New cam

Discussion in 'Photography' started by McPaul, May 19, 2006.

  1. McPaul

    McPaul Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 1999
    Messages:
    1,782
    Likes Received:
    48
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Real Name:
    Paul M
    I just bought a Panasonic DMC-FX01 today and first use will be this weekend to take to a wedding...

    I bought it because it's small, and offers 28mm lens, those are the two big reasons. Having optical image stabilizer and a 4x zoom are big plusses.

    Oh, another plus, they gave me a printer to go with it. I've never printed out any pictures before, but I'll give it a try when I get home. It's the HP Deskjet 5940. Is this a decent model?

    I've heard this cam produces a lot of noise, esp. on higher ISO settings, however I'm not so sure I will notice it.

    I understand that camera noise can be photoshopped out. Is this an easy process that produces quality results? I've never used Photoshop before.

    I've got a 2G SD card that's just waiting to be filled!!
     
  2. Scott Merryfield

    Scott Merryfield Executive Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    11,692
    Likes Received:
    763
    Location:
    Michigan
    Sounds like a nice camera, Paul. I think you will really like the image stabilization (assuming Panasonic implemented it correctly).

    Just yesterday I received my first image stabilization lens for the Canon Digital Rebel XT dSLR that I bought a couple months ago. This is a 70-300mm Canon telephoto, and I was amazed at the pictures I was able to take handheld at dusk last night.
     
  3. Bryan X

    Bryan X Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,469
    Likes Received:
    3
    I bought the Rebel XT recently too, Scott. I got the 17-85mm IS lens with it. IS is really nice. I was looking for a second lens for more reach and was really interested in the 70-300 IS you have. But decided against it because of the focusing issue Canon is adressing with the recall. Have you noticed the problem much on yours?

    I ended up getting the 70-200mm f/4 L. Excellent image quality, but the IS would have been nice. I'm not real steady at 200mm.
     
  4. ManW_TheUncool

    ManW_TheUncool Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    5,961
    Likes Received:
    32
    Location:
    The BK
    Real Name:
    ManW
    Do it the old fashion way. Get a monopod for manual IS that works for all your non-IS lenses (across all camera brands). [​IMG]
     
  5. Scott Merryfield

    Scott Merryfield Executive Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    11,692
    Likes Received:
    763
    Location:
    Michigan

    If you haven't tried image stabilization, Man-Fai, you are missing a nice feature. Monopods and tripods are useful tools, but there are times they are just not practical. With IS, you are always sort of carrying a monopod/tripod. I hike a lot on vacation and do not like to carry a tripod then, so IS is quite useful.
     
  6. Bryan X

    Bryan X Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,469
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'm glad you haven't had the problem with your 70-300.

    I'm like you, Scott. We do a lot of hiking on vacation and a tripod is not a good option then. I did buy a monopod since my 70-200 L doesn't have IS. It's more convenient than a tripod but not as convenient as IS. I'm not as steady with the monopod as with IS either.

    The 17-85mm IS is pretty nice. It's has some distortion at 17mm, but other than that, very sharp, very nice.

    The other lens I'm looking at is the Canon 100mm f/2.0. I think that would be a good choice for shooting pics at my son's basketball games.
     
  7. Scott Merryfield

    Scott Merryfield Executive Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    11,692
    Likes Received:
    763
    Location:
    Michigan

    That, along with the smaller maximum aperature and higher price, are the main reasons (along with the macro capability) I decided on the Sigma 17-70 instead. However, I have since added the Canon 10-22mm to my bag, so the poorer performance at 17mm would not be as big an issue now.
     
  8. ManW_TheUncool

    ManW_TheUncool Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    5,961
    Likes Received:
    32
    Location:
    The BK
    Real Name:
    ManW

    Oh, I have no doubt that IS will often be more practical. I was mainly just suggesting the alternative of monopod as better than nothing at all since Bryan already owns the 70-200 f/4L.

    Bryan,

    RE: IS working better than monopod (when the latter is useable). Since you went w/ a lens that offers larger aperture than the IS option, I suspect the effectiveness of the combo of lens + monopod will be very close, if not the same. Of course, this assumes that you don't need the extra DoF of a particular aperture you'd otherwise use on the IS lens. OTOH, it's not like IS will help you stop action like the extra stop that the non-IS f/4 telezoom would.

    Anyway, for myself, I prefer to go w/ the better/faster glass first before going for IS even though I hate to lug a tripod and would also prefer to leave the monopod at home as well. I guess if I could afford it, I'd add something like the Nikon 18-200mm VR on top of better glass to cover the same range for travel-lite IS-enabled shooting. [​IMG] OTOH, I'd probably want to upgrade to the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR first before doing something like that. [​IMG]

    _Man_
     

Share This Page