Mysterious modes

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by meow2222@care2.com, Jun 24, 2013.

  1. Guest

    As well as the main mode I use, this Benq DC-C640 has many modes that the instructions give no useful info on. Modes for food, buildings, landscape, kids, sunset, but a total dearth of info on what they do different, and its nothing obvious. Does anyone know what these modes supposedly do different?I'm not a beginner at photography, but havent come across any real info onthis.

    thanks


    NT
     
    , Jun 24, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. me Guest

    On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:05:26 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

    >As well as the main mode I use, this Benq DC-C640 has many modes that the instructions give no useful info on.
    >Modes for food, buildings, landscape, kids, sunset, but a total dearth of info on what they do different, and its nothing obvious.
    > Does anyone know what these modes supposedly do different? I'm not a beginner at photography, but havent come across any real info on this.


    Make some controlled shots at each setting and then look at the exif
    info to see how shutter speed, f-stop, iso, ext vary.
     
    me, Jun 24, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest

    On Monday, June 24, 2013 10:24:51 PM UTC+1, me wrote:
    > On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:05:26 -0700 (PDT), wrote:


    > >As well as the main mode I use, this Benq DC-C640 has many modes that the instructions give no useful info on.
    > >Modes for food, buildings, landscape, kids, sunset, but a total dearth of info on what they do different, and its nothing obvious.
    > > Does anyone know what these modes supposedly do different? I'm not a beginner at photography, but havent come across any real info on this.


    > Make some controlled shots at each setting and then look at the exif
    > info to see how shutter speed, f-stop, iso, ext vary.


    nice one, thank you


    NT
     
    , Jun 27, 2013
    #3
  4. Guest

    On Thursday, June 27, 2013 9:44:27 AM UTC+1, wrote:
    > On Monday, June 24, 2013 10:24:51 PM UTC+1, me wrote:
    > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:05:26 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

    8<

    > > >As well as the main mode I use, this Benq DC-C640 has many modes that the instructions give no useful info on.



    > > Make some controlled shots at each setting and then look at the exif
    > > info to see how shutter speed, f-stop, iso, ext vary.



    OK, I took pics of an outdoor scene in full sun, including a mix of scene elements. I drew a table up but there are some unexpected results in there...

    mode
    ---- f 1/ iso flash
    P full auto 5.6 261 200 n darks rather dark
    shakefree 5.6 199 100 y darks dark
    mountain/ landscape 5.6 89 100 n everything much lighter
    backlight 5.6 85 50 y
    moon/ night scene 5.6 60 64 n darks v lght
    snow 5.6 60 100 n even lighter
    fireworks 5.6 100 100 n well balanced
    building 5.6 68 50 n as above
    iso hi 5.6 92 100 n darks a bit light
    food 5.6 100 100 n red much redder
    text 5.6 85 100 n bit 2 lite all round
    kids 2.8 419 100 n darks bit dark
    sunset 5.6 81 100 n darks washed out, 2 light

    I made one mistake: I forgot this monitor's an old one in temporary use while the main machine is sorted, and its gamma's way off. So most pics actually have dark areas that are too dark, the lighter pics in the table are nearer correct.

    Now... a couple of surprises.

    Firework mode: I would have expected high iso, very long exposures to get trails, maybe boosted colour saturation, and probably infinite focus. I suspect it realised it wasnt looking at nighttime fireworks and did something completely different.

    Night scene 64ASA? That sure wouldnt be my choice for night use.

    The very high iso grainy portrait mode, which is explained in the manual, apparently isnt.

    Why low iso suits buildings I dont know.

    Either I'm missing something, or most of those modes seem not especially useful.


    NT
     
    , Jun 28, 2013
    #4
  5. J. Clarke Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    >
    > On Thursday, June 27, 2013 9:44:27 AM UTC+1, wrote:
    > > On Monday, June 24, 2013 10:24:51 PM UTC+1, me wrote:
    > > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:05:26 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

    > 8<
    >
    > > > >As well as the main mode I use, this Benq DC-C640 has many modes that the instructions give no useful info on.

    >
    >
    > > > Make some controlled shots at each setting and then look at the exif
    > > > info to see how shutter speed, f-stop, iso, ext vary.

