 |
 | 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 / General Photo Topics / UK Photography / November 2007Choosing a new camera, help/advice please
I'm looking at buying a new digital camera in the (hopefully/probably) sub £200, or maybe around £200 sort of price range. It can be either a 'point and shoot' or maybe (and this is where I'm looking hardest) one of the cameras like the Fuji S5700 and S6500. Apart from straightforward specifications which are fairly 'universal' and easy to compare I have a few criteria which are very difficult to find any information about:- I'd like the wide angle end to be wider than "35mm equivalent", I found that my 28mm lens on my old OM2 was my most heavily used lens. One of the Fujis (I think it's the S6500) goes to 28mm equivalent, are there any other cameras offering this wide a lens in the same sort of price category? I want reasonable speed of operation, both for 'ready from turn on' and 'time to take a picture after pressing the button', our present Olympus C460 is rather poor on this front. Is there anywhere where one can find comparative 'speed of operating' information for digital cameras? And/or can anyone recommend cameras/makers which are good from this point of view? Thanks for any help and advice, just comments/reports about particular cameras would be useful.  SignatureChris Green > I'd like the wide angle end to be wider than "35mm equivalent", I > found that my 28mm lens on my old OM2 was my most heavily used > lens. One of the Fujis (I think it's the S6500) goes to 28mm > equivalent, are there any other cameras offering this wide a lens > in the same sort of price category? I'm not quite sure what you're saying here - "35mm equivalent" isn't a focal length, it just means that the lengths quoted alongside it are expressed as if the camera had a 24x36mm image sensor (because everyone knows what a 28mm lens or a 200mm lens is like in 35mm terms). > > I'd like the wide angle end to be wider than "35mm equivalent", I > > found that my 28mm lens on my old OM2 was my most heavily used [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > expressed as if the camera had a 24x36mm image sensor (because everyone > knows what a 28mm lens or a 200mm lens is like in 35mm terms). Well no one actually quotes focal lengths for digital cameras, they quote "35mm equivalent", i.e. they give the focal length which would give the same angle of view for a standard 35mm camera that takes 24x36 pictures. I used my 28mm (really 28mm that is) wide angle lens on my OM-2 a lot so I'm looking for a "28mm equivalent" wide angle on a digital camera which, as I understand it, will give me the same angle of view. Ah, sorry, I see what's confused you, by "35mm equivalent" I meant a focal length of 35mm, it's just confusing that the wide angle end of many (most?) digital camera zoom lenses happens to be the equivalent of a 35mm focal length lens on a camera that takes 35mm film. That 35mm occurs twice is just coincidental (and confusing!). SignatureChris Green > Ah, sorry, I see what's confused you, by "35mm equivalent" I meant > a focal length of 35mm, it's just confusing that the wide angle end > of many (most?) digital camera zoom lenses happens to be the > equivalent of a 35mm focal length lens on a camera that takes 35mm > film. That 35mm occurs twice is just coincidental (and confusing!). I'm easily confused. :-) > I'm looking at buying a new digital camera in the (hopefully/probably) > sub £200, or maybe around £200 sort of price range. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > equivalent, are there any other cameras offering this wide a lens > in the same sort of price category? I think the S6500 is the only long zoom (300mm equiv) camera with a 28mm equiv wide end in your price range. If you can live without any form of viewfinder, just using the LCD on the back, and somewhat less zoom range, then I think some of the Ricoh R series or some of the Canon Ixus might suit you. > I want reasonable speed of operation, both for 'ready from turn > on' and 'time to take a picture after pressing the button', our > present Olympus C460 is rather poor on this front. Is there > anywhere where one can find comparative 'speed of operating' > information for digital cameras? And/or can anyone recommend > cameras/makers which are good from this point of view? Most non-DSLRs are pretty poor in this regard, though the Fuji S6500 is better than many. The reviews here http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ generally give fairly detailed information on various timings. > Thanks for any help and advice, just comments/reports about particular > cameras would be useful. If low light action shots might be of interest, the Fuji S6500 is probably the best available, short of a DSLR. It has rather less noise at high ISO sensitivities, which enables faster shutter speeds in low light. > > I'm looking at buying a new digital camera in the (hopefully/probably) > > sub £200, or maybe around £200 sort of price range. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > range, then I think some of the Ricoh R series or some of the Canon Ixus > might suit you. No, I definitely *can't* live without a viewfinder! :-) > > I want reasonable speed of operation, both for 'ready from turn > > on' and 'time to take a picture after pressing the button', our [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > at high ISO sensitivities, which enables faster shutter speeds in low > light. Thank you for the useful reply, looks like an S6500 is it then! SignatureChris Green tinnews@isbd.co.uk observed >No, I definitely *can't* live without a viewfinder! :-) > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >Thank you for the useful reply, looks like an S6500 is it then! Check out the Panasonic FZ18 - that has a wider range - but is currently (it's fairly new) slightly above your price range. I've been very satisfied with an earlier model (FZ5) for which I have a w/a adapter. Mike [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] SignatureMichael J Davis <>< Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused the meaning of "discussion" with "digression". <>< > tinnews@isbd.co.uk observed > >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > (it's fairly new) slightly above your price range. I've been very > satisfied with an earlier model (FZ5) for which I have a w/a adapter. OK, thank you, I can find it at £239.99 so it's not impossible. SignatureChris Green >>> I'm looking at buying a new digital camera in the >>> (hopefully/probably) sub £200, or maybe around £200 sort of price [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] >> > Thank you for the useful reply, looks like an S6500 is it then! Its Probably the best in the range I got a 9600 to replace my Minolta 7Hi and wanted 28mm too The only others with a 28 eqv are the more compact but smaller sensor and not quiet up to bridge/crossover standards the 6500 and 9600 have the fell of a slr complete with hand control on the lens( not one the pops in and out of the body) even a proper cable release. SignatureTrev You can always tell a Yorkshire man, But you can't tell him much. > I'd like the wide angle end to be wider than "35mm equivalent", I > found that my 28mm lens on my old OM2 was my most heavily used > lens. One of the Fujis (I think it's the S6500) goes to 28mm > equivalent, are there any other cameras offering this wide a lens > in the same sort of price category? Almost any of the many Panasonic Lumix models or Ricog Caplio models have 28mm at the wide end. The price though is they're usually 105mm at the long end, except Ricoh Caplio R5/R6 etc which are 28-200mm. Elsewhere though you said you needed optical viewfinder, this limits you a lot, none of the small Panasonic or Ricohs in your price range have a viewfinder. > I want reasonable speed of operation, both for 'ready from turn on' > and 'time to take a picture after pressing the button', our > present Olympus C460 is rather poor on this front. Is there > anywhere where one can find comparative 'speed of operating' > information for digital cameras? And/or can anyone recommend > cameras/makers which are good from this point of view? For shutter lag table see http://www.cameras.co.uk/html/shutter-lag-comparisons.cfm You can also glean timing info from individual reviews at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ Note though that like a lot of sites the first one doesn't mention Ricoh products (and dpreview mentions them only rarely) due to them not being sold in the USA (for some mysterious reason that no-one can fathom). A site which *does* happily review Ricohs is http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews.php but it doesn't seem to have any precise timing info. It's worth checking more than one review before making a purchase I think. > > I'd like the wide angle end to be wider than "35mm equivalent", I > > found that my 28mm lens on my old OM2 was my most heavily used [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > For shutter lag table see > http://www.cameras.co.uk/html/shutter-lag-comparisons.cfm Excellent, thank you very much! > You can also glean timing info from individual reviews at > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > It's worth checking more than one review before making a purchase I think. Quite, dpreview is quite complimentary about the S6500FD but it would be nice to see some other reviews. Its worst point seems to be the viewfinder, maybe I should try and find one to look through before I buy it. SignatureChris Green In article <47317e1a$0$514$bed64819@news.gradwell.net>, tinnews@isbd.co.uk scribeth thus >> > I'd like the wide angle end to be wider than "35mm equivalent", I >> > found that my 28mm lens on my old OM2 was my most heavily used [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >viewfinder, maybe I should try and find one to look through before I >buy it. If its any use I've recently bought a Fuji Finepix S5800 which is fine for the Zoom lens and anti shake etc, but its a bit of a job to get decent images from it the reason being that under most all conditions it shoots at 800 ISO which is way too fast. You can faff around putting it into a manual mode where you can get that down to lower speeds but overall I bought this to replace a damaged E550 and the Pix from that are still that bit cleaner and sharper.. The ones thus far produced on the 5800 seen to be either "dirty" or "noisy" and lack definition. However it seems that a lot of cameras are like this nowadays.. OTOH for the money and if you need the Zoom which I find useful then I suppose its quite good value for the money around £115 plus VAT from e- buyer... SignatureTony Sayer > In article <47317e1a$0$514$bed64819@news.gradwell.net>, > tinnews@isbd.co.uk