 |
|
|
|
Next: Panasonic DSLR
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Jul 31, 2007
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 76) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:55 am
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Imported from groups: rec>photo>digital, others (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 51
|
(Msg. 77) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:51 am
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <username DeleteThis @qwest.net>
observed
>Scott W wrote:
>> Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
>>> A real world test from last Friday:
>>> 70+ P&S cameras versus 4 DSLRs on a whale viewing boat.
>>> Guess which cameras got pictures of a whale breaching?
>>> Hint: guess which cameras where hindered by too much delay?
>> A whale breaching is slow enough that if you know it is going to
>>happen it is pretty easy to capture with even a slow P&S camera.
>>These are some I shot with a small waterproof P&S.
>> http://www.pbase.com/konascott/whale
>> The whale gets enough hang time that I was waiting, trying to hit the
>>shutter at the best time.
>> The big difference is that if I had my DSLR I would have gotten 3-4
>>shots / breach instead of one. And if you don't know the whale is
>>going to breach before hand (often the case) the chances of getting
>>it with a P&S are close to zero, with a DSLR you have a much better chance.
>> Note that when I was using the P&S auto-focus time was not an issue
>>because I set the focus to infinity and just left it there, if I tried
>>to auto-focus all you would see is a splash left over from where the
>>whale went in, I have a number of photos like this.
>> Sadly I have yet to be very close to a breaching whale with my DSLR
>>in hand, I don't take it out on the water with me.
>
>http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.NEW/web/whale.breach.c07.27
>.2007.IMG_3556b-800.html
>
>Out of the 70+ P&S cameras on board, none got the shot.
>Of the 4 DSLRs, 2 people were chimping and missed it.
>The two images were the one above and one by a guy with a Nikon DSLR.
>We had no warning, only knew a breach was possible anytime, anywhere.
>My main regret is I didn't take my 1D Mark II with me (I was traveling
>light and didn't plan on doing this).
Nice shot Roger!
I have only a limited experience of Digital cameras (a few of my own and
the P&S other people ask me to use for them), and I would agree that
I've never come across a delay proportional to shutter speed.
I use cameras with viewfinders, but keep both eyes open. One for framing
on the v/f and one for timing. In practice, the action shots (with
manual focussing) suffer from no greater delay than an SLR.
The digicam (I certainly would not call my cameras P&S) suffers from the
following delays...
1. Sensor to viewfinder / LCD screen (the V/f is sometimes slightly less
than the LCD, depending on refresh rates.
2. Focus delay when in auto focus mode
3. Exposure calculation delay (are you using your dSLR in auto exposure
- is that a factor?) - the time it takes to measure the light and set
aperture and shutter. (Reduced but not eliminated by half-press
settings.)
4. Response delay - the inherent delay between activating the shutter
and capturing the scene (equivalent to your 70ms
5. Human delay (should have put this first) - seeing the action and
deciding to press the shutter.
In practice, apart from having to view with both eyes, I use my digicams
in such a way that only 4 & 5 and the inevitable bit of 3 affects me.
I have to say, I can't relate much to Alfred Molon observations either.
I'd like to know which cameras he's referring to.
Mike
[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting]
--
Michael J Davis
<><
Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused
the meaning of "discussion" with "digression".
<>< |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 04, 2005
Posts: 833
|
(Msg. 78) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:51 am
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Michael J Davis wrote:
> "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <username.RemoveThis@qwest.net> observed
>> http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.NEW/web/whale.breach.c07.27
>> .2007.IMG_3556b-800.html
>>
>> Out of the 70+ P&S cameras on board, none got the shot.
>> Of the 4 DSLRs, 2 people were chimping and missed it.
>> The two images were the one above and one by a guy with a Nikon DSLR.
>> We had no warning, only knew a breach was possible anytime, anywhere.
>> My main regret is I didn't take my 1D Mark II with me (I was traveling
>> light and didn't plan on doing this).
>
> Nice shot Roger!
>
> I have only a limited experience of Digital cameras (a few of my own and
> the P&S other people ask me to use for them), and I would agree that
> I've never come across a delay proportional to shutter speed.