    >
    >
    > OK, I took pics of an outdoor scene in full sun, including a mix of scene elements. I drew a table up but there are some unexpected results in there...
    >
    > mode
    > ---- f 1/ iso flash
    > P full auto 5.6 261 200 n darks rather dark
    > shakefree 5.6 199 100 y darks dark
    > mountain/ landscape 5.6 89 100 n everything much lighter
    > backlight 5.6 85 50 y
    > moon/ night scene 5.6 60 64 n darks v lght
    > snow 5.6 60 100 n even lighter
    > fireworks 5.6 100 100 n well balanced
    > building 5.6 68 50 n as above
    > iso hi 5.6 92 100 n darks a bit light
    > food 5.6 100 100 n red much redder
    > text 5.6 85 100 n bit 2 lite all round
    > kids 2.8 419 100 n darks bit dark
    > sunset 5.6 81 100 n darks washed out, 2 light
    >
    > I made one mistake: I forgot this monitor's an old one in temporary use while the main machine is sorted, and its gamma's way off. So most pics actually have dark areas that are too dark, the lighter pics in the table are nearer correct.
    >
    > Now... a couple of surprises.
    >
    > Firework mode: I would have expected high iso, very long exposures to get trails, maybe boosted colour saturation, and probably infinite focus. I suspect it realised it wasnt looking at nighttime fireworks and did something completely different.
    >
    > Night scene 64ASA? That sure wouldnt be my choice for night use.
    >
    > The very high iso grainy portrait mode, which is explained in the manual, apparently isnt.
    >
    > Why low iso suits buildings I dont know.
    >
    > Either I'm missing something, or most of those modes seem not especially useful.
    >
    >
    > NT


    Remember that a digital camera has four exposure controls, not three.
    White balance is also an exposure control, analogous to changing from
    "tungsten" to "daylight" film only much more precisely controllable. I
    suspect that some of those modes have preset white balance. The trouble
    is, if you're getting JPGs instead of RAW you may not be able to find
    out what white balance setting was used.
     
    J. Clarke, Jun 28, 2013
    #5
  6. In article <>,
    "J. Clarke" <> wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > >
    > > On Thursday, June 27, 2013 9:44:27 AM UTC+1, wrote:
    > > > On Monday, June 24, 2013 10:24:51 PM UTC+1, me wrote:
    > > > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:05:26 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

    > > 8<
    > >
    > > > > >As well as the main mode I use, this Benq DC-C640 has many modes that
    > > > > >the instructions give no useful info on.

    > >
    > >
    > > > > Make some controlled shots at each setting and then look at the exif
    > > > > info to see how shutter speed, f-stop, iso, ext vary.

    > >
    > >
    > > OK, I took pics of an outdoor scene in full sun, including a mix of scene
    > > elements. I drew a table up but there are some unexpected results in
    > > there...
    > >
    > > mode
    > > ---- f 1/ iso flash
    > > P full auto 5.6 261 200 n darks rather dark
    > > shakefree 5.6 199 100 y darks dark
    > > mountain/ landscape 5.6 89 100 n everything much lighter
    > > backlight 5.6 85 50 y
    > > moon/ night scene 5.6 60 64 n darks v lght
    > > snow 5.6 60 100 n even lighter
    > > fireworks 5.6 100 100 n well balanced
    > > building 5.6 68 50 n as above
    > > iso hi 5.6 92 100 n darks a bit light
    > > food 5.6 100 100 n red much redder
    > > text 5.6 85 100 n bit 2 lite all round
    > > kids 2.8 419 100 n darks bit dark
    > > sunset 5.6 81 100 n darks washed out, 2 light
    > >
    > > I made one mistake: I forgot this monitor's an old one in temporary use
    > > while the main machine is sorted, and its gamma's way off. So most pics
    > > actually have dark areas that are too dark, the lighter pics in the table
    > > are nearer correct.
    > >
    > > Now... a couple of surprises.
    > >
    > > Firework mode: I would have expected high iso, very long exposures to get
    > > trails, maybe boosted colour saturation, and probably infinite focus. I
    > > suspect it realised it wasnt looking at nighttime fireworks and did
    > > something completely different.
    > >
    > > Night scene 64ASA? That sure wouldnt be my choice for night use.
    > >
    > > The very high iso grainy portrait mode, which is explained in the manual,
    > > apparently isnt.
    > >
    > > Why low iso suits buildings I dont know.
    > >
    > > Either I'm missing something, or most of those modes seem not especially
    > > useful.
    > >
    > >
    > > NT