scribeth thus [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > suppose its quite good value for the money around £115 plus VAT from > e- buyer... Is The anti shake in the form of using a High ISO to enable High shutter speed If so Turn it off SignatureTrev You can always tell a Yorkshire man, But you can't tell him much. >> If its any use I've recently bought a Fuji Finepix S5800 which is fine >> for the Zoom lens and anti shake etc, but its a bit of a job to get [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Is The anti shake in the form of using a High ISO to enable High shutter >speed If so Turn it off I think it moves the CCD sensor around. Does work very well though when your at max zoom and a bit!..... SignatureTony Sayer >>> If its any use I've recently bought a Fuji Finepix S5800 which is >>> fine for the Zoom lens and anti shake etc, but its a bit of a job [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > I think it moves the CCD sensor around. Does work very well though > when your at max zoom and a bit!..... I doesn't move the sensor on my 9600 Just sets higher iso as needed to allow higher shutter speed SignatureTrev You can always tell a Yorkshire man, But you can't tell him much. >>> Is The anti shake in the form of using a High ISO to enable High >>> shutter speed If so Turn it off [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I doesn't move the sensor on my 9600 Just sets higher iso as needed to > allow higher shutter speed A lot of cameras do both. Mine has CCD shift stabilisation but if Auto ISO is enabled then it also gradually raises the ISO if the shutter speed falls below about 1/30 sec. >> I'd like the wide angle end to be wider than "35mm equivalent", I >> found that my 28mm lens on my old OM2 was my most heavily used [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > It's worth checking more than one review before making a purchase I > think. Personal experience is that Ricoh are one of the fastest in terms of shutter lag - a tad slower than Casio and a touch quicker than Canon. <Anything> is quicker than an older Olympus or Nikon! In my Caplio RR30 handbook it actually specifies a press-to-picture time of better than 220mS! SignatureWoody harrogate three at ntlworld dot com Marty Fremen <Marty@fremen.invalid> observed >> I'd like the wide angle end to be wider than "35mm equivalent", I >> found that my 28mm lens on my old OM2 was my most heavily used [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >For shutter lag table see >http://www.cameras.co.uk/html/shutter-lag-comparisons.cfm Which is a load of technobabble. As we've discussed here before, shutter lag is a combination of Viewfinder delay Focussing delay Exposure assessment delay Physical trigger delay and in this case - storage to memory delay. (multiple exposures) The last and the focussing delay are usually the worst, and can be bucked by using manual focussing. Exposure assessment delay (usually <.1 sec) can be bucked by using manual or preset exposure. Viewfinder delay can be bucked by using your eyes... So don't accept just one figure as being good or bad... >You can also glean timing info from individual reviews at >http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ Which analyses much of the above. >Note though that like a lot of sites the first one doesn't mention Ricoh >products (and dpreview mentions them only rarely) due to them not being [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >It's worth checking more than one review before making a purchase I think. Indeed Mike [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] SignatureMichael J Davis <>< Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused the meaning of "discussion" with "digression". <>< |> As we've discussed here before, shutter lag is a combination of |> Viewfinder delay [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] |> bucked by using manual focussing. Exposure assessment delay (usually <.1 |> sec) can be bucked by using manual or preset exposure. Following your posting and the responses to my query, I have tried looking for some way of doing manual focussing on the sort of camera I am interested in. And failed. It seems that manual focussing comes on the relatively large and heavy (and definitely expensive and complicated) cameras only, and that some blurbs call a special focussing menu "manual focussing". Well, for real action shots, you need to be able to set up the camera by touch alone while watching for the moment - and then snap and shoot in a fraction of a second. I went into a local shop, and they told me that I could get fast times on the DSLRs, because they have more powerful motors. Large, heavy and expensive, again :-( Have I misunderstood this, and am I looking for something that is no longer possible? Regards, Nick Maclaren. > |> As we've discussed here before, shutter lag is a combination of > |> Viewfinder delay [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Have I misunderstood this, and am I looking for something that is > no longer possible? Fast times on dSLRs because they have more powerful motors? Rubbish. Maybe you will get shorter times between frames in multi-shot (motor drive) mode, but the shutter lag is nothing to do with motors. Some compact cameras have significantly less shutter lag than others. Casio and probably Ricoh are two of the fastest, with Canon and Sony