Sony F828 Opinions?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Paul Williams, Nov 9, 2004.

  1. Hi All,

    I'm thinking of getting a new camera; currently own
    a Nikon Coolpix 775, which of course is a bit limited.

    I was thinking of the Sony F828, but heard some bad things
    about it. But on the other hand all the reviews at www.dpreview.com
    seem to be very positive.

    My other choice would be the Fujifilm Finepix s7000 which is
    about £200 cheaper.

    So 2 questions:

    1. What are you honest opionions/experiences with the Sony F828?
    2. Given the choice of the Fuji or the Sony, which would you pick
    if budget was not a problem?

    Best regards,
    Paul
     
    Paul Williams, Nov 9, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Williams

    TAFKAB Guest

    I've been using one for a few months, and I really like it. Yes, it has
    issues with PF when you shoot it at the widest angles and wide open, with
    areas of extreme contrast. However, it's easily fixed in PS for the very few
    times you'll see it. For me, the camera's positives far outweigh the
    negatives. And, when you compare it to the other 8MP ZLRs, it looks even
    better. The AF is much better, the manual zoom is an absolute delight, the
    zoom range is excellent, the controls are logical, but there's a lot of them
    so there's a small learning curve. Also, the build quality is outstanding.
    Once I took a good long look, it was obvious that the only real issue
    associated with the camera, PF, was very easily fixable, but the problems
    associated with the other 8MP ZLRs, such as poor AF performance, horrid zoom
    controls, etc weren't fixable at all. I tried the Olympus 8080 and the Canon
    Pro 1, and found that the response times for AF and zooming were absolutely
    horrible, and actually hated both of them. They seemed fine if your subject
    was stationary, but completely incapable of anything moving. Of course, if
    you shoot action, get a DSLR since even the Sony isn't really suitable for
    fast-moving action.

    Anyway, it's up to you to decide what's important to you, and go from there.
    Sorry I can't comment on the Fuji; I've never even held one.

    "Paul Williams" <> wrote in message
    news:cmqn47$hj5$...
    > Hi All,
    >
    > I'm thinking of getting a new camera; currently own
    > a Nikon Coolpix 775, which of course is a bit limited.
    >
    > I was thinking of the Sony F828, but heard some bad things
    > about it. But on the other hand all the reviews at www.dpreview.com
    > seem to be very positive.
    >
    > My other choice would be the Fujifilm Finepix s7000 which is
    > about £200 cheaper.
    >
    > So 2 questions:
    >
    > 1. What are you honest opionions/experiences with the Sony F828?
    > 2. Given the choice of the Fuji or the Sony, which would you pick
    > if budget was not a problem?
    >
    > Best regards,
    > Paul
    >
     
    TAFKAB, Nov 9, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul Williams

    bmoag Guest

    I have this camera. It is a beast.
    That means it is big and heavy but also very powerful, reliable and well
    built. But far from perfect and may bite you occasionally.
    I have taken it to places where one should think twice about taking
    electronic devices without problems.
    The learning curve for total control is significant.
    The 828 works very well in totally auto program mode if you want the
    ultimate snapshot camera.
    The lens is excellent. It seems razor sharp because of the awesome detail
    the sensor can capture.
    Purple fringing has been a non-issue for me and I have yet to see a digital
    sensor without some artifact: it is easy to find examples of horrible moire
    using dSLRs on the web but nobody seems to dis those cameras.
    It is not the fastest camera to use although there is a limited burst mode.
    It is difficult to use with external flash except for dedicated Sony units
    in program mode.
    The EVF takes getting used to, can be difficult to use in bright light
    (especially when trying to track a moving object), and can be difficult to
    use for critical manual focus, worse even than the focusing screens in most
    autofocus SLRs. These are generic issues for EVF cameras and can be a real
    pain. To me the EVF is the biggest issue with this camera but that is the
    nature of the beast.
    Because of diffraction effects the minimum aperture is f8: for critical
    outdoor work you need to have a polarizer or neutral density filter if you
    want to use slower shutter speeds at lower effective ISOs for best image
    quality. Again, this is the nature of the beast and is not an issue unless
    you understand why it is an issue.
    The Sony RAW mode, which under some conditions can marginally increase the
    already good color accuracy of the 828, can now be directly manipulated in
    Photoshop CS with a new Adobe plug-in. However it takes a very long time to
    write raw images to memory in this camera and the files are quite large.
    RAW mode is impractical except for special uses so if you don't know why you
    may need it you don't need it.
    Although they cannot write to each other it is very convenient to be able to
    use both CF and memory stick in the camera: double the storage capacity.
    If you do not want an SLR but want the most digital camera available I would
    not hesitate to get an 828. For my uses the 828 is so good I do not mind
    waiting until Nikon coughs out a successor to the D70.
     