    >
    > Remember that a digital camera has four exposure controls, not three.
    > White balance is also an exposure control, analogous to changing from
    > "tungsten" to "daylight" film only much more precisely controllable. I
    > suspect that some of those modes have preset white balance. The trouble
    > is, if you're getting JPGs instead of RAW you may not be able to find
    > out what white balance setting was used.


    White balance is a metadata tag in both RAW and JPEG. In the case of
    JPEG, the white balance is applied to the image too.

    All those different modes tune the balance and limits for aperture,
    shutter, ISO, white balance, and metering bias. A well-lit outdoor
    scene doesn't have the conditions needed to see the differences.
    --
    I will not see posts from Google because I must filter them as spam
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Jun 28, 2013
    #6
  7. Guest

    On Friday, June 28, 2013 4:46:43 PM UTC+1, J. Clarke wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    > > > On Thursday, June 27, 2013 9:44:27 AM UTC+1, wrote:
    > > > On Monday, June 24, 2013 10:24:51 PM UTC+1, me wrote:
    > > > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:05:26 -0700 (PDT), wrote:



    > Remember that a digital camera has four exposure controls, not three.
    > White balance is also an exposure control, analogous to changing from
    > "tungsten" to "daylight" film only much more precisely controllable. I
    > suspect that some of those modes have preset white balance. The trouble
    > is, if you're getting JPGs instead of RAW you may not be able to find
    > out what white balance setting was used.


    Yup, it only does jpgs. White balance is fairly low on my priorities, its usually good enough as is, unlike other parameters, and can usually be fixedin postprocessing if not.

    I have learnt more from this about how the cam works, it seems the persistently off gamma is down to me setting it to use 200asa in auto mode, all thepics with lower iso fare better on that point. I guess despite having it for years I've continued thinking more in film terms, and the issues arent the same.

    thanks

    NT
     
    , Jun 29, 2013
    #7
  8. Guest

    On Friday, June 28, 2013 5:12:04 PM UTC+1, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:

    > White balance is a metadata tag in both RAW and JPEG. In the case of
    > JPEG, the white balance is applied to the image too.
    > All those different modes tune the balance and limits for aperture,
    > shutter, ISO, white balance, and metering bias. A well-lit outdoor
    > scene doesn't have the conditions needed to see the differences.


    I noticed the metering decisions varied, I guess the menu setting I picked is only applied to the P/auto mode.

    I suppose I need to compare what it does under various different conditions to learn more about what each mode does.

    thanks


    NT
     
    , Jun 29, 2013
    #8
  9. Robert Coe Guest

    On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 03:46:48 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
    : OK, I took pics of an outdoor scene in full sun, including a mix of scene elements. I drew a table up but there are some unexpected results in there...
    :
    : mode
    : ---- f 1/ iso flash
    : P full auto 5.6 261 200 n darks rather dark
    : shakefree 5.6 199 100 y darks dark
    : mountain/ landscape 5.6 89 100 n everything much lighter
    : backlight 5.6 85 50 y
    : moon/ night scene 5.6 60 64 n darks v lght
    : snow 5.6 60 100 n even lighter
    : fireworks 5.6 100 100 n well balanced
    : building 5.6 68 50 n as above
    : iso hi 5.6 92 100 n darks a bit light
    : food 5.6 100 100 n red much redder
    : text 5.6 85 100 n bit 2 lite all round
    : kids 2.8 419 100 n darks bit dark
    : sunset 5.6 81 100 n darks washed out, 2 light
    :
    : I made one mistake: I forgot this monitor's an old one in temporary use while the main machine is sorted, and its gamma's way off. So most pics actually have dark areas that are too dark, the lighter pics in the table are nearer correct.
    :
    : Now... a couple of surprises.
    :
    : Firework mode: I would have expected high iso, very long exposures to get trails, maybe boosted colour saturation, and probably infinite focus. I suspect it realised it wasnt looking at nighttime fireworks and did something completely different.

