Amateur Question....

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by WiNK, Jun 14, 2006.

  1. WiNK

    WiNK Guest

    My head is spinning from all the reviews I've been reading. I want to know
    if "Noise" is apparent to an amateur taking pictures? I'm trying to decide
    between the following cameras:
    Canon PowerShot S3
    Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ7S
    Sony DSC-H2
    Possibly the Lumix
    Panasonic DMC-TZ1S?

    Read about noise issues with the Panasonic FZ7S....is it that bad? Would I
    notice? And with the Sony....the whole different format, concerning the
    Memory Stick Pro Duo....would that be a frustrating thing?

    I currently have a Nikon Coolpix 5900. I hate the fact that I can't
    zoom.... that the function for extreme close ups is finicky. It's touchy at
    ISO 400 in indoor settings with no flash. (I can't tell you why--remember,
    I'm an amateur.) But if I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't have bought
    it. It's a nice little point and shoot, but so very limited. But I am on a
    budget..........

    Thanks for your help!!
    Nadine
    WiNK, Jun 14, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:08:10 -0600, WiNK <> wrote:
    > My head is spinning from all the reviews I've been reading. I want to know
    > if "Noise" is apparent to an amateur taking pictures? I'm trying to decide
    > between the following cameras:
    > Canon PowerShot S3
    > Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ7S
    > Sony DSC-H2
    > Possibly the Lumix
    > Panasonic DMC-TZ1S?
    >
    > Read about noise issues with the Panasonic FZ7S....is it that bad? Would I
    > notice? And with the Sony....the whole different format, concerning the
    > Memory Stick Pro Duo....would that be a frustrating thing?


    I have the FZ5 (the predecessor to the FZ7), and my experience with the
    noise issue is that it isn't a big deal unless (a) you are shooting at
    ISO 400 and (b) you are planning to print the shots at 8x10 or larger.
    For on-screen viewing or for 4x6 prints, it's not a major issue.

    There's also software around that can do a decent job at cutting down
    the noise after the fact. NeatImage and Noise Ninja are two
    well-regarded programs that do this sort of thing.

    As far as which camera to buy, the first three on your list are pretty
    much equivalent to each other, differing in the fine details. The TZ1 is
    a different beast; it's noticeably smaller, doesn't have any manual
    control over aperture/shutter speed, and has a somewhat shorter zoom
    range (350mm max rather than 430mm-ish).

    And, just out of morbid curiousity, why the FZ7S instead of the FZ7K?
    Most of the FZs I've seen in the wild have been K (black body) rather
    than S (silver body). Any particular reason for preferring silver? Just
    wondering.

    -dms
    Daniel Silevitch, Jun 14, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. WiNK

    WiNK Guest

    "Daniel Silevitch" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:08:10 -0600, WiNK <> wrote:
    > > My head is spinning from all the reviews I've been reading. I want to

    know
    > > if "Noise" is apparent to an amateur taking pictures? I'm trying to

    decide
    > > between the following cameras:
    > > Canon PowerShot S3
    > > Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ7S
    > > Sony DSC-H2
    > > Possibly the Lumix
    > > Panasonic DMC-TZ1S?
    > >
    > > Read about noise issues with the Panasonic FZ7S....is it that bad? Would

    I
    > > notice? And with the Sony....the whole different format, concerning the
    > > Memory Stick Pro Duo....would that be a frustrating thing?

    >
    > I have the FZ5 (the predecessor to the FZ7), and my experience with the
    > noise issue is that it isn't a big deal unless (a) you are shooting at
    > ISO 400 and (b) you are planning to print the shots at 8x10 or larger.
    > For on-screen viewing or for 4x6 prints, it's not a major issue.


    This is good to note, as it would just be for personal use and rarely would
    I need to print larger than 4x6. (Except with landscape photos, which ISO
    400 wouldn't apply...)

    >
    > There's also software around that can do a decent job at cutting down
    > the noise after the fact. NeatImage and Noise Ninja are two
    > well-regarded programs that do this sort of thing.
    >
    > As far as which camera to buy, the first three on your list are pretty
    > much equivalent to each other, differing in the fine details. The TZ1 is
    > a different beast; it's noticeably smaller, doesn't have any manual
    > control over aperture/shutter speed, and has a somewhat shorter zoom
    > range (350mm max rather than 430mm-ish).


    It is....and may be too similar to what I have (for me.)

