which is better?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by vanderlej, May 9, 2006.

  1. vanderlej

    vanderlej Guest

    1. Advertising

  2. vanderlej

    Neil Ellwood Guest

    Neil Ellwood, May 9, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. vanderlej

    vanderlej Guest

    since i'm new to photography i'm looking for entry level camera. i was
    thinkink overall better, nothing specific.
    i would use it to take pictures around the town, or when i go to the country
    or hiking. things like that, nothing to advanced and those three are at the
    top of my list.
    hope someone can help me.
    thanks, again.

    "Neil Ellwood" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Tue, 09 May 2006 10:21:03 +0200, vanderlej wrote:
    >
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...icaminolta_dimagez5,panasonic_dmcfz5&show=all
    >>
    >> thanks

    > For what?
    > You need to tell us your requirements to enable any sort of judgement to
    > be made.
    > --
    > Neil
    > Delete 'l' to reply
    vanderlej, May 9, 2006
    #3
  4. vanderlej wrote:
    > since i'm new to photography i'm looking for entry level camera. i was
    > thinkink overall better, nothing specific.
    > i would use it to take pictures around the town, or when i go to the
    > country or hiking. things like that, nothing to advanced and those
    > three are at the top of my list.
    > hope someone can help me.
    > thanks, again.


    Based on your information, there is no bases to recommend on over
    another. They all will do what you have asked about. Each is different and
    has abilities that could be useful for some photographers, but you have not
    identified any specific thing that would relate to the differences.

    I suggest that you stop at a store and get your hands on them. Hold
    them take a photo or two with them. How does it feel, does making
    adjustments feel "right" to you. How a camera fits your hands and how
    logical or illogical the layout of controls are is greatly underrated by
    most people. Ergonomics and user interface are really important. They are
    also very personal.


    >
    > "Neil Ellwood" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> On Tue, 09 May 2006 10:21:03 +0200, vanderlej wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...icaminolta_dimagez5,panasonic_dmcfz5&show=all
    >>>
    >>> thanks

    >> For what?
    >> You need to tell us your requirements to enable any sort of
    >> judgement to be made.
    >> --
    >> Neil
    >> Delete 'l' to reply


    --
    Joseph Meehan

    Dia duit
    Joseph Meehan, May 9, 2006
    #4
  5. vanderlej

    Stormlady Guest

    I would also suggest looking at the Kodak P850. I was intending on
    purchasing the Fuji on the list and was advised to consider the Kodak.
    While I don't have the Kodak yet, it does have some extra features,
    12Xoptical zoom, image stabilization, and an external flash (if that matters
    to you) The few people I've talked to with it have been happy with it, i
    hope I'm as happy when I get mine.

    Another thing to consider would be the type of card it takes. Some cards
    are more expensive than others.
    "vanderlej" <> wrote in message
    news:e3pjdf$2md$...
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...icaminolta_dimagez5,panasonic_dmcfz5&show=all
    >
    > thanks
    >
    Stormlady, May 9, 2006
    #5
  6. vanderlej

    Panno Zhai Guest

    vanderlej wrote:
    > since i'm new to photography i'm looking for entry level camera.


    Neither of the cameras are "entry level". They have some advanced
    features which you may not need. Thus you will carry extra-weight and
    extra-size to hiking for nothing.

    Have a look at the "compact" class of cameras. You cannot go wrong with
    Canon, e.g. A610 or A620. Pentax Optio are also good for the majority
    of newbie users. Generally, you should get a camera off your friend,
    and try it. There are such features as ergonomics, sharpness of
    picture, shutter lag and so on which are important. If you try any
    camera, you will know what you want from a camera.
    Panno Zhai, May 9, 2006
    #6
  7. On Tue, 9 May 2006 12:08:36 +0200, vanderlej <> wrote:
    > "Neil Ellwood" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> On Tue, 09 May 2006 10:21:03 +0200, vanderlej wrote:


    fuji_finepixs5200z
    konicaminolta_dimagez5
    panasonic_dmcfz5

    >>> thanks

    >> For what?
    >> You need to tell us your requirements to enable any sort of judgement to
    >> be made.

