 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / October 2006Motion Blur P&S vs. DSLR
I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. I tried taking some low light pictures which brings up my question. The P&S lens extends out ~1 inch from my hand while my D70 extends out over 5". Does the lens difference itself make the P&S less likely to produce blur from camera shake? I know there are technical explanations of the effects of camera blur due to vertical motion and horizontal motion but this comparison seems obvious. Thanks, Don F > I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip > or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Thanks, > Don F Generally the heavier the camera the less shake it has. But if you are taking "low light" pictures you really need a camera support, because any camera below a 30th of a second is subject to shake. If you have an antishake, which I don't believe either of your cameras do, this may help a little, I have heard of 1/15th with a longish lens. Don't think you can get much below that the timing is just too long. So a support is needed, could be a tree branch, a rock wall, but the best idea is a small tripod of decent quality. I know another thing to carry, but with low light shots it is necessary. Tom > Generally the heavier the camera the less shake it has. But if you are > taking "low light" pictures you really need a camera support, because > any camera below a 30th of a second is subject to shake. Not really. First, the usual rule of the thumb is focal length (effective length in 35mm aequivalent) as 1/Xs (i.e. effective 50mm => handholding OK down to 1/50s). This may vary by one step up or down, depending on the individual photographer. So with effective 20mm, ... Second, range finder cameras have no mirror, hence no mirror slap (and rather silent operation), which is said to give you an extra 1-2 stops. So a rangefinder with 35mm should be able to go down to 1/10 and still be OK (if you know how to hold your camera properly, that is.) Third: "low light" pictures can be shot at (effective) ISO 3200 or more, so even comparably fast shutter times can happen. Shooting RAW at ISO1600 with -1 stop exposure compensation and pulling the data up later (and treating the noise) is surely possible and can give good enough images. (Though you need a working RAW workflow or develop one or get frustrated. And much more storage space.) > So a support is needed, could be a tree branch, a rock wall, but the > best idea is a small tripod of decent quality. Bean bags can come handy, too, I hear tell. However, there are flexible mini-tripods available for P&S cameras, which are easily stowable in your trouser's pockets. -Wolfgang > I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip > or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Thanks, > Don F Keep in mind that the A610 only goes up to ISO 400. The D70 can give you an extra usable stop up to ISO 800. You can also toss a 50/1.8 lens on the D70 to give you another stop over the A610's maximum f/2.8. On the other hand, you'll have to tote around a charger too, instead of buying AA batteries on the fly. >> I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris >> trip or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > On the other hand, you'll have to tote around a charger too, instead of > buying AA batteries on the fly. If the D70 is anything like the Canon 30D then it will run for a month or more on a charge and take thousands of photos. >> On the other hand, you'll have to tote around a charger too, >> instead of buying AA batteries on the fly. > > If the D70 is anything like the Canon 30D then it will run for a > month or more on a charge and take thousands of photos. Lasting a month I can believe, if you don't take many shots. But thousands of photos? I don't think so... Hundreds, yes. But thousands, no. In practical use, with some LCD reviewing, downloading, etc., you can expect several hundred shots with a fully charged battery in good condition. The numbers below are from Nikon and Canon specs and indicate optimum conditions: Canon 30D - 1100 no flash, 750 at 50% flash. Nikon D70/s - 2000 no flash, 400 at 50% flash. Note that Canon uses the CIPA method while Nikon apparently uses a more rugged method for flash use by racking the focus out and back which is why the 50% flash spec is so much lower than the no-flash number on the Nikon. I can't offer any practical numbers from my own use because I never think to keep track of it. But I do know that it usually takes me a couple of days of shooting to deplete a battery in my Canon XT. My friends D70s has lasted me about three days and I know it gets more shots on the same size card, so I'd say about twice as many shots. Maybe one day I'll think to monitor it, but it's not something I worry about when shooting...I just take along the little charger regardless. >>> On the other hand, you'll have to tote around a charger too, instead of >>> buying AA batteries on the fly. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Canon 30D - 1100 no flash, 750 at 50% flash. > Nikon D70/s - 2000 no flash, 400 at 50% flash. The numbers I get are that I've repeatedly filled up two 2 GB CFs with my 30D with the battery indicator not even moving . But I don't normally use the onboard flash, the LCD is _off_ unless I'm looking at it for some reason (usually to show someone else an image--example, I was on a trip, I rode the Acela for one leg of it, on the next leg somebody had questions about the Acela, so I showed him the pictures), and I don't download from the camera. I've found that with that camera and working the way I work the battery life just plain is not an issue. > Note that Canon uses the CIPA method while Nikon apparently uses a more > rugged method for flash use by racking the focus out and back which is why [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Maybe one day I'll think to monitor it, but it's not something I worry > about when shooting...I just take along the little charger regardless. >>>>On the other hand, you'll have to tote around a charger too, instead of >>>>buying AA batteries on the fly. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > 30D with the battery indicator not even moving . But I don't normally use > the onboard flash, the LCD is _off_ unless I'm looking at it for some reason From my experience of other shooters, having the LCD monitor on is the norm, not the exception. This would contribute to your higher numbers, of course.  Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >>>>> On the other hand, you'll have to tote around a charger too, >>>>> instead of buying AA batteries on the fly. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > norm, not the exception. This would contribute to your higher numbers, > of course. His magic batteries probably contribute, too. Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons > If the D70 is anything like the Canon 30D then it will run for a > month or more on a charge and take thousands of photos. Sounds a bit extreme. I can go about 600 - 800 RAW images on a charge, I do not use auto focus at all or the A/S very much. (K-M 7D). The battery, left alone in the camera for a couple weeks does not discharge much (or at all) that I can tell. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip > or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I know there are technical explanations of the effects of camera blur due > to vertical motion and horizontal motion but this comparison seems obvious. The things that matter are field of view (35mm equivalent for example), print size and shutter speed. the rule of thumb is shutter speed same as 35mm eq. focal length, 1/50 sec at 50mm, 1/200 sec at 200mm. Keep in mind most DSLRs have a 1.5 multiplier so 200mm is 300mm eq. The shutter speed can be increased by using a wider aperture, smaller f/stop, fast lens or high ISO or image stabilization, or use a tripod. SignaturePaul Furman http://www.edgehill.net/1 Bay Natives http://www.baynatives.com > I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip > or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. > I recently went to China and debated the same thing. I ended up taking my Rebel XT with a 10-22mm and 24-135mm lens along with my girlfriend's old A70. I'm glad we took both because I got good lowlight shots with the Rebel and the A70 failed completely towards the end of the trip. Greg Signature"All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons Thanks for all your responses. As for the trip, it makes sense (Greg's suggestion) to take both cameras. My original question was lost in the discussion probable becaus I didn't phrase it properly. Does the physical size of the lens at a given focal length, change the hand held speed rule of thumb recommendation? In other words, if it was possible to make a 300 mm lens only 1" wide vs. a 300 mm lens that was 6" wide, would the minimum hand held speed change. I wonder if the minimum hand held speed is dependent on the focal point (which could be out in space, if I remember correctly). Don F > Thanks for all your responses. > As for the trip, it makes sense (Greg's suggestion) to take both cameras. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > possible to make a 300 mm lens only 1" wide vs. a 300 mm lens that was 6" > wide, would the minimum hand held speed change. Only indirectly. A wider lens probably has a larger aperture letting in more light, allowing faster shutter speed. The length of a 300mm lens can vary also, depending on the design. Smaller P&S sensors do have more DOF for the same exposure though the tradeoff is image quality & dynamic range. My cell phone camera is basically focused on everything from one inch to infinity at all times where a large format camera with 6-inch square film has a very shallow depth of field and requires special tilt lenses and a tripod to use. > I wonder if the minimum hand held speed is dependent on the focal point > (which could be out in space, if I remember correctly). > Don F Only in the very minor way that focusing zooms a tiny bit. SignaturePaul Furman http://www.edgehill.net/1 Bay Natives http://www.baynatives.com > where a large format camera with 6-inch > square film has a very shallow depth of field and requires special tilt > lenses and a tripod to use. Large format cameras have