>
> I use cameras with viewfinders, but keep both eyes open. One for framing
> on the v/f and one for timing. In practice, the action shots (with
> manual focussing) suffer from no greater delay than an SLR.
>
> The digicam (I certainly would not call my cameras P&S) suffers from the
> following delays...
>
> 1. Sensor to viewfinder / LCD screen (the V/f is sometimes slightly less
> than the LCD, depending on refresh rates.
>
> 2. Focus delay when in auto focus mode
>
> 3. Exposure calculation delay (are you using your dSLR in auto exposure
> - is that a factor?) - the time it takes to measure the light and set
> aperture and shutter. (Reduced but not eliminated by half-press settings.)
>
> 4. Response delay - the inherent delay between activating the shutter
> and capturing the scene (equivalent to your 70ms
>
> 5. Human delay (should have put this first) - seeing the action and
> deciding to press the shutter.
>
> In practice, apart from having to view with both eyes, I use my digicams
> in such a way that only 4 & 5 and the inevitable bit of 3 affects me.
>
> I have to say, I can't relate much to Alfred Molon observations either.
> I'd like to know which cameras he's referring to.
>
> Mike
Thanks, Mike,
Good summary. In a DSLR, with <70ms delays, that includes your
number 2, 3, and 4 (#2, focus delay does depend on how far the
focus has to move) and #1 does not apply.
In action photography, with the subject of the action a large fraction
of the frame, focus is critical (and on the animals eyes, for example),
so the camera system must have focus squares that can be placed on
the eyes, and the camera must respond fast enough to catch that
action. Film and digital SLRs also have predictive autofocus
which tracks moving subjects, predicts and sets focus projected
to the time of the actual shutter opening. For the whale image
above, I was using predictive autofocus, and aperture priority (the camera
did measure and set exposure for each frame).
DSLRs have independent circuits for measuring exposure and autofocus,
and some cameras have dedicated computers for this too (e.g. pro
series cameras, both film and digital).
There is no reason why P&S cameras couldn't have these features too,
but currently they don't.
Some examples where all these features and fast response is
critical to get the shot:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird/web/eagle.c09.11.200...Z3F4717
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.africa/web/cheetah.c01.26...07.JZ3F
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bear/web/brown_bear.c09.0...004.JZ3
Certainly not everyone wants to do wildlife action photography,
but the situations are similar if you want to do other actions, for example,
baby's first step, kids or pets at play, sports, etc.
(When these facts enrage the troll who keeps changing
its name and forging headers, just ignore it. Its theme is always
the same: personal attacks, incorrect facts, ignores other facts
and doesn't answer direct questions.)
Roger >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 22, 2007
Posts: 343
|
(Msg. 79) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:52 am
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Mel & Amber wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:03:53 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username to
> rnclark)" <username.RemoveThis@qwest.net> wrote:
>> Out of the 70+ P&S cameras on board, none got the shot.
>> Of the 4 DSLRs, 2 people were chimping and missed it.
>> The two images were the one above and one by a guy with a Nikon DSLR.
>> We had no warning, only knew a breach was possible anytime, anywhere.
>> My main regret is I didn't take my 1D Mark II with me (I was traveling
>> light and didn't plan on doing this).
>>
>> Roger
>
> I've watched many whales breaching in my travels. None while I had my camera
> along, but then I'm not into whales for photos so no big deal. Photos of whales
> are for "ooo-ahh" tourists and snap-shooters that don't get out much. I usually
> viewed whales with compact 10x binoculars from hiking trails above the ocean.
> From the time the water starts swelling until the whale slams back down into the
> water is usually a good 2 to 4 seconds. If you can't swing around to snap off
> several shots of that with __any__ camera then there's other issues at work. My
> guess is that this is another senior citizen's tour boat like most tours you
> probably go on for your photographs.
>
> Don't be so proud Gramps. It's good for your age but still slow. You caught the
> whale at the last of its decent, 2-3 seconds into the action. If you're going to
> convince anyone of your POV find a better scenario to show your problems between
> camera designs. Find one that doesn't reveal your aging reflexes so clearly.
