1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

New cam

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

  1. McPaul

    McPaul Well-Known Member

    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

    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    11,449
    Likes Received:
    651
    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 Well-Known Member

    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 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    5,945
    Likes Received:
    30
    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

    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    11,449
    Likes Received:
    651
    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 Well-Known Member

    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

    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    11,449
    Likes Received:
    651
    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 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    5,945
    Likes Received:
    30
    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