    >
    > since i'm new to photography i'm looking for entry level camera. i was
    > thinkink overall better, nothing specific.
    > i would use it to take pictures around the town, or when i go to the country
    > or hiking. things like that, nothing to advanced and those three are at the
    > top of my list.


    I'm not off-hand familiar with the Fuji, but the other two aren't really
    entry-level cameras. They both can be used as such, since they have
    full-auto modes, but you'll be getting (and paying for) a bunch of
    additional features. These are also not pocket-sized cameras, unless you
    mean a fair-sized jacket pocket.

    If you think that you'll eventually want the more advanced features,
    these are good cameras. Konica-minolta cameras may be hard to find,
    as they are pulling out of the camera business. You might also want to
    consider something smaller/less expensive, like the Canon A610 or A700,
    or if you want the large zoom range, the Panasonic TZ1.

    -dms
    Daniel Silevitch, May 9, 2006
    #7
  8. vanderlej

    Panno Zhai Guest

    Daniel Silevitch wrote:

    > I'm not off-hand familiar with the Fuji, but the other two aren't really
    > entry-level cameras. They both can be used as such, since they have
    > full-auto modes, but you'll be getting (and paying for) a bunch of
    > additional features. These are also not pocket-sized cameras, unless you
    > mean a fair-sized jacket pocket.


    You do not understand. The original poster (OP) is from Hungary. In
    Eastern Europe, you just hafta demonstrate to people how cool and
    expensive you camera is. Point & Shoot (P&S) cameras are not expensive
    enough. Perhaps, the "premium" line of P&S cameras is what the OP
    looking for. The examples of such cameras are Canon IXUS and Casio
    Excilim.
    Panno Zhai, May 9, 2006
    #8
  9. On 9 May 2006 06:32:01 -0700, Panno Zhai <> wrote:
    >
    > Daniel Silevitch wrote:
    >
    >> I'm not off-hand familiar with the Fuji, but the other two aren't really
    >> entry-level cameras. They both can be used as such, since they have
    >> full-auto modes, but you'll be getting (and paying for) a bunch of
    >> additional features. These are also not pocket-sized cameras, unless you
    >> mean a fair-sized jacket pocket.

    >
    > You do not understand. The original poster (OP) is from Hungary. In
    > Eastern Europe, you just hafta demonstrate to people how cool and
    > expensive you camera is. Point & Shoot (P&S) cameras are not expensive
    > enough. Perhaps, the "premium" line of P&S cameras is what the OP
    > looking for. The examples of such cameras are Canon IXUS and Casio
    > Excilim.


    He said he wanted an entry-level camera. If he wants a "prestige" camera
    without paying for a DSLR, I'd suggest the $500ish Panasonic LX-1, or
    better yet, the Leica version of same.

    -dms
    Daniel Silevitch, May 9, 2006
    #9
  10. vanderlej

    Kitt Guest

    vanderlej wrote:
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...icaminolta_dimagez5,panasonic_dmcfz5&show=all
    >
    > thanks



    One difference I noticed was the absence of image stabilization on one
    of them. Is that not important to you and if not, why pay more for it?
    You should be able to find cameras without it for less, if it's not
    important or add another one with it to give you more choice if it's
    something you do really want.
    Kitt, May 9, 2006
    #10
  11. vanderlej

    vanderlej Guest

    how important and usefull is image stabilization?