> While you're at it, correct the text on that photo. The numbers betray you
> inventing new ones to try to prove something that goes against reality.
>
> I'm beginning to now see why you find a time lag in everything around you,
> except for the only cameras with which you are still remotely familiar. The
> world and whales are all moving a bit fast for you these days, are they? Having
> a hard time finding those little camera buttons on the new cameras too, eh? EH?
> Turn up your hearing-aid Gramps! Your bifocals are over there! YES, OVER THERE!
> NO, I DIDN'T SAY "MOVE OR DARE", I SAID, OVER THERE! GET YOUR GLASSES SO YOU CAN
> LEARN TO LEVEL YOUR PHOTOS PROPERLY TOO! NO, I DIDN'T SAY, "EARN 2 PEBBLES,
> AWFUL TOES SLOPPILY DO". YOUR HORIZON IS OFF! NO, I DIDN'T SAY, "YOUR RAISIN
> KISS OFF".
>
> Oh screw it.
>
> Well I tried. I'll let someone else explain things to the ol' coot. And please,
> someone show him where his bifocals are before they let him near his photo
> editing software again. Call the attendants for him or something.
>
>
What a juvenile post. Grow up! If you ever do grow up I might start
reading your posts again, but that is very unlikely. Goodbye.
Allen >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 31, 2007
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 80) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:56 am
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Imported from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 22, 2007
Posts: 343
|
(Msg. 81) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:56 am
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Rob Akins wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:27:04 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username to
> rnclark)" <username.TakeThisOut@qwest.net> wrote:
>
>> (When these facts enrage the troll who keeps changing
>> its name and forging headers, just ignore it. Its theme is always
>> the same: personal attacks, incorrect facts, ignores other facts
>> and doesn't answer direct questions.)
>
> Now why on earth would some troll want to bring even more attention to your
> mediocre photography so you can spam the newsgroup more than you already do with
> your biased and misinformed replies? All it would do is give you yet another
> excuse to post links to your beginner's photography, just like you always do.
>
> Get real.
>
Another sicko pops up from the depths of the slime mold. Goodbye.
Allen >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Aug 11, 2005
Posts: 123
|
(Msg. 82) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:57 pm
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>photo>digital (more info?)
|
|
|
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 04:19:59 GMT, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor.RemoveThis@blueyonder.not-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
>Zach G. wrote:
>[]
>> For the rest of you, don't buy into all this blatant misinformation
>> about P&S cameras. It's just uneducated and inexperienced bias being
>> posted in this group by people with an obvious agenda against any
>> camera they didn't personally choose for their own equipment. Only
>> their camera is the best one, they did after-all spend that much money
>> on it. At that much cost it has to be the best camera. Right? (more
>> coughing)
>
>Don't you accept that both DSLR and P&S cameras have their place - that
>each has its own advantages and drawbacks, and that one type or the other
>may be best suited to particular tasks?
>
>David
>
David,
Congratulations for introducing what we need more of
in the world. Reason & acceptance that what works well for 1 person
is not what works best for another.
Yes "both" P&S & DSLR & SLR for that matter, have their pros &
cons. If we all thought the same or had the same needs or wants, we
would all be driving around in the same size, type & color automobile
but that's not what I see on the road.
Also I would rather "have" a "good" picture taken with a P&S
than a "great" picture that "never got taken" with my DSLR because I
did not have it with me when the photo opportunity presented itself!
Just my 2 cents worth.
Respectfully, DHB
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 31, 2007
Posts: 3
|
(Msg. 83) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:56 pm
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>photo>digital, others (more info?)
|
|
|
"Alfred Molon" <a.DeleteThis@b.c> wrote in message
news:MPG.2119963a9bc77af198b628@news.supernews.com...
> In article <46AE8FAE.6070708.DeleteThis@qwest.net>, Roger N. Clark (change
> username
> to rnclark) says...
>
>> Please cite specific models that do this, because clearly not
>> all do this.
>
> The Sony R1 and the Olympus mju 700 behave like this. The image in
> the
> LCD screen gets blurrish if you hold a fast moving object in front
> of
> them and the exposure time is long enough. Here indeed you see how
> the
> final picture will be in the LCD screen, i.e. the motion blur is
> made
> visible.