    Fireworks are pretty bright, and at night you want the background dark. And
    the trails they leave tend to be real, rather than due to latency in the
    observer's vision. All of which tends to negate the need for high ISO and long
    exposures. BTW, I'd be very surprised if any mode setting directly affected
    the focus.

    : Night scene 64ASA? That sure wouldnt be my choice for night use.

    It might if you were using a tripod and wanted to minimize noise.

    : The very high iso grainy portrait mode, which is explained in the manual, apparently isnt.

    Probably just as well. Who needs grainy portraits?

    : Why low iso suits buildings I dont know.

    Buildings don't move much, so you usually don't need high shutter speeds.
    Lower IDO can mean less noise.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jun 29, 2013
    #9
  10. otter Guest

    On Monday, June 24, 2013 4:05:26 PM UTC-5, wrote:
    > As well as the main mode I use, this Benq DC-C640 has many modes that theinstructions give no useful info on. Modes for food, buildings, landscape,kids, sunset, but a total dearth of info on what they do different, and its nothing obvious. Does anyone know what these modes supposedly do different? I'm not a beginner at photography, but havent come across any real info on this.
    >


    Did you download the user manual? It does have some brief descriptions of each mode. I'd never heard of Benq before, so I took a look out of curiosity.

    For example, the building mode says it enhances the edges of buildings, which means it turns up the sharpening.

    It's probably best to ignore these modes, and just set the controls the wayyou need them. I think that is what most experienced photographers do. The modes are there just to help beginners. Obviously, not all the choices are ideal.
     
    otter, Jun 29, 2013
    #10
  11. Guest

    On Saturday, June 29, 2013 4:47:32 PM UTC+1, otter wrote:


    > Did you download the user manual? It does have some brief descriptions of each mode. I'd never heard of Benq before, so I took a look out of curiosity.
    > For example, the building mode says it enhances the edges of buildings, which means it turns up the sharpening.


    The mode descriptions are in some cases informative, and in some meaningless, eg
    Landscape - used for the wide scenic views
    Snow - used for the beach or snow scenes
    Night scene - shooting the subject while keeping background night scenery
    Kids - take a still image to capture moving kids


    > It's probably best to ignore these modes, and just set the controls the way you need them. I think that is what most experienced photographers do. The modes are there just to help beginners. Obviously, not all the choices are ideal.


    So far I've ignored them, but if I know what they actually do, presumably some would have their uses.

    Overall I've been impressed with the thing, it far outperforms my old film SLRs. Adding external lens elements gives it SLR-like abilities, like closeup, macro & fisheye. If I had my way I'd give it more useful modes though, like animal mode, harris shutter, HDR etc.


    NT
     
    , Jun 30, 2013
    #11
  12. Bill K Guest

    On 6/30/2013 10:15 AM, wrote:
    > On Saturday, June 29, 2013 4:47:32 PM UTC+1, otter wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Did you download the user manual? It does have some brief descriptions of each mode. I'd never heard of Benq before, so I took a look out of curiosity.
    >> For example, the building mode says it enhances the edges of buildings, which means it turns up the sharpening.

    >
    > The mode descriptions are in some cases informative, and in some meaningless, eg
    > Landscape - used for the wide scenic views
    > Snow - used for the beach or snow scenes
    > Night scene - shooting the subject while keeping background night scenery
    > Kids - take a still image to capture moving kids
    >
    >
    >> It's probably best to ignore these modes, and just set the controls the way you need them. I think that is what most experienced photographers do. The modes are there just to help beginners. Obviously, not all the choices are ideal.

    >
    > So far I've ignored them, but if I know what they actually do, presumably some would have their uses.
    >
    > Overall I've been impressed with the thing, it far outperforms my old film SLRs. Adding external lens elements gives it SLR-like abilities, like closeup, macro & fisheye. If I had my way I'd give it more useful modes though, like animal mode, harris shutter, HDR etc.
    >
    >
    > NT
    >



    I think you are expecting too much from a cheap camera. The modes are
    there to help out beginners, but there is nothing in them that you
    couldn't directly set in other ways.
     
