Need advice - Point and Shoot - Super zoom vs shirt pocketable zoom for traveling in Japan

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by asdf3b, Aug 20, 2007.

  1. asdf3b

    asdf3b Guest

    Greetings! I shall be taking an escorted tour of Japan for 12 days
    from 15th September to 15th October 2007. I am an USA citizen. Then I
    shall travel to Bangkok and Siem Rep to photograph Ankor Wat. I shall
    be probably take 2000 to 3000 pictures during that time. Pictures will
    be tourist type. All pictures will be viewed on Computer monitor.

    Which camera you will take if you are given choice between two
    cameras- [a] Canon Super zoom - power shot S5 IS weighing 16 oz or
    Canon SD 1000 weighing 4.4 oz.

    The lighter shirt pocketable camera will be carried by me all the
    time. I have to make a conscious effort to take the heavier camera
    with me.

    What is your experience ? With thanks.
    asdf3b, Aug 20, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. asdf3b

    ray Guest

    Personally, I'd go with neither. When my wife and I go to Yellowstone
    (several times per year) we go with a Kodak P850 and a Nikon Coolpix 2100.
    I chose the P850 of similar cameras from canon and other vendors primarily
    because I cannot stand an EVF with under 200k pixels - it is so blocky I
    can't tell what I'm doing. YMMV.

    Bottom line, why not both? They're not that expensive.
    ray, Aug 20, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Why choose when you can get the best of both worlds? 28 - 280mm zoom,

    David J Taylor, Aug 20, 2007
  4. asdf3b

    irwell Guest

    No viewfinder?
    irwell, Aug 21, 2007
  5. asdf3b

    ASAAR Guest

    I'm not sure that I understand the question, or perhaps you didn't
    phrase it too well. If you'll always take the SD1000 with you, the
    question might be when should you take the S5 IS, or should you not
    take it at all? Personally, I'd try to take the S5 as often as
    possible, as it should produce better pictures. The SD 1000 I'd
    maybe take all the time, mainly for when the S5 (still a fairly
    small camera) might be too cumbersome or inappropriate for the
    location, and also as insurance when you'd be using the S5, in case
    it's stolen, lost or something else unfortunate happens. You may
    not care about taking videos, but if you have any good
    opportunities, the S5 IS is one of the best for video quality, and
    it also records sound in stereo, which is pretty rare. My only
    similar experience has been very brief, with the S3 IS, and it
    performed better than I expected handheld at the lens's maximum tele
    extension. Having the S5 IS might allow some shots to be taken that
    wouldn't turn out nearly as well using the SD1000.
    ASAAR, Aug 21, 2007
  6. asdf3b

    Nushar Guest

    David J Taylor

    : Why choose when you can get the best of both worlds? 28 - 280mm
    : zoom, 8oz.

    Good recommendation among the currently available choices.

    I consider myself a serious traveller and photographer. For me, the
    single most important consideration is compactness: not to look cute,
    but size should be so so I would always have the camera with me.

    The second most important consideration is good wide-angle. (I do
    understand that others may prioritize differently.)

    One step lower are (i) telephoto as well as (ii) manual control. I
    haven't been able to choose between them, and choose I must if I want
    to buy something.

    For relative compactness, good wide and telephoto, IS, but without
    manual control, the best choice is the above recommended Panasonic
    Lumix TZ-3.

    For relative compactness, good wide angle, IS, manual control, but with
    very limited telephotol, the best choice is Panasonic Lumix LX-2 or its
    more expensive and possibly better version Leica D-Lux-3.

    The camera which seems to have everything, except perhaps the
    compactness, :) is about-to-be-released Panasonic Lumix FZ-18. I shall
    look at it to decide if I can live with its size.

    I suppose there are more choices if you don't care about 28mm.
    Similarly, Ricoh has 24mm-72mm models. However, I haven't paid them
    much attention.
    Nushar, Aug 21, 2007
  7. Yes, it has an LCD screen on the back.

    David J Taylor, Aug 21, 2007
  8. asdf3b

    Kalinka Guest

    or even better
    Kalinka, Aug 21, 2007
  9. asdf3b

    ASAAR Guest

    ASAAR, Aug 21, 2007
  10. Not the best choice for someone who wants a light, compact camera they can
    carry all the time. Quite apart from the poor reviews as ASAAR mentioned.

    David J Taylor, Aug 21, 2007
  11. asdf3b

    irwell Guest

    Cute answer, but it is not a good response.
    irwell, Aug 21, 2007
  12. asdf3b

    Kalinka Guest

    according to me it works fine......[email protected]/[email protected]/
    and its less hassle to have one camera that weighs less than the other
    2 and does more !
    Kalinka, Aug 21, 2007
  13. irwell wrote:
    What is the LCD, if not the viewfinder, then?

    The TZ3, in common with most very compact cameras, does not have room for
    either an EVF or optical viewfinder. It would be most unusual to find an
    optical viewfinder for a camera with 10:1 zoom range in any case.

    Some people find the EVF unusable, although I've been happy with mine.
    The best EVF I used was the VGA-resolution finder on the Minolta A2, but
    no other manufacturer has taken these up.

    If you want, you can cut up an old hand-held slide viewer to make an
    adaptor for using an LCD close-up, and keeping the sun off. Someone
    probably makes these commercially.

    David J Taylor, Aug 21, 2007
  14. asdf3b

    Newbie Guest

    Newbie, Aug 21, 2007
  15. asdf3b

    Kalinka Guest

    here are some better examples of what 504mm can give you,
    from Windsor to the centre of London is about 20 miles as the crow
    flies (and in between Heathrow airport)[email protected]/870797509/

    or (in the same camera) using 28mm[email protected]/695296539/
    Kalinka, Aug 21, 2007
  16. asdf3b

    irwell Guest

    The OP was interested in the Canon SD 1000, listed as an Ultra Compact
    with an optical viewfinder.

    So now we have a gimmicky optical viewfinder,
    I rest my case!
    irwell, Aug 21, 2007
  17. Well, no. The optical finder would have parallax errors for close-up
    work, and would not have the gain-up which can make electronic finders
    such a delight to use in dimmer conditions.

    But I still don't think you will find an optical finder in a compact,
    ten-times zoom camera.

    David J Taylor, Aug 22, 2007
  18. asdf3b

    irwell Guest

    I have nothing against EVFs, in fact I liked them on
    the two cameras I once owned that had them, my
    original query was that you had touted a camera that
    had no view finder, optical or otherwise. The LCD
    is a display IMO, not a viewfinder, and has limitations
    in bright sunlight conditions.
    irwell, Aug 22, 2007
  19. irwell wrote:
    Well, if you only have an LCD, like it or lump it, that /is/ the

    I've also used EVF cameras and quite like the camera-to-face way of
    operating. I would struggle with an LCD were it not for the fact that I
    am short-sighted, and can look over my glasses when needed. My LCD-only
    camera is my least favourite viewfinder.

    David J Taylor, Aug 22, 2007
  20. asdf3b

    Andy Guest

    how about Canon 710IS with a teleconverter, that gives you ~368mm
    according to camera manual
    Andy, Aug 22, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.