> The Olympus 8080 instead does not behave like that (or to put it
> differently, I didn't find a way to make it behave like this).
>
As does the whole Sony DSC line of cameras, and all of the Canon
PowerShot line of cameras.
It appears that this resident know-it-all is lacking in quite a bit of
"know-it-all". Surprising, since he claimed that he tested "all the
ones (he) owns, (his) family owns, and all the models (he's) tested in
stores" but somehow happened to miss those whole huge lines of
cameras. Is he a family of one and a camera of one and has never been
to a store that displays more than one camera?
His advice appears to be just as full of "facts" and real-life
experience as all the other resident know-it-alls in this group.
Time to stop reading this one. It's fun outing him for what he truly
is though.
It's times like this when my news-reader's liar-filter/spam-filter is
so handy.
btw, Alfred, try a half-press to see if it triggers the shutter-speed
sync effect in your Olympus 8080. I found that some cameras' EVFs
don't mirror the shutter-speed and f-stop's DOF until then.
Anyway, I'm out of this discussion. There's no sense in beating a dead
and exposed horse's ass. >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 51
|
(Msg. 84) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:52 pm
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <username.RemoveThis@qwest.net>
observed
>Michael J Davis wrote:
>> Nice shot Roger!
>> I have only a limited experience of Digital cameras (a few of my own
>>and the P&S other people ask me to use for them), and I would agree
>>that I've never come across a delay proportional to shutter speed.
>> I use cameras with viewfinders, but keep both eyes open. One for
>>framing on the v/f and one for timing. In practice, the action shots
>>(with manual focussing) suffer from no greater delay than an SLR.
>> The digicam (I certainly would not call my cameras P&S) suffers from
>>the following delays...
>> 1. Sensor to viewfinder / LCD screen (the V/f is sometimes slightly
>>less than the LCD, depending on refresh rates.
>> 2. Focus delay when in auto focus mode
>> 3. Exposure calculation delay (are you using your dSLR in auto
>>exposure - is that a factor?) - the time it takes to measure the
>>light and set aperture and shutter. (Reduced but not eliminated by
>>half-press settings.)
>> 4. Response delay - the inherent delay between activating the
>>shutter and capturing the scene (equivalent to your 70ms
>> 5. Human delay (should have put this first) - seeing the action and
>>deciding to press the shutter.
>> In practice, apart from having to view with both eyes, I use my
>>digicams in such a way that only 4 & 5 and the inevitable bit of 3
>>affects me.
>> I have to say, I can't relate much to Alfred Molon observations
>>either. I'd like to know which cameras he's referring to.
>> Mike
>
>Thanks, Mike,
>
>Good summary. In a DSLR, with <70ms delays, that includes your
>number 2, 3, and 4 (#2, focus delay does depend on how far the
>focus has to move) and #1 does not apply.
>
>In action photography, with the subject of the action a large fraction
>of the frame, focus is critical (and on the animals eyes, for example),
>so the camera system must have focus squares that can be placed on
>the eyes, and the camera must respond fast enough to catch that
>action. Film and digital SLRs also have predictive autofocus
>which tracks moving subjects, predicts and sets focus projected
>to the time of the actual shutter opening. For the whale image
>above, I was using predictive autofocus, and aperture priority (the camera
>did measure and set exposure for each frame).
I haven't used a camera using electronic predictive af, although as one
gets to know one's equipment one can simulate it!! 
>DSLRs have independent circuits for measuring exposure and autofocus,
>and some cameras have dedicated computers for this too (e.g. pro
>series cameras, both film and digital).
>
>There is no reason why P&S cameras couldn't have these features too,
>but currently they don't.
>
>Some examples where all these features and fast response is
>critical to get the shot:
>
>http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird/web/eagle.c09.11.2004.
>JZ3F4717.b-700.html
>
>http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.africa/web/cheetah.c01.26.2
>007.JZ3F2435c-700.html
>
>http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bear/web/brown_bear.c09.07.