    Bill K, Jul 6, 2013
    #12
  13. Guest

    On Saturday, July 6, 2013 2:24:31 AM UTC+1, Bill K wrote:
    > On 6/30/2013 10:15 AM, wrote:



    > > Overall I've been impressed with the thing, it far outperforms my old film SLRs. Adding external lens elements gives it SLR-like abilities, like closeup, macro & fisheye. If I had my way I'd give it more useful modes though, like animal mode, harris shutter, HDR etc.


    > I think you are expecting too much from a cheap camera. The modes are
    > there to help out beginners, but there is nothing in them that you
    > couldn't directly set in other ways.


    I wish. Sadly there's no way to set exposure or aperture, or even tell it in which direction to push things. The only things one can preset are ISO and CCT. I use white paper to reduce flash output.

    I'm tempted to look at getting a canon and use CHDK.


    NT
     
    , Jul 6, 2013
    #13
  14. otter Guest

    On 7/6/2013 4:55 AM, wrote:
    > On Saturday, July 6, 2013 2:24:31 AM UTC+1, Bill K wrote:
    >> On 6/30/2013 10:15 AM, wrote:

    >
    >
    >>> Overall I've been impressed with the thing, it far outperforms my old film SLRs. Adding external lens elements gives it SLR-like abilities, like closeup, macro & fisheye. If I had my way I'd give it more useful modes though, like animal mode, harris shutter, HDR etc.

    >
    >> I think you are expecting too much from a cheap camera. The modes are
    >> there to help out beginners, but there is nothing in them that you
    >> couldn't directly set in other ways.

    >
    > I wish. Sadly there's no way to set exposure or aperture, or even tell it in which direction to push things. The only things one can preset are ISO and CCT. I use white paper to reduce flash output.
    >
    > I'm tempted to look at getting a canon and use CHDK.
    >
    >
    > NT
    >


    Ah, I see why I've never heard of this camera before.

    Actually, if you look in the Rec menu list (section 3.4.2.1 of the user
    manual) you can set ISO, exposure, white balance, AEB, sharpness, and
    several other things. I doubt if the Scene modes allow you any further
    control over what you can do in the Rec menu. But, granted, the Scene
    mode menu could be more convenient given the limited controls you have
    available with this camera.

    Moving to a Canon (which one?) might be a step in the right direction,
    even if you don't do CHDK. Make sure the camera model supports RAW.
    There are also other good choices for compact cameras, like say, the
    Sony RX100. A lot depends on your budget, of course.
     
    otter, Jul 6, 2013
    #14
  15. Guest

    On Saturday, July 6, 2013 3:15:17 PM UTC+1, otter wrote:
    > On 7/6/2013 4:55 AM, wrote:
    > > On Saturday, July 6, 2013 2:24:31 AM UTC+1, Bill K wrote:


    > >> I think you are expecting too much from a cheap camera. The modes are
    > >> there to help out beginners, but there is nothing in them that you
    > >> couldn't directly set in other ways.


    > > I wish. Sadly there's no way to set exposure or aperture, or even tell it in which direction to push things. The only things one can preset are ISO and CCT. I use white paper to reduce flash output.
    > >
    > > I'm tempted to look at getting a canon and use CHDK.


    > Ah, I see why I've never heard of this camera before.
    > Actually, if you look in the Rec menu list (section 3.4.2.1 of the user
    > manual) you can set ISO, exposure, white balance, AEB, sharpness, and
    > several other things.


    ISO and CCT yes. Exposure is listed but it doesnt enable setting of exposure! It only adjusts whatever the cam decides by upto 2 stops, and this results in either white clipping or dark noise in the final image, ie there is no corresponding compensation with shutter or iso setting etc. So you still cant choose exposure or aperture. Its a huge omission.


    > I doubt if the Scene modes allow you any further
    > control over what you can do in the Rec menu.


    Some do to an extent. I was hoping to milk them, but its limited.
    'Kids' gives fast exposure & wide aperture.
    'Backlight' & 'Night' give low ISO for low noise, with & without flash.
    That's about it though.