flexible _bodies_ and film that's anywhere from 4 inches by 5 inches to 22 by 30 something (the large Polaroid). I've shot large format for some rather luscious portrait shots. DoF is shallow, but people have shot 4x5 (Speed Graphics) handheld with flash. On large film refraction effects aren't so obvious when you're stopped down to f/22. The typical US photojournalists of the 1930s through WWII and even into the 1960s used Speed Graphics with short lenses and flash. I've seen some of these shots blown up to 4 feet by 5 feet at the Museum of Modern Art. Tilt in the lenses is generally for 35mm cameras and medium format, though there are some medium format view and field cameras with movements. According to Don F <nobody@NOSPAMhome.com>: > Thanks for all your responses. > As for the trip, it makes sense (Greg's suggestion) to take both cameras. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > possible to make a 300 mm lens only 1" wide vs. a 300 mm lens that was 6" > wide, would the minimum hand held speed change. Well ... if you are shooting with the P&S using the display as a viewfinder, you are missing the stability boost which you get from holding the camera against your face. Also -- you can gain a bit more stability by changing the way you hold the camera. For any SLR, my standard practice is to grip the camera with the right hand, with the index finger on the shutter release, and other fingers near whatever controls your camera maker has made conveninent. The *left* hand, however, is moved forward, and rotated palm up to cup the lens barrel between thumb and forefinger (and middle finger as well, if you need to control both focus and zoom, depending on the lens maker's design and your selected options. Usually, for me, the little finger is folded under the base of the camera body. Tuck *both* elbows down against your stomach. This will improve the stability of the camera if fully hand-held. You may opt to lean up against a tree, or a part of a building to gain greater stability for some shots. > I wonder if the minimum hand held speed is dependent on the focal point > (which could be out in space, if I remember correctly). It *is* a function of the focal *length* -- and the size of the sensor (which determines the effective magnification needed to get the image onto a print or a screen display of reasonable size. And if you get into macro shots -- either with a macro lens, or with extension tubes, bellows, or close-up lenses -- it may make it a lot more sensitive to camera motion -- including towards and away from the object being photographed, as the depth of field becomes very shallow. Good Luck, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > According to Don F <nobody@NOSPAMhome.com>: >> Thanks for all your responses. [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > the object being photographed, as the depth of field becomes very > shallow. All good advice which I pretty much follow when using a dslr. For my Canon G3, I find a good way for great stability is using the neck strap, holding the camera against my stomach, and exerting a mild amount of downward pressure on the strap. I have heard of an electronic device that fits over the viewfinder on a dslr and displays in any direction you like via an LCD panel. Any one know its name, or better, has used same and can comment? SignatureJohn McWilliams According to John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net>: [ ... ] > > Well ... if you are shooting with the P&S using the display as a > > viewfinder, you are missing the stability boost which you get from > > holding the camera against your face. [ ... ] > All good advice which I pretty much follow when using a dslr. For my > Canon G3, I find a good way for great stability is using the neck strap, > holding the camera against my stomach, and exerting a mild amount of > downward pressure on the strap. O.K. That should work as long as the viewfinder allows you to see what you are doing. > I have heard of an electronic device that fits over the viewfinder on a > dslr and displays in any direction you like via an LCD panel. Any one > know its name, or better, has used same and can comment? IIRC -- it is sold by the people who make the "HOODMAN" LCD protector. No -- I have not seen one in person, so I can't tell you more about it. No -- I was wrong -- it is someone else who makes that. The closest thing which HOODMAN makes is this: ====================================================================== <http://www.hoodmanusa.com/H-RAV.asp> ====================================================================== a right-angle viewer for DSLRs. I don't know how good that is -- but from what I have read, their normal LCD viewing hoods are rather excessively fragile. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > I have heard of an electronic device that fits over the viewfinder on a > dslr and displays in any direction you like via an LCD panel. Any one > know its name, or better, has used same and can comment? Zigview: http://www.zigview.co.uk/ I haven't used it, but the one with the remote-screen-on-a-cable thing is pretty cool looking. But too expensive. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com >> I have heard of an electronic device that fits over the viewfinder on a >> dslr and displays in any direction you like via an LCD panel. Any one [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I haven't used it, but the one with the remote-screen-on-a-cable thing is > pretty cool looking. But too expensive. Less than 250 quid, and agreed. I thought of putting together my G3 side by side the DSLR, or under, and having a jury rigged range finder of sorts.... SignatureJohn McWilliams > Does the physical size of the lens at a given focal length, change the >hand held speed rule of thumb recommendation? In other words, if it was >possible to make a 300 mm lens only 1" wide vs. a 300 mm lens that was 6" >wide, would the minimum hand held speed change. I don't think so. Camera movements can have two components: - you can move the optical axis (left, right, up, down, etc). With a 300mm lens that is not going to matter much. - you can rotate the optical axis. This is the important one. So you have to to find a way of holding the camera such that the camera is unlikely to rotate. Compared to other cameras, SLRs have of course the additional problem of a moving mirror. SignatureThat was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency If you would be happy with P&S quality pictures then do not lug around a dSLR. Camera motion blur has nothing at all to do with that decision. As much as I hate lugging a heavy dSLR on my various treks I am only happy when I get home if I have those great raw files to work on. Why not take both cameras and only lug the dSLR when it is convenient? This is generally what I do on extended foreign treks. Most decent hotel rooms in Paris have safes in the closet. > I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip Yes. With a tripod. I'm not being a smart a.s it's simply: If I want the D70, then I want totake good images. To do that, then a tripod is essential in lower light. Otherwise take the P&S. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip Why buy a nice camera in the first place if you're going to leave it at home? SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com > I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip > or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. First mistake right there. You do not need all the gear with the D70. Take a medium range zoom and your charger. > I tried taking some low light pictures which brings up my question. > The P&S lens extends out ~1 inch from my hand while my D70 extends out > over 5". Does the lens difference itself make the P&S less likely to > produce blur from camera shake? No. P&S cameras invariably produce more blur because of their light weight and the way they are held. P&S cameras are generally held out and away from the body so that you can use the LCD screen to compose. This less stable method of holding the camera, plus the lighter weight, make the P&S much more subject to motion blur. At least the A610 has an optical viewfinder, but people rarely use it in practice. The DSLR is held up to your face and steadied against your head -- much more stable, plus it is heavier and less likely to move. According to cjcampbell <christophercampbell@hotmail.com>: > > I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip > > or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. > > First mistake right there. You do not need all the gear with the D70. > Take a medium range zoom and your charger. And an adaptor to allow you to plug the charger into the local outlets -- they *will* be different from what you have at home. They will also probably be a different voltage -- but the charger for the D70 will handle voltages from 100 VAC through 240 VAC or so, so as long as you can find a connector adaptor you should be fine. [ ... ] I already posted on the other subject covered in the followup to which I am replying, so I'll snip that -- though I will say that I do agree with what I snipped. Enjoy, DoN. SignatureEmail: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- > According to cjcampbell <christophercampbell@hotmail.com>: >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > will handle voltages from 100 VAC through 240 VAC or so, so as long as > you can find a connector adaptor you should be fine. I didn't realize that for my Rebel XT charger until 5 days into my China trip. Thankfully my girlfriend also had her travel adapters along until I noticed. And I was surprised to see that every place we stayed had at least 4 different types of outlets on the walls. Greg > > According to cjcampbell <christophercampbell@hotmail.com>: > >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > noticed. And I was surprised to see that every place we stayed had at least > 4 different types of outlets on the walls. China is the best place to get adapters. You can pick up little plugstrips that will adapt almost anything to anything for a buck. > I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip > or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Thanks, > Don F Motion blur is caused by the camera lowering it's shutter speed to compensate for exposure. Many, if not most p and s