pretty close behind. The slowest traditionally are Nikon and Olympus. You can prefocus and pre-expose on most compact cameras by pressing and holding the shutter half way, then when you press it the rest of the way down it will take the picture almost instantly. If you are after fast action shots forget a compact, they just won't do it. A dSLR is the only answer there - and they are not really that complicated once you get used to them. As they are all auto everything you can use it just as you would a compact, albeit agreed they are larger and heavier. SignatureWoody harrogate three at ntlworld dot com |> Fast times on dSLRs because they have more powerful motors? Rubbish. |> Maybe you will get shorter times between frames in multi-shot (motor |> drive) mode, but the shutter lag is nothing to do with motors. How is focussing done on those things? If it involves physically moving the lens, I can see that as a possibility. The other obvious one is the power of the CPU. Shutter lag, per se, hasn't been a problem in an awfully long time, though I have used a camera where it was .... |> Some compact cameras have significantly less shutter lag than others. |> Casio and probably Ricoh are two of the fastest, with Canon and Sony |> pretty close behind. The slowest traditionally are Nikon and Olympus. Thanks. Yes, I had heard that. |> You can prefocus and pre-expose on most compact cameras by pressing and |> holding the shutter half way, then when you press it the rest of the way |> down it will take the picture almost instantly. Pre-expose, yes, but what you are about to shoot isn't necessarily there in advance of you shooting it, so pre-focussing isn't always feasible. It also involves taking your eye off the ball, or shooting from the hip. I am sure that some cameras are better, but my wife's Olympus mju was almost impossible to use like that, as I couldn't tell when it was exactly half way by touch alone. |> If you are after fast action shots forget a compact, they just won't do |> it. A dSLR is the only answer there - and they are not really that |> complicated once you get used to them. As they are all auto everything |> you can use it just as you would a compact, albeit agreed they are |> larger and heavier. Thanks :-( It was the size and weight I was after, NOT the "point and click" aspect. Regards, Nick Maclaren. >Fast times on dSLRs because they have more powerful motors? Rubbish. >Maybe you will get shorter times between frames in multi-shot (motor >drive) mode, but the shutter lag is nothing to do with motors. So why do Canon, Nikon, Olympus and Sigma invest tens of millions in developing ever faster, quieter and more powerful motors to focus their SLR lenses faster? It isn't "rubbish" at all. DSLR manufacturers compete to offer the fastest and most accurate focusing systems because that is what DSLR buyers demand. To the original poster, one of the fastest focusing DSLRs is also one of the cheapest. It is the entry-level Nikon D40X which has a 10 megapixel sensor. To keep costs low, the D40X only offers autofocus with Nikon's AF-S series of lenses with the "Silent Wave" ultrasonic focusing motor. The plus side of that is that all these lenses have extremely fast and accurate focusing. |> To the original poster, one of the fastest focusing DSLRs is also one |> of the cheapest. It is the entry-level Nikon D40X which has a 10 |> megapixel sensor. Thanks. Yes, it looks good, but is rather overkill for my use. Regards, Nick Maclaren. >|> To the original poster, one of the fastest focusing DSLRs is also one >|> of the cheapest. It is the entry-level Nikon D40X which has a 10 >|> megapixel sensor. > >Thanks. Yes, it looks good, but is rather overkill for my use. No problem. >>Fast times on dSLRs because they have more powerful motors? Rubbish. >>Maybe you will get shorter times between frames in multi-shot (motor [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > plus side of that is that all these lenses have extremely fast and > accurate focusing. I think you were either reading out of contect or you hadn't seen all of my original post. The salesperson in the shop stated that dSLRs are faster <than compacts> because they have more powerful motors. Any dSLR will focus more quickly than almost any compact because of the way they work. In the context that you read it - as dSLR versus dSLR - you are right and I won't argue with you, but in the context of dSLR versus compact I stand by my original statement. SignatureWoody harrogate three at ntlworld dot com >In the context that you read it - as dSLR versus dSLR - you are right >and I won't argue with you, but in the context of dSLR versus compact I >stand by my original statement. OK, accepted. >> |> As we've discussed here before, shutter lag is a combination of >> |> Viewfinder delay [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] >you can use it just as you would a compact, albeit agreed they are >larger and heavier. But manual focusing on most DSLRs is a joke. It's only recently that you have been able to get DSLRs with interchangeable screens, so at least now in 2 or 3 models you can get a proper split-image viewfinder to get exact manual focus. Until now you had to put up with viewfinder focusing screens that were straight from the 1950s, and if you complained you were given the immortal line: 'Manual focusing? No call for it mate'. SignatureChris Morriss > I went into a local shop, and they told me that I could get fast > times on the DSLRs, because they have more powerful motors. Large, > heavy and expensive, again :-( > > Have I misunderstood this, and am I looking for something that is > no longer possible? I would guess that this is an example of shop assistants wool-pulling! Although it's true that a large lens will need a larger motor to shift its components, the result ought to be a draw. On the other hand I find that having autofocus helps with my poor eyesight through the viewfinder, so long as I have time to wait for the hunting to and fro of the servo. But the amount of movement of the lens from max to min is so small (to help the motor, no doubt) that manual focus is very tricky. I wondered if a lever would help but it would be in the way and would have to be balanced somehow. A vernier is what is needed. I hope that modern DLSRs (which I have yet to get) are better at focusing because they know in which direction to adjust and therefore do not hunt from max to min while my quarry goes out of sight... Mike. SignatureIf reply address = connectfee, add an r because it is free not fee. NM> NM> It seems that manual focussing comes on the relatively large and NM> heavy (and definitely expensive and complicated) cameras only, and NM> that some blurbs call a special focussing menu "manual focussing". NM> Well, for real action shots, you need to be able to set up the NM> camera by touch alone while watching for the moment - and then snap NM> and shoot in a fraction of a second. NM> My Nikon 8800 has "manual" focus. It is still not manual in that it is electronic via pressing buttons. Whatever happened to the focus ring, aperture ring and zoom all together on the lenses of my old Practic slr? And three types of focus aid in the viewfinder? SignatureAlan ( If replying by mail, please note that all "sardines" are canned. However, unless this a very old message, a "tuna" will swim right through. ) > It seems that manual focussing comes on the relatively large and > heavy (and definitely expensive and complicated) cameras only, and > that some blurbs call a special focussing menu "manual focussing". Most Ricoh compacts have manual focussing, but IME trying to focus via an LCD screen is a slow and painstaking process, especially given the depth of field of a compact camera. Mine does have an on-screen focussing scale, but the markings go 1m - 3m - infinity, maybe that's sufficient with a wideangle lens but you are very reliant on depth of field which you can't really assess until after you've taken the shot, since the 2x focus magnifier is pretty much useless. > Well, for real action shots, you need to be able to set up the > camera by touch alone while watching for the moment - and then snap > and shoot in a fraction of a second. To set focus up by touch you need a lens with a focussing ring I think, I don't know if even any DSLR lenses give you that, let alone digital compacts. What you can do with some cameras is set them up for hyperfocal distance or infinity. The Ricoh's give you those options. Some other makes of camera offer infinity via landscape scene mode (though my Panasonic didn't, making its landscape mode totally pointless). > I went into a local shop, and they told me that I could get fast > times on the DSLRs, because they have more powerful motors. Large, > heavy and expensive, again :-( I think SLRs achieve the zero lag you want by using predictive focussing, I think this is pretty vital for action shots like sports, where autofocus is otherwise always going to be a step behind the action. |> To set focus up by touch you need a lens with a focussing ring I think, I |> don't know if even any DSLR lenses give you that, let alone digital |> compacts. From the Web, some do, but the reviews weren't exactly enthusiastic. |> What you can do with some cameras is set them up for hyperfocal distance or |> infinity. The Ricoh's give you those options. Ah! That's useful information. |> Some other makes of camera |> offer infinity via landscape scene mode (though my Panasonic didn't, making |> its landscape mode totally pointless). Its landscape is optimised for photographing bottle gardens? :-) |> I think SLRs achieve the zero lag you want by using predictive focussing, I |> think this is pretty vital for action shots like sports, where autofocus is |> otherwise always going to be a step behind the action. That makes sense. And it will sometimes get it spectacularly wrong, like all forms of prediction .... Regards, Nick Maclaren. Nick Maclaren <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk> observed >|> As we've discussed here before, shutter lag is a combination of >|> Viewfinder delay [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >Have I misunderstood this, and am I looking for something that is >no longer possible? OK, I've had four digicams. The two had a manual button for focussing as well as an autofocus mode (the others had genuine manual focussing (i.e. turn a ring). I switch them to the non-auto focus mode. Then for, say, street shooting, I do what I always did with my Leica M3, and other film cameras. ... which is to preset the focus by aiming at something between 3-5m ahead, and wait for the action. Lift the camera (which is *on*) and allow the exposure to be calculated as I fire the shutter. If it's kids at 2m then prefocus there. That's all. It works! If the subject is