    > But, granted, the Scene
    > mode menu could be more convenient given the limited controls you have
    > available with this camera.
    > Moving to a Canon (which one?) might be a step in the right direction,
    > even if you don't do CHDK. Make sure the camera model supports RAW.
    > There are also other good choices for compact cameras, like say, the
    > Sony RX100. A lot depends on your budget, of course.


    Yeah, I'm torn 2 ways budget wise. I do fancy chdk. Do all compact canons allow full control of exposure, aperture, iso? That's what really matters, everything else is just gravy. Do they provide raw files? If they do both, I'm not sure there would be a reason to move further up the food chain. Megapixel count is more than enough these days.

    thanks


    NT
     
    , Jul 7, 2013
    #15
  16. PeterN Guest

    On 7/6/2013 10:15 AM, otter wrote:
    > On 7/6/2013 4:55 AM, wrote:
    >> On Saturday, July 6, 2013 2:24:31 AM UTC+1, Bill K wrote:
    >>> On 6/30/2013 10:15 AM, wrote:

    >>
    >>
    >>>> Overall I've been impressed with the thing, it far outperforms my
    >>>> old film SLRs. Adding external lens elements gives it SLR-like
    >>>> abilities, like closeup, macro & fisheye. If I had my way I'd give
    >>>> it more useful modes though, like animal mode, harris shutter, HDR etc.

    >>
    >>> I think you are expecting too much from a cheap camera. The modes are
    >>> there to help out beginners, but there is nothing in them that you
    >>> couldn't directly set in other ways.

    >>
    >> I wish. Sadly there's no way to set exposure or aperture, or even tell
    >> it in which direction to push things. The only things one can preset
    >> are ISO and CCT. I use white paper to reduce flash output.
    >>
    >> I'm tempted to look at getting a canon and use CHDK.
    >>
    >>
    >> NT
    >>

    >
    > Ah, I see why I've never heard of this camera before.
    >
    > Actually, if you look in the Rec menu list (section 3.4.2.1 of the user
    > manual) you can set ISO, exposure, white balance, AEB, sharpness, and
    > several other things. I doubt if the Scene modes allow you any further
    > control over what you can do in the Rec menu. But, granted, the Scene
    > mode menu could be more convenient given the limited controls you have
    > available with this camera.
    >
    > Moving to a Canon (which one?) might be a step in the right direction,
    > even if you don't do CHDK. Make sure the camera model supports RAW.
    > There are also other good choices for compact cameras, like say, the
    > Sony RX100. A lot depends on your budget, of course.
    >


    IIRC I had to put my Coolpix in a close up mode, to take macros. My
    guess is, that mode increased the distance from the rear element to
    the sensor. There may be some other similar functionality with other
    cameras.

    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, Jul 7, 2013
    #16
  17. otter Guest

    On 7/6/2013 6:18 PM, wrote:
    > On Saturday, July 6, 2013 3:15:17 PM UTC+1, otter wrote:
    >> On 7/6/2013 4:55 AM, wrote:
    >>> On Saturday, July 6, 2013 2:24:31 AM UTC+1, Bill K wrote:

    >
    >>>> I think you are expecting too much from a cheap camera. The modes are
    >>>> there to help out beginners, but there is nothing in them that you
    >>>> couldn't directly set in other ways.

    >
    >>> I wish. Sadly there's no way to set exposure or aperture, or even tell it in which direction to push things. The only things one can preset are ISO and CCT. I use white paper to reduce flash output.
    >>>
    >>> I'm tempted to look at getting a canon and use CHDK.

    >
    >> Ah, I see why I've never heard of this camera before.
    >> Actually, if you look in the Rec menu list (section 3.4.2.1 of the user
    >> manual) you can set ISO, exposure, white balance, AEB, sharpness, and
    >> several other things.

    >
    > ISO and CCT yes. Exposure is listed but it doesnt enable setting of exposure! It only adjusts whatever the cam decides by upto 2 stops, and this results in either white clipping or dark noise in the final image, ie there is no corresponding compensation with shutter or iso setting etc. So you still cant choose exposure or aperture. Its a huge omission.
    >
    >
    >> I doubt if the Scene modes allow you any further
    >> control over what you can do in the Rec menu.