    >
    > And, just out of morbid curiousity, why the FZ7S instead of the FZ7K?
    > Most of the FZs I've seen in the wild have been K (black body) rather
    > than S (silver body). Any particular reason for preferring silver? Just
    > wondering.


    No reason at all...... just will probably end up getting the silver. Is
    there something I should know? ;-)

    Good thoughts....thank you!

    Nadine
    WiNK, Jun 14, 2006
    #3
  4. WiNK

    bmoag Guest

    Image noise is the least thing you would notice about these cameras.
    When you ask questions on this newsgroup realize you will get answers from
    people who have written about what a complete disaster the new Sony dSLR is
    although no one has actually seen or touched the camera.
    bmoag, Jun 14, 2006
    #4
  5. WiNK

    WiNK Guest

    "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    news:mIVjg.97263$...
    > Image noise is the least thing you would notice about these cameras.
    > When you ask questions on this newsgroup realize you will get answers from
    > people who have written about what a complete disaster the new Sony dSLR

    is
    > although no one has actually seen or touched the camera.
    >


    And that's why I ask....because the seriously in-depth reviews mean nothing
    to me. I usually go to the "Conclusions" page and get things in a nutshell.
    I want something with quick response.....[plus not a lot of red-eye (my
    Nikon is notorious for that....plus indoor shots in large rooms give "devil"
    possession eyes...which is not red, only like the eyes on the Bonnie Tyler
    video for "Total Eclipse of the Heart." heh So these can't even be
    corrected with my photo software.)

    I want to be able to zoom, like if I'm taking pics of animals from a
    distance or corny flower shots. ;-) Most of all, I want ease.... a lot of
    functions that are easy to figure out (I'm savvy and fearless, but don't
    want to mess with manual focus), and affordable (single parent.) Is that
    too much to ask? ;-)

    Nadine
    >
    WiNK, Jun 14, 2006
    #5
  6. On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:35:04 -0600, WiNK <> wrote:
    >
    > I want to be able to zoom, like if I'm taking pics of animals from a
    > distance or corny flower shots. ;-) Most of all, I want ease.... a lot of
    > functions that are easy to figure out (I'm savvy and fearless, but don't
    > want to mess with manual focus), and affordable (single parent.) Is that
    > too much to ask? ;-)


    Well, for whatever it's worth, I've been extremely happy with my FZ5.
    One caveat that applies to all of the cameras that you listed. You
    mentioned landscape photography as one of your interests. None of these
    cameras goes to any sort of real wide angle, which is an annoyance for
    landscape work. The way around this is stitching; take several shots,
    and then use various bits of software to glue them together.

    This shouldn't impact your choice of model, since I think they all have
    roughly the same wide-end focal length, but just bear in mind that
    photographs of broad sweeping vistas will need a bit of extra work.

    -dms
    Daniel Silevitch, Jun 14, 2006
    #6
  7. WiNK wrote:
    > "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    > news:mIVjg.97263$...
    >> Image noise is the least thing you would notice about these cameras.
    >> When you ask questions on this newsgroup realize you will get
    >> answers from people who have written about what a complete disaster
    >> the new Sony dSLR is although no one has actually seen or touched
    >> the camera.
    >>

    >
    > And that's why I ask....because the seriously in-depth reviews mean
    > nothing to me. I usually go to the "Conclusions" page and get things
    > in a nutshell. I want something with quick response.....[plus not a
    > lot of red-eye (my Nikon is notorious for that....plus indoor shots
    > in large rooms give "devil" possession eyes...which is not red, only
    > like the eyes on the Bonnie Tyler video for "Total Eclipse of the
    > Heart." heh So these can't even be corrected with my photo software.)
    >
    > I want to be able to zoom, like if I'm taking pics of animals from a
    > distance or corny flower shots. ;-) Most of all, I want ease.... a
    > lot of functions that are easy to figure out (I'm savvy and fearless,
    > but don't want to mess with manual focus), and affordable (single
    > parent.) Is that too much to ask? ;-)
    >

    Affordability , like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I know of
    millionaires to whom the expenditure of £300 on a camera would be
    unthinkable, and I know relatively poor people who would regard that amount
    as derisory for a "decent" camera.

    If you can stretch to it, buy a Panasonic FZ30 through internet mail order.
    You won't regret it!
    Dennis Pogson, Jun 14, 2006
    #7
  8. (WiNK) wrote:

    > My head is spinning from all the reviews I've been reading.


