as you get them. Having a special battery you're stuck forever.
And the last - the pro and semi-pro DSLRs often have a special adapter
allowing them to use AA batteries as well.

Just D.


Right on, Just D. Ability to use AA batteries is a must for me. Any
place you go where you can buy gasoline, groceries, etc, you can count
on being able to buy AAs, just in case your charger dies or you didn't
leave home with a complete charge, or you forgot your charger, or
whatever. If you spend all your time in a studio maybe other options are
valid.
Allen

In article , SMS
wrote:

Also, have you ever seen a camera that didn't get at least a
"Recommended" rating on dpreview?

absolutely.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/default.asp?view=rating

while the majority of cameras are in the highly recommended and
recommended categories, there are plenty in the above average, average
and even below average categories. however, i'd agree that far too
many receive one of the top two ratings.

in fact, in 2007, three cameras landed an above average rating, and i
expect there will be more cameras rated as above average, or possibly
even lower.

"David J Taylor"
writes:

Michael Meissner wrote:
[]
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.

.. although you might find that you feel the same with other cameras at
ISO 200 or even ISO 100, so the Fuji /may/ have bought you something.

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 Meissner
email:
http://www.the-meissners.org

Michael Meissner 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.

Cheers,
David

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.

It's good if the different opinion is accurate for all cases of
how the F10/F30 is used. In this case more information is needed.
The reviews (from what I recall) were in agreement that the
F10/F30's 6mp sensor has greater resolution than the 7mp sensors in
similar cameras. 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. On the other hand if the
ISO was manually set, the high ISO/low noise performance was
exceptionally good. Neither of the reviews had an explanation for
why this occurred. I think that this was briefly discussed here not
long after the F10 was first reviewed, but I couldn't locate any of
these messages.