    >
    > Some do to an extent. I was hoping to milk them, but its limited.
    > 'Kids' gives fast exposure & wide aperture.
    > 'Backlight' & 'Night' give low ISO for low noise, with & without flash.
    > That's about it though.
    >
    >
    >> But, granted, the Scene
    >> mode menu could be more convenient given the limited controls you have
    >> available with this camera.
    >> Moving to a Canon (which one?) might be a step in the right direction,
    >> even if you don't do CHDK. Make sure the camera model supports RAW.
    >> There are also other good choices for compact cameras, like say, the
    >> Sony RX100. A lot depends on your budget, of course.

    >
    > Yeah, I'm torn 2 ways budget wise. I do fancy chdk. Do all compact canons allow full control of exposure, aperture, iso? That's what really matters, everything else is just gravy. Do they provide raw files? If they do both, I'm not sure there would be a reason to move further up the food chain. Megapixel count is more than enough these days.
    >
    > thanks
    >
    >
    > NT
    >


    You'll have to check out the specifications of the particular model, I'm
    not an expert on all the Canon compact cameras. I know the G series
    have knobs to directly control these things that are even more handy
    than my full frame camera.

    Not sure what Canon compact camera to recommend, though. I liked my G12
    but the sensor size is pretty small compared to some of it's competitors
    (like the RX100). That leads to noise issues in low light, and not very
    shallow depth of field for subject isolation.
     
    otter, Jul 7, 2013
    #17
  18. David Taylor Guest

    On 07/07/2013 01:03, PeterN wrote:
    []
    > IIRC I had to put my Coolpix in a close up mode, to take macros. My
    > guess is, that mode increased the distance from the rear element to
    > the sensor. There may be some other similar functionality with other
    > cameras.


    On some Coolpix, at least, macro-mode allowed a greater range of focus
    so that close objtects could be imaged, but at the expense of
    potentially slower focus as there was greater range through which the
    lens could move.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
     
    David Taylor, Jul 7, 2013
    #18
  19. PeterN Guest

    On 7/7/2013 2:30 AM, David Taylor wrote:
    > On 07/07/2013 01:03, PeterN wrote:
    > []
    >> IIRC I had to put my Coolpix in a close up mode, to take macros. My
    >> guess is, that mode increased the distance from the rear element to
    >> the sensor. There may be some other similar functionality with other
    >> cameras.

    >
    > On some Coolpix, at least, macro-mode allowed a greater range of focus
    > so that close objtects could be imaged, but at the expense of
    > potentially slower focus as there was greater range through which the
    > lens could move.


    The shutter lag was intolerable. That's why I went to s dslr, and
    converted the Coolpiz for infra red use.

    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, Jul 7, 2013
    #19
  20. David Taylor Guest

    On 07/07/2013 16:46, PeterN wrote:
    > On 7/7/2013 2:30 AM, David Taylor wrote:
    >> On 07/07/2013 01:03, PeterN wrote:
    >> []
    >>> IIRC I had to put my Coolpix in a close up mode, to take macros. My
    >>> guess is, that mode increased the distance from the rear element to
    >>> the sensor. There may be some other similar functionality with other
    >>> cameras.

    >>
    >> On some Coolpix, at least, macro-mode allowed a greater range of focus
    >> so that close objtects could be imaged, but at the expense of
    >> potentially slower focus as there was greater range through which the
    >> lens could move.

    >
    > The shutter lag was intolerable. That's why I went to s dslr, and
    > converted the Coolpix for infra red use.


    It was good for macro, though and, having an entrance pupil similar to
    the human eye, was easy to attach to telescopes etc. No early digital
    cameras had such low shutter lag as today's do.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
     
    David Taylor, Jul 7, 2013
    #20
    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. Z
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,608
  2. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,952
  3. Joe Warrington

    Mysterious Self-rebooting system

    Joe Warrington, Jun 29, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    595
    °Mike°
    Jun 29, 2003
  4. d.c.

    Mysterious Sounds

    d.c., Sep 6, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    465
    °Mike°
    Sep 6, 2003
  5. ultraviolet353

    really really mysterious IE6 problem--secure site

    ultraviolet353, Nov 20, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    1,222
    Boomer
    Nov 22, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page