    I keep thinking about upgrading my Canon S1, which has some annoying
    weaknesses. The last thing that concerns me is picture noise though. As
    an amateur I rarely find it to be a significant problem. My shots are
    ruined by shutter lag, poor/slow autofocus, low EVF resolution, and user
    incompetence, but never noise. :)

    Andrew McP
    Andrew MacPherson, Jun 14, 2006
    #8
  9. WiNK

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    Andrew MacPherson wrote:
    > (WiNK) wrote:
    >
    >
    >>My head is spinning from all the reviews I've been reading.

    >
    >
    > I keep thinking about upgrading my Canon S1, which has some annoying
    > weaknesses. The last thing that concerns me is picture noise though. As
    > an amateur I rarely find it to be a significant problem. My shots are
    > ruined by shutter lag, poor/slow autofocus, low EVF resolution, and user
    > incompetence, but never noise. :)
    >


    Yes .. even when all else works for me, there is always my "user
    imcompentence" to spoil the shot. On overseas trips I average
    about 100 a day .. and feel good if 20 are keepers!

    Phil
    Phil Wheeler, Jun 14, 2006
    #9
  10. WiNK

    WiNK Guest

    "Dennis Pogson" <> wrote in message
    news:TmYjg.36178$...
    > WiNK wrote:
    > > "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    > > news:mIVjg.97263$...
    > >> Image noise is the least thing you would notice about these cameras.
    > >> When you ask questions on this newsgroup realize you will get
    > >> answers from people who have written about what a complete disaster
    > >> the new Sony dSLR is although no one has actually seen or touched
    > >> the camera.
    > >>

    > >
    > > And that's why I ask....because the seriously in-depth reviews mean
    > > nothing to me. I usually go to the "Conclusions" page and get things
    > > in a nutshell. I want something with quick response.....[plus not a
    > > lot of red-eye (my Nikon is notorious for that....plus indoor shots
    > > in large rooms give "devil" possession eyes...which is not red, only
    > > like the eyes on the Bonnie Tyler video for "Total Eclipse of the
    > > Heart." heh So these can't even be corrected with my photo software.)
    > >
    > > I want to be able to zoom, like if I'm taking pics of animals from a
    > > distance or corny flower shots. ;-) Most of all, I want ease.... a
    > > lot of functions that are easy to figure out (I'm savvy and fearless,
    > > but don't want to mess with manual focus), and affordable (single
    > > parent.) Is that too much to ask? ;-)
    > >

    > Affordability , like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I know of
    > millionaires to whom the expenditure of £300 on a camera would be
    > unthinkable, and I know relatively poor people who would regard that

    amount
    > as derisory for a "decent" camera.
    >
    > If you can stretch to it, buy a Panasonic FZ30 through internet mail

    order.
    > You won't regret it!
    >
    >


    Ah true..... okay, 400 (or so) US Dollars. That's my limit. ;-)

    Nadine
    WiNK, Jun 14, 2006
    #10
  11. (Phil Wheeler) wrote:

    > On overseas trips I average about 100 a day .. and feel
    > good if 20 are keepers!


    With cheap storage on camera and CD/DVD, and with easy timelined archive
    browsing via Picassa etc. I've started keeping a *lot* more pictures than
    I used to. They form a more in-depth visual diary than the keepers, and
    are much easier to glance through on a PC than shuffling through piles
    of photographs used to be.

    Which reminds me, I still have some to sort through from 20 years ago.
    Must get round to that one day. :)

    Andrew McP
    Andrew MacPherson, Jun 15, 2006
    #11
  12. WiNK

    J. Clarke Guest

    WiNK wrote:

    >
    > "Dennis Pogson" <> wrote in message
    > news:TmYjg.36178$...
    >> WiNK wrote:
    >> > "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    >> > news:mIVjg.97263$...
    >> >> Image noise is the least thing you would notice about these cameras.
    >> >> When you ask questions on this newsgroup realize you will get
    >> >> answers from people who have written about what a complete disaster
    >> >> the new Sony dSLR is although no one has actually seen or touched
    >> >> the camera.
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> > And that's why I ask....because the seriously in-depth reviews mean
    >> > nothing to me. I usually go to the "Conclusions" page and get things
    >> > in a nutshell. I want something with quick response.....[plus not a
    >> > lot of red-eye (my Nikon is notorious for that....plus indoor shots
    >> > in large rooms give "devil" possession eyes...which is not red, only
    >> > like the eyes on the Bonnie Tyler video for "Total Eclipse of the
    >> > Heart." heh So these can't even be corrected with my photo software.)
    >> >
    >> > I want to be able to zoom, like if I'm taking pics of animals from a
    >> > distance or corny flower shots. ;-) Most of all, I want ease.... a
    >> > lot of functions that are easy to figure out (I'm savvy and fearless,
    >> > but don't want to mess with manual focus), and affordable (single
    >> > parent.) Is that too much to ask? ;-)
    >> >

    >> Affordability , like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I know of
    >> millionaires to whom the expenditure of £300 on a camera would be
    >> unthinkable, and I know relatively poor people who would regard that

    > amount
    >> as derisory for a "decent" camera.
    >>
    >> If you can stretch to it, buy a Panasonic FZ30 through internet mail

    > order.
    >> You won't regret it!
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Ah true..... okay, 400 (or so) US Dollars. That's my limit. ;-)


    Personally I have an FZ7 and you can see some of the results at
    <http://www.flickr.com/photos/39383723%40N00/>. The two sequences of
    photos of the ugly old guy are there to show the effect of using different
    ISOs under different lighting conditions.

    All in all it is a very nice piece of equipment, but so is the Canon S3IS
    and if it had been out when I got the FZ7 I might have gone that way, or,
    if I had done my homework properly, I would probably have gone with the
    FZ30.

    Just so you know, Adorama right now has an FZ30 open box demo up for $454
    and shipping--that's a little over your budget but if you can afford the
    extra I think you'll find it well spent. Does just about everything the
    FZ7 does except the high ISO modes, but it has much nicer controls and it's
    easy to put an external flash on it among other things.

    > Nadine


    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
    J. Clarke, Jun 15, 2006
    #12
  13. WiNK

    WiNK Guest

    "J. Clarke" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > WiNK wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > "Dennis Pogson" <> wrote in message
    > > news:TmYjg.36178$...
    > >> WiNK wrote:
    > >> > "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    > >> > news:mIVjg.97263$...
    > >> >> Image noise is the least thing you would notice about these cameras.
    > >> >> When you ask questions on this newsgroup realize you will get
    > >> >> answers from people who have written about what a complete disaster
    > >> >> the new Sony dSLR is although no one has actually seen or touched
    > >> >> the camera.
    > >> >>
    > >> >
    > >> > And that's why I ask....because the seriously in-depth reviews mean
    > >> > nothing to me. I usually go to the "Conclusions" page and get things
    > >> > in a nutshell. I want something with quick response.....[plus not a
    > >> > lot of red-eye (my Nikon is notorious for that....plus indoor shots
    > >> > in large rooms give "devil" possession eyes...which is not red, only
    > >> > like the eyes on the Bonnie Tyler video for "Total Eclipse of the
    > >> > Heart." heh So these can't even be corrected with my photo

    software.)
    > >> >
    > >> > I want to be able to zoom, like if I'm taking pics of animals from a
    > >> > distance or corny flower shots. ;-) Most of all, I want ease.... a
    > >> > lot of functions that are easy to figure out (I'm savvy and fearless,
    > >> > but don't want to mess with manual focus), and affordable (single
    > >> > parent.) Is that too much to ask? ;-)
    > >> >
    > >> Affordability , like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I know of
    > >> millionaires to whom the expenditure of £300 on a camera would be
    > >> unthinkable, and I know relatively poor people who would regard that

    > > amount
    > >> as derisory for a "decent" camera.
    > >>
    > >> If you can stretch to it, buy a Panasonic FZ30 through internet mail

    > > order.
    > >> You won't regret it!
    > >>
    > >>

    > >
    > > Ah true..... okay, 400 (or so) US Dollars. That's my limit. ;-)

    >
    > Personally I have an FZ7 and you can see some of the results at
    > <http://www.flickr.com/photos/39383723%40N00/>. The two sequences of
    > photos of the ugly old guy are there to show the effect of using different
    > ISOs under different lighting conditions.


    Just not seeing what all the fuss is about, regarding high ISO and quality
    with the FZ7...maybe my vision sucks. I *do* have -10.5 glasses, y'know.

    >
    > All in all it is a very nice piece of equipment, but so is the Canon S3IS
    > and if it had been out when I got the FZ7 I might have gone that way, or,
    > if I had done my homework properly, I would probably have gone with the
    > FZ30.
    >



    Just bought an FZ7 from Vanns for $339, *before* I read your post about the
    open box FZ30. :) Free shipping..... yes, I read all the "stuff" about
    "noise," which seems like a good thing to harp on. For someone who is used
    to the grainy 400 film from the 70s, I'm not worried about it. I see there
    are quite a few free "noise fixers" available.

    Nadine
    WiNK, Jun 15, 2006
    #13
  14. WiNK

    J. Clarke Guest

    WiNK wrote:

    >
    > "J. Clarke" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> WiNK wrote:
    >>
    >> >
    >> > "Dennis Pogson" <> wrote in message
    >> > news:TmYjg.36178$...
    >> >> WiNK wrote:
    >> >> > "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    >> >> > news:mIVjg.97263$...
    >> >> >> Image noise is the least thing you would notice about these
    >> >> >> cameras. When you ask questions on this newsgroup realize you will
    >> >> >> get answers from people who have written about what a complete
    >> >> >> disaster the new Sony dSLR is although no one has actually seen or
    >> >> >> touched the camera.
    >> >> >>
    >> >> >
    >> >> > And that's why I ask....because the seriously in-depth reviews mean
    >> >> > nothing to me. I usually go to the "Conclusions" page and get
    >> >> > things in a nutshell. I want something with quick response.....[plus
    >> >> > not a lot of red-eye (my Nikon is notorious for that....plus indoor
    >> >> > shots in large rooms give "devil" possession eyes...which is not
    >> >> > red, only like the eyes on the Bonnie Tyler video for "Total Eclipse
    >> >> > of the
    >> >> > Heart." heh So these can't even be corrected with my photo

    > software.)
    >> >> >
    >> >> > I want to be able to zoom, like if I'm taking pics of animals from a
    >> >> > distance or corny flower shots. ;-) Most of all, I want ease.... a
    >> >> > lot of functions that are easy to figure out (I'm savvy and
    >> >> > fearless, but don't want to mess with manual focus), and affordable
    >> >> > (single
    >> >> > parent.) Is that too much to ask? ;-)
    >> >> >
    >> >> Affordability , like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I know of
    >> >> millionaires to whom the expenditure of £300 on a camera would be
    >> >> unthinkable, and I know relatively poor people who would regard that
    >> > amount
    >> >> as derisory for a "decent" camera.
    >> >>
    >> >> If you can stretch to it, buy a Panasonic FZ30 through internet mail
    >> > order.
    >> >> You won't regret it!
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> > Ah true..... okay, 400 (or so) US Dollars. That's my limit. ;-)

    >>
    >> Personally I have an FZ7 and you can see some of the results at
    >> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/39383723%40N00/>. The two sequences of
    >> photos of the ugly old guy are there to show the effect of using
    >> different ISOs under different lighting conditions.

    >
    > Just not seeing what all the fuss is about, regarding high ISO and quality
    > with the FZ7...maybe my vision sucks. I *do* have -10.5 glasses, y'know.
    >
    >>
    >> All in all it is a very nice piece of equipment, but so is the Canon S3IS
    >> and if it had been out when I got the FZ7 I might have gone that way, or,
    >> if I had done my homework properly, I would probably have gone with the
    >> FZ30.
    >>

    >
    >
    > Just bought an FZ7 from Vanns for $339, *before* I read your post about
    > the
    > open box FZ30. :) Free shipping..... yes, I read all the "stuff" about
    > "noise," which seems like a good thing to harp on. For someone who is
    > used
    > to the grainy 400 film from the 70s, I'm not worried about it. I see
    > there are quite a few free "noise fixers" available.


    I think you're going to like it. I know I like mine.

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
    J. Clarke, Jun 15, 2006
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. OZJ
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    390
  2. Miggsee

    Amateur images

    Miggsee, Dec 9, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    655
  3. Kenneth Lessam

    amateur birdwatching

    Kenneth Lessam, Jun 7, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    474
  4. Steve Hughes

    Freelance Amateur and Professional Photograph site

    Steve Hughes, Jul 31, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    308
    Steve Hughes
    Jul 31, 2003
  5. BD
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    617
    Sam I am
    Jul 14, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page