    bmoag, Nov 9, 2004
    #3
  4. Paul Williams

    Larry Guest

    In article <cmqn47$hj5$>,
    says...
    > Hi All,
    >
    > I'm thinking of getting a new camera; currently own
    > a Nikon Coolpix 775, which of course is a bit limited.
    >
    > I was thinking of the Sony F828, but heard some bad things
    > about it. But on the other hand all the reviews at www.dpreview.com
    > seem to be very positive.
    >
    > My other choice would be the Fujifilm Finepix s7000 which is
    > about £200 cheaper.
    >
    > So 2 questions:
    >
    > 1. What are you honest opionions/experiences with the Sony F828?
    > 2. Given the choice of the Fuji or the Sony, which would you pick
    > if budget was not a problem?
    >
    > Best regards,
    > Paul
    >
    >


    I feel qualified to answer here as I own BOTH the Fuji
    S7000 And the Sony 828.

    FUJI

    Item 1. BAD thing...The Fuji STARTS at ISO 200 and goes UP
    from there. I dont like NOT having ISO 100

    Item 2. GOOD thing...The Fuji is faster saving RAW files (1
    or 2 sec)

    Item 3. BAD thing... To get the BEST picture from the Fuji
    you need to shoot at its highest resolution (12mp
    interpolated) and then reduce the size yourself. If you
    shoot at the native 6mp resolution it STILL shoots an
    interpolated 12mp image then reduces it "in camera". End
    result is a picture not quite as crisp as it is if you do
    the size reduction yourself.

    Item 4. GOOD thing... The Sony Starts at ISO 84 and goes up
    from there

    Item 5. BAD thing... The Sony is VERY noisy at more than
    ISO 100

    Item 5. BAD thing... The Sony takes 30 seconds or longer to
    save a RAW file, meanwhile the camera is locked up until
    the file is saved.

    All in all I think the Sony is a better camera, but I
    REALLY HATE the long wait between frames when in RAW mode.

    I tend to use the Fuji at ISO 200 for "Action" shots in RAW
    mode, and use the SONY for "POSED" images where the scene
    wont change much in 30 seconds.

    When FORCED to use the Sony for action pictures, it does a
    good job, and the "constant Auto Focus" works very well and
    very fast. (this feature also works well on the Fuji)




    --
    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
     
    Larry, Nov 9, 2004
    #4
  5. Paul Williams

    Aerticus Guest

    Now I know why I have returned to this NG

    Thanks guys - these are fantastic insights

    Aerticus
     
    Aerticus, Nov 9, 2004
    #5
  6. Paul Williams

    Guest

    In message <>,
    Larry <> wrote:

    >Item 1. BAD thing...The Fuji STARTS at ISO 200 and goes UP
    >from there. I dont like NOT having ISO 100


    These numbers are pretty arbitrary, in my experience. You point two
    different camera models at the same blank wall, with the same ISO
    setting, and one will use an aperture and shutter combination that is a
    stop different than the other. Your 200 may be equal to 100 on another
    camera.

    Even if this is not so, the one with a min of 200 may have more dynamic
    range, allowing you to achieve ISO 100 with exposure compensation.
    Unlike pushing ISOs, pulling ISOs with digital cameras is not only *as*
    good, but is usualy better than if the camera really had that ISO,
    because more bitdepth is used to sample the subject. Just beware of
    clipping, as you lose a stop of headroom.


    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Nov 9, 2004
    #6
  7. Hi Everyone,

    I'm with Aerticus on this, thanks for everyones' very helpful views!

    You have all suade me in the direction of the 828.