    "Kitt" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > vanderlej wrote:
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/com...icaminolta_dimagez5,panasonic_dmcfz5&show=all
    >>
    >> thanks

    >
    >
    > One difference I noticed was the absence of image stabilization on one
    > of them. Is that not important to you and if not, why pay more for it?
    > You should be able to find cameras without it for less, if it's not
    > important or add another one with it to give you more choice if it's
    > something you do really want.
    >
    vanderlej, May 10, 2006
    #11
  12. vanderlej

    Guest

    vanderlej wrote:

    > how important and usefull is image stabilization?
    >

    Personally, I think it's very important. I find that it
    saves a lot of what would otherwise come out as blurred
    shots when shooting in poor light and the resultant slow
    shutter speed, especially near the long end of the zoom.
    Unless you're going to always shoot in good light at fast
    shutter speeds and/or with a tripod, you'll see a big
    difference.

    If you really are a beginner and not just being modest,
    I think I know what you're going through because I was in
    the same situation myself not long ago. Questions about
    what you need or what you want to do can just make the
    issue even more confusing. I still consider myself a novice
    in digital photography, but slightly less so than a few
    months ago.

    I think what you need is a camera that's powerful and
    versatile enough to let your interests grow, without being
    overly expensive or complex.

    I have not used any of the three cameras mentioned, and I
    know nothing about the K-M except what's written in reviews,
    but I had the older Fuji S3500 until a couple of months ago,
    and I'm using the Panasonic FZ5's big brother the FZ20. So,
    based partly on the specs, partly on reviews and partly on
    my experience with other models of the same brand, and the
    fact that manufacturers tend to keep incorporating the same
    strengths and weaknesses in their line of products, here's
    my 2 cents worth.

    Pros for the Panasonic FZ5 :
    Image stabiliser - a major factor IMHO.
    Significantly smaller and lighter.
    Wider optical zoom range.
    More powerful lens (f/2.8 vs 3.2)
    Shorter minimum focus distance
    More powerful flash
    Cheaper memory card type

    Pros for the Fuji S5200 :
    More pleasing color out of the box (though this is partly
    subjective and some will probably disagree)
    Better movie mode
    3:2 format - convenient for printing at 4x6 without cropping.
    Less noise
    Wider ISO range

    There are other differences that favor one or the other and
    may be significant for more experienced users, but less so
    for beginners. Some factors such as the type of battery used
    is rather controversial and a matter of personal choice.

    I liked my Fuji S3500 and still think it was a very nice
    entry-level camera with only one real flaw which, according
    to reviews, is still evident in the S5200. That's highlight
    clipping where there's loss of detail in bright areas of a
    high-contrast scene. Personally speaking, between the Fuji
    S5200 and the Pana FZ5, I'd choose the latter.

    You might also consider going for the newer FZ7 which has
    more resolution, 3:2 format, better movie mode and a larger
    LCD.
    , May 10, 2006
    #12
  13. vanderlej

    Kitt Guest

    vanderlej wrote:
    > how important and usefull is image stabilization?
    >



    It's not very important at all if you run around with your camera on a
    monopod or tripod all the time. If you don't, it could be very
    important, especially if you do a lot of close up work or use the long
    end of the telephoto very much. I can't speak for any on your list,
    but we have both the Canon S1 IS and the S2 IS and we're very happy
    with them. The S3 IS is the most current model of that camera. The
    movable view screen, great movie mode and flexibility of shooting modes
    are the pluses we enjoy with these cameras and the Image Stabilization
    has saved many an otherwise bad shot. YMMV, but I would recommend it
    if you don't use a tripod and shoot in less than ideal conditions very
    often.

    Kitt
    Kitt, May 15, 2006
    #13
    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. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    791
    unholy
    Jul 11, 2005
  2. Tony Carlisle

    Why doesn't the better camera have a better dpi?

    Tony Carlisle, Oct 2, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    443
    Mark Herring
    Oct 4, 2003
  3. The Jesus of Suburbia

    Microcontrollers: which one ? which language ? which compiler ?

    The Jesus of Suburbia, Feb 11, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    510
  4. thingy

    The SCO case gets better and better....

    thingy, Dec 10, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    328
  5. dh@.
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    462
    PTravel
    Aug 28, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page