cameras use this method to properly expose an image. If your p and s camera has enough controls to allow you to raise the shutter speed, and then open the aperture or raise the ISO to compensate, then it should work for you. However, an SLR allows you, generally, the option of shutter priority, better results using higher ISO speeds and the ability to use lenses with wider apertures. You can also use many techniques to steady a camera, use a flash, or use a monopod or a tripod, which kindof negates the idea of using a compact p and s. Many of my friends use D-70's and D-200's, and they have traveled the world extensively. They seem to have no problem carrying around their equipment, and their photos are phenomenal. My friends with p and s cameras bring back photos that look like snapshots. Now, a lot of that is the photographer, but I think it all depends on what kind of photos you want to bring back. My friends with p and s cameras have lots of small prints and a lot of images on their computer. My friends with DSLR's have stunning photos and montages hanging on their walls that not only add to the decor, but let's you know they've been around. >> I am trying to decide if I should take my D70 (and gear) to a Paris trip >> or avoid carrying all that bulk and use my wife's A610 P&S. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > stunning photos and montages hanging on their walls that not only add to > the decor, but let's you know they've been around. When on a trip, it's always good to carry a tripod just in case you want to take a long timed shot especially at night, or include yourself in a picture. Ninety % of my photos are taken holding the camera with a light grip and pushing the shutter-release without moving the camera. If possible, I lean against something when standing or sitting, or place the camera on a fence post, or anything that has a solid foundation. I've found I can take photos from a moving car, or tour bus if I take it with a fast shutter setting. Is shooting with a macro or telescopic lens, I use a tripod. Only one of my digital cameras can easily be hand held without being careful about the clarity of the pictures. It is an old 14x optical zoom camera that has a stabilization feature that can be turned off and on. I have little if any problems with blurry shots using a Nikon D200, since it operates faster in most situations. A Nikon D70s was used for all the photos of a Libya trip found on the following URL: http://www2.hagenhosting.com/~naborswe/Libya/Libyaindex.html The photos at the above URL are only about 20% of their original size. Thanks again for all your responses. Of course it is obvious that my D70 will out perform the A610. I shoot *only* in RAW mode and the benefits outweigh any size or post processing inconvenience. My problem is I am going on a tour with friends who are at best P&S shooters. That means that 90% of the time I will be time limited in the time I have to take (make) pictures . My wife, the tour guide, and an angry busload of people usually greet me in anger after I wander off to get some great (to me) shots when we stop someplace and I lose track of time. We only have a half day on our own in Paris. This is the usually the best part of any tour for me and really the only opportunity to *enjoy* taking pictures. The limited time for photography is the primary reason for considering the P&S only camera. Then I will *not* be able to irritate other people on the tour. Don F > My wife, the tour guide, and an angry > busload of people usually greet me in anger after I wander off to get some > great (to me) shots when we stop someplace and I lose track of time. > We only have a half day on our own in Paris. Maybe you should just leave the cameras at home and enjoy your time while you're there. A hobby is supposed to be fun not a source of frustration and anger. You won't be frustrated at the lack of time to take decent shots and they won't be angry at wasting their limited time waiting for you. >> My wife, the tour guide, and an angry >> busload of people usually greet me in anger after I wander off to get some [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >take decent shots and they won't be angry at wasting their limited time >waiting for you. Pashahhhh! He should find a better tour, maybe a different wife, and go take good pictures! *That* is what a hobby is for... SignatureFloyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com >> My wife, the tour guide, and an angry >> busload of people usually greet me in anger after I wander off to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > take decent shots and they won't be angry at wasting their limited > time waiting for you. The same thought had crossed my mind as well. If those people are paying customers, they have a right not to be delayed by you. Maybe they should just leave you in Paris and let you find your own way back! <G> Why not take a separate one-week trip to Paris (which is the length of stay Paris needs, to be honest) another time? David > The same thought had crossed my mind as well. If those people are paying > customers, they have a right not to be delayed by you. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > stay Paris needs, to be honest) another time? > David ---------- I agree that other people on a tour should not be inconvenienced by my tardiness. That kind of behavior is rude and inconsiderate but I think you should understand here I am not talking about hours but minutes. I remember an incident on a tour in Italy where a couple did not care for the content of the place we visited so they went off to the by themselves. The bus was loaded and ready to depart but the couple was not onboard. The tour guide had to search the town to find them and, after 1-1/2 hours they were located in a bar. My delays are only 5 or 10 minutes and nobody had to find me, but I still agree it is rude behavior. Now, "leave me in Paris" ... that thought doesn't sound half bad.<G> Don F [] > I agree that other people on a tour should not be inconvenienced by > my tardiness. That kind of behavior is rude and inconsiderate but I > think you should understand here I am not talking about hours but > minutes. I understand that, as a person who is often last or last but one on the bus. I don't recall ever being late. I do always try and keep the tour guide in sight, though, so that he or she knows just where I am. As you appreciate, it's the photography that delays things..... [] > Now, "leave me in Paris" ... that thought doesn't sound half bad.<G> > Don F I rather thought you might appreciate that! David I've often wondered about the difference between the P&S camera and the DSLR camera as far as camera shake are concerned. I've noticed that my Sony Mavica CD300 camera can easily outperform my Nikon D70s in low light situations without the use of a tripod as far as camera shake is concerned. Before I get flamed for saying this, I must emphasize that I am talking about totally hand held in low light situations only. The only idea that comes to mind is that the smaller sensor size must have something to do with this. The Sony Mavica aperture range is also limited from f/2-f/8 Why is it that it doesn't require more than f/8 to do the same job as the Nikon? I've done some additional experiments that make me wonder about the sensor size issue. I purchased a CrystalVue 8X telescope that is designed to fit the Sony P&S camera giving it effectively 24X optical magnification. I can take photos with this combination, totally hand held and no camera shake. The photos come out of the camera crystal clear and sharp. Try to do that with a DSLR without a tripod. I really like my Nikon D70s because of the better quality photos and the additional flexibility that it has but when it comes to low light situations and hand holding the camera, my Sony P&S has sharper images. Argue if you must, but those are the results from the unbiased testing that I have done. I really don't care what camera that I use to take a photo. It is the quality of the photo that is important to me. Each camera has its strength and weakness. Use whatever it takes to get the job done. >The only idea that comes to mind is that the smaller sensor size must >have something to do with this. The Sony Mavica aperture range is also >limited from f/2-f/8 Why is it that it doesn't require more than f/8 >to do the same job as the Nikon? The aperture range of f/2 to f/8 corresponds to f/9.8 to f/78 on 35mm. f/78 doesn't make any sense on 35mm because of diffraction. Of course, for 35mm, making a 34-102mm f/9.8 sort of guarantees that you won't sell any. SignatureThat was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency >>The only idea that comes to mind is that the smaller sensor size must >>have something to do with this. The Sony Mavica aperture range is also >>limited from f/2-f/8 Why is it that it doesn't require more than f/8 >>to do the same job as the Nikon? > >The aperture range of f/2 to f/8 corresponds to f/9.8 to f/78 on 35mm. Oops, that should have been f/39 instead of f/78. SignatureThat was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency > The same thought had crossed my mind as well. If those people are paying > customers, they have a right not to be delayed by you. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > stay Paris needs, to be honest) another time? > David ---------- I agree that other people on a tour should not be inconvenienced by my tardiness. That kind of behavior is rude and inconsiderate but I think you should understand here I am not talking about hours but minutes. I remember an incident on a tour in Italy where a couple did not care for the content of the place we visited so they went off to the by themselves. The bus was loaded and ready to depart but the couple was not onboard. The tour guide had to search the town to find them and, after 1-1/2 hours they were located in a bar. My delays are only 5 or 10 minutes and nobody had to find me, but I still agree it is rude behavior. Now, "leave me in Paris" ... that thought doesn't sound half bad.<G> Don F > The limited time for photography is the primary reason for considering the > P&S only camera. Then I will *not* be able to irritate other people on the > tour. Then bring both cameras and enjoy your "lone time" with the best eqt. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.