    Now I just have to persuade my bank balance that I can get it! ;-)

    Best regards,
    Paul


    wrote:
    > In message <>,
    > Larry <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Item 1. BAD thing...The Fuji STARTS at ISO 200 and goes UP

    >
    >>from there. I dont like NOT having ISO 100

    >
    > These numbers are pretty arbitrary, in my experience. You point two
    > different camera models at the same blank wall, with the same ISO
    > setting, and one will use an aperture and shutter combination that is a
    > stop different than the other. Your 200 may be equal to 100 on another
    > camera.
    >
    > Even if this is not so, the one with a min of 200 may have more dynamic
    > range, allowing you to achieve ISO 100 with exposure compensation.
    > Unlike pushing ISOs, pulling ISOs with digital cameras is not only *as*
    > good, but is usualy better than if the camera really had that ISO,
    > because more bitdepth is used to sample the subject. Just beware of
    > clipping, as you lose a stop of headroom.
    >
    >
     
    Paul Williams, Nov 10, 2004
    #7
  8. Paul Williams wrote:
    > Hi Everyone,
    >
    > I'm with Aerticus on this, thanks for everyones' very helpful views!
    >
    > You have all suade me in the direction of the 828.
    >
    > Now I just have to persuade my bank balance that I can get it! ;-)
    >
    > Best regards,
    > Paul


    If you want it for the long zoom there are better choices, or if you want
    it for the 8MP.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 10, 2004
    #8
  9. Paul Williams

    Larry Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > These numbers are pretty arbitrary, in my experience. You point two
    > different camera models at the same blank wall, with the same ISO
    > setting, and one will use an aperture and shutter combination that is a
    > stop different than the other. Your 200 may be equal to 100 on another
    > camera.
    >
    > Even if this is not so, the one with a min of 200 may have more dynamic
    > range, allowing you to achieve ISO 100 with exposure compensation.
    > Unlike pushing ISOs, pulling ISOs with digital cameras is not only *as*
    > good, but is usualy better than if the camera really had that ISO,
    > because more bitdepth is used to sample the subject. Just beware of
    > clipping, as you lose a stop of headroom.
    >
    >


    Perhaps the way I should put it is>>>>

    I HATE not being able to SET the camera at ISO 100 and
    shoot AS IF it was ISO 100.

    Since I sometimes have as little as 2 seconds to get a shot
    I've been waiting for (not knowing WHERE in my viscinity it
    going to happen) I'de rather Not have to set compensation,
    but rather set a "film speed equivalent" as it were.

    Notice I Still own the Fuji (and use it a lot) you can tell
    it wasn't a "Killing" need, just a wish.

    I only list it under BAD thing in case the OP didn't know
    of the limitation.


    --
    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
     
    Larry, Nov 10, 2004
    #9
  10. Paul Williams

    TAFKAB Guest

    "Paul Williams" <> wrote in message
    news:cmsmv0$f9g$...
    > Hi Everyone,
    >
    > I'm with Aerticus on this, thanks for everyones' very helpful views!
    >
    > You have all suade me in the direction of the 828.
    >
    > Now I just have to persuade my bank balance that I can get it! ;-)


    I saw it for under $700 at Circuit City a little while ago. Not sure if it's
    still on sale. Also, check E-Bay for "dealer dumps."

    >
    > Best regards,
    > Paul
    >
    >
    > wrote:
    >> In message <>,
    >> Larry <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Item 1. BAD thing...The Fuji STARTS at ISO 200 and goes UP

    >>
    >>>from there. I dont like NOT having ISO 100

    >>
    >> These numbers are pretty arbitrary, in my experience. You point two
    >> different camera models at the same blank wall, with the same ISO
    >> setting, and one will use an aperture and shutter combination that is a
    >> stop different than the other. Your 200 may be equal to 100 on another
    >> camera.
    >>
    >> Even if this is not so, the one with a min of 200 may have more dynamic
    >> range, allowing you to achieve ISO 100 with exposure compensation.
    >> Unlike pushing ISOs, pulling ISOs with digital cameras is not only *as*
    >> good, but is usualy better than if the camera really had that ISO,
    >> because more bitdepth is used to sample the subject. Just beware of
    >> clipping, as you lose a stop of headroom.
    >>
    >>

    >
     
    TAFKAB, Nov 10, 2004
    #10
    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. alex
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    643
  2. BUNTOVNIK
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    597
  3. Gerard McGovern
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    951
    Todd Walker
    Aug 29, 2003
  4. Michael Meissner
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    339
    Bernhard Mayer
    Aug 20, 2003
  5. Petzl
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    441
    Paul D. Sullivan
    Aug 23, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page