>2004.JZ3F0862.b-700.html
The first is the most impressive, as the others are relatively static
within the frame (albeit moving!). Like
http://www.flickr.com/photos/watchman/65984291
Which was a matter of setting the focus on the likely passing point.
(Ancient Fuji 6900z).
>Certainly not everyone wants to do wildlife action photography,
>but the situations are similar if you want to do other actions, for example,
>baby's first step, kids or pets at play, sports, etc.
However, I am about to get a red dot sight so that I don't have to use
the two eye approach!
Mike
[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting]
--
Michael J Davis
<><
Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused
the meaning of "discussion" with "digression".
<>< >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 31, 2007
Posts: 3
|
(Msg. 85) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:56 pm
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 06:55:24 GMT, Mel & Amber <mamber2971.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>SO YOU CAN
>LEARN TO LEVEL YOUR PHOTOS PROPERLY TOO!
Let's just hope he's not using PhotoShop with bicubic being the only resampling
option in that software or he's going to smear any details when using any
leveling, perspective, resizing, or barrel & pincushion correction in his
work-flow. He'd be much better off with PhotoLine 32 or even freeware IrfanView
for those tasks where he can choose this century's Lanczos resampling methods.
It's hard to teach old-dogs new tricks. Once they learn to roll-over and play
dead they think that's all they'll ever need to earn a treat during their
lifetime. >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 04, 2005
Posts: 833
|
(Msg. 86) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:57 pm
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Michael J Davis wrote:
> The first is the most impressive, as the others are relatively static
> within the frame (albeit moving!). Like
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/watchman/65984291
>
> Which was a matter of setting the focus on the likely passing point.
> (Ancient Fuji 6900z).
This is a good example of P&S versus DSLRs, especially when
you include the statement on the above web page:
> MikeJDavis Pro User says:
> Thanks! You should have see the hundreds that were out
> of focus, out of frame, or plain blurred!!
> The just leap up and shoot past - fast.
Using pro series DSLRs on the fastest action, I get about
90% in sharp focus images, with consumer DSLRs, like a
30D, that percentage drops to a little under 50%. And when
one uses a much slower P&S, that percentage drops to less than
one percent.
Of course for other, more static subjects, the differences
are less. DSLRs, with their large sensors, excel in
fast action and low light. P&S cameras do very well in situations
where there is plenty of light, and speed is not an issue,
and they excel at portability.
Roger >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 14, 2007
Posts: 56
|
(Msg. 87) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:07 pm
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <46AE8FAE.6070708.RemoveThis@qwest.net>, Roger N. Clark (change username
to rnclark) says...
> remains the same. Typical delays seems to be about 0.1 second.
How did you measure it or are you just guessing? I couldn't detect any
shutter delay in the three cameras I tested. For all practical purposes,
unless you are planning to photograph a bullet in mid-air, LCD delay is
not an issue.
> To me this is too long, especially when you add the typical
> shutter lag P&S cameras have. Full press shutter lag in
> good DSLRs is under 70 milliseconds, and that includes true
> zero delay from the optical viewfinder.
There are ways to reduce the shutter lag in P&S cameras, by using manual
focus and exposure.
> Please cite specific models that do this, because clearly not
> all do this.
The Sony R1 and the Olympus mju 700 behave like this. The image in the
LCD screen gets blurrish if you hold a fast moving object in front of
them and the exposure time is long enough. Here indeed you see how the
final picture will be in the LCD screen, i.e. the motion blur is made
visible.
The Olympus 8080 instead does not behave like that (or to put it
differently, I didn't find a way to make it behave like this).
> You also have yet to cite P&S models that have
> LCD "live preview" in "perfect sync" with as fast as you can move
> your hand in front of the camera.
Sony R1, Olympus 8080, Olympus mju 700 - just did a new test with a hand
moving in front of the camera.
But let me mention that this was a subjective, unscientific test. I just
didn't notice any delay between the image in the LCD screen and the
hand.
> A real world test from last Friday:
> 70+ P&S cameras versus 4 DSLRs on a whale viewing boat.
> Guess which cameras got pictures of a whale breaching?
> Hint: guess which cameras where hindered by too much delay?
But that's a different type of delay Roger. This is focusing delay and
shutter lag. Nobody questions that a phase detection focusing system -
which BTW could also be built into a P&S - is way faster than a contrast
detection focusing system.
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E3X0, E4X0 and E5X0 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 04, 2005
Posts: 833
|
(Msg. 88) Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:09 pm
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <46AE8FAE.6070708.RemoveThis@qwest.net>, Roger N. Clark (change username
> to rnclark) says...
>
>> remains the same. Typical delays seems to be about 0.1 second.
>
> How did you measure it or are you just guessing? I couldn't detect any
> shutter delay in the three cameras I tested. For all practical purposes,
> unless you are planning to photograph a bullet in mid-air, LCD delay is
> not an issue.
Actually, I set up a rotating target and photographed the P&S
camera with its LCD showing the image from the "live preview" and
the real scene, and photographed the true view and the P&S
with a 1D Mark II at 8.5 frames per second. The rotation is
well calibrated and the timing clearly shows the delay.
>> To me this is too long, especially when you add the typical
>> shutter lag P&S cameras have. Full press shutter lag in
>> good DSLRs is under 70 milliseconds, and that includes true
>> zero delay from the optical viewfinder.
>
> There are ways to reduce the shutter lag in P&S cameras, by using manual
> focus and exposure.
Yes, but that doesn't help when the subject is moving toward
or away from the camera and the focus point is changing.
>> Please cite specific models that do this, because clearly not
>> all do this.
>
> The Sony R1 and the Olympus mju 700 behave like this. The image in the
> LCD screen gets blurrish if you hold a fast moving object in front of
> them and the exposure time is long enough. Here indeed you see how the
> final picture will be in the LCD screen, i.e. the motion blur is made
> visible.
> The Olympus 8080 instead does not behave like that (or to put it
> differently, I didn't find a way to make it behave like this).
>
>> You also have yet to cite P&S models that have
>> LCD "live preview" in "perfect sync" with as fast as you can move
>> your hand in front of the camera.
>
> Sony R1, Olympus 8080, Olympus mju 700 - just did a new test with a hand
> moving in front of the camera.
> But let me mention that this was a subjective, unscientific test. I just
> didn't notice any delay between the image in the LCD screen and the
> hand.
I have not tested a Sony R1, but I can say the troll is lying
again: he says the entire Canon powershot line has variable
LCD frame rates with shutter speed, yet I have tested powershot
cameras that do not behave that way.
>> A real world test from last Friday:
>> 70+ P&S cameras versus 4 DSLRs on a whale viewing boat.
>> Guess which cameras got pictures of a whale breaching?
>> Hint: guess which cameras where hindered by too much delay?
>
> But that's a different type of delay Roger. This is focusing delay and
> shutter lag. Nobody questions that a phase detection focusing system -
> which BTW could also be built into a P&S - is way faster than a contrast
> detection focusing system.
The test includes all the delays typical in cameras, and that is
what is important when you must get the shot, and you only have one
chance.
Roger >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 29, 2005
Posts: 51
|
(Msg. 89) Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:46 am
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <username.TakeThisOut@qwest.net>
observed
>Michael J Davis wrote:
>> The first is the most impressive, as the others are relatively static
>>within the frame (albeit moving!). Like
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/watchman/65984291
>> Which was a matter of setting the focus on the likely passing point.
>>(Ancient Fuji 6900z).
>
>This is a good example of P&S versus DSLRs, especially when
>you include the statement on the above web page:
>
>> MikeJDavis Pro User says:
>> Thanks! You should have see the hundreds that were out
>> of focus, out of frame, or plain blurred!!
>> The just leap up and shoot past - fast.
>
>Using pro series DSLRs on the fastest action, I get about
>90% in sharp focus images, with consumer DSLRs, like a
>30D, that percentage drops to a little under 50%. And when
>one uses a much slower P&S, that percentage drops to less than
>one percent.
Thanks for looking! I doubt that even you would only lose 1% in the
circumstances I described!
The main problem is that there is no time to focus and auto focus - even
fast - is distracted by the background.
>Of course for other, more static subjects, the differences
>are less. DSLRs, with their large sensors, excel in
>fast action and low light. P&S cameras do very well in situations
>where there is plenty of light, and speed is not an issue,
>and they excel at portability.
Sure. And I would add (from my years of lugging a box full of lenses
around) a single good quality zoom increases the opportunities lost from
changing lenses!!
I'm not claiming that any one camera type is better than any other, btw.
There's a place for all of them. (Yes, I know - the trash can for
some!!)
Mike
[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting]
--
Michael J Davis
<><
Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused
the meaning of "discussion" with "digression".
<>< >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 04, 2005
Posts: 833
|
(Msg. 90) Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:46 am
Post subject: Re: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Michael J Davis wrote:
> "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <username DeleteThis @qwest.net> observed
>> Using pro series DSLRs on the fastest action, I get about
>> 90% in sharp focus images, with consumer DSLRs, like a
>> 30D, that percentage drops to a little under 50%. And when
>> one uses a much slower P&S, that percentage drops to less than
>> one percent.
>
> Thanks for looking! I doubt that even you would only lose 1% in the
> circumstances I described!
I doubt it too. Note above I said 90% success rate, not 99%.
Also note your image of the puffin is mainly a pan shot, the
easiest action shot for a camera as the focus shift is small
(to zero). As the subject direction turns closer to you, it becomes
more difficult. I know puffins do fly very fast so you shot
is difficult due to the speed.
> The main problem is that there is no time to focus and auto focus - even
> fast - is distracted by the background.
Again, this is where selecting a single focus point becomes critical,
and using predictive autofocus. The challenge then is to keep
the focus point on the subject's eyes while keeping good composition.
Example: full frame, brown snake eagle, predictive autofocus
tracking on the eye, headed at the camera:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird/web/eagle.c01.18.200...Z3F7355
Some may say just prefocus on the branch, but there were
many branches, and I didn't know which branch the bird was
flying to.
Here is an example with a cluttered background:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird/web/sandhill.cranes.....01.200
A single autofocus rectangle was kept on the bird's eye (closest
bird). They were tracked all the way to take-off.
>
>> Of course for other, more static subjects, the differences
>> are less. DSLRs, with their large sensors, excel in
>> fast action and low light. P&S cameras do very well in situations
>> where there is plenty of light, and speed is not an issue,
>> and they excel at portability.
>
> Sure. And I would add (from my years of lugging a box full of lenses
> around) a single good quality zoom increases the opportunities lost from
> changing lenses!!
>
> I'm not claiming that any one camera type is better than any other, btw.
> There's a place for all of them. (Yes, I know - the trash can for some!!)
I agree. My point is understand your tools and their limitations.
Select the best tool you have for each job. I often travel with
just a small P&S camera, but when I want to do high end photography
I carry the bulky DSLR.
Roger >> Stay informed about: P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
| Related Topics: | When does SLR start to make sense ? - I understand that the bigger sensors in the current SLRs will give a better image than the sensors in the compacts, but when does the difference start to show ? And how ? Say comparing a good quality 6 MP compact (say Fuji F30) with a good quality 6 MP....
DSLR - I have a Canon 350D and would like to improve the qualities etc of my pictures. Is there a critical analysis group available Thank you
RE- DSLR's that take AA batteries - I myself try to buy electrical goods/gadgets that use either AA batteries, or can be charged from a USB port. I have two adaptors that allow USB charging from 12v auto (i.e. cigar lighter) in my car or the same USB lead from mains electricity. Less..
DSLR: What lens should I get? - I love taking pictures and experiment a lot with my Canon PowerShot G6 (f2.0-f3.0, 35-140mm). Now I think it's too slow and it's time to step up to a DSLR. What DSLR is recommendable? And what lens should I get? It should be/have: * lightweight * wide....
smallest dslr available in US - Looking for a new 'street" edc camera...since the "compact" trend doesn't seem to be cutting it these days (raw becoming hard to find, for example), I'm thinking a mini-dslr might be the way to go... Any thoughts on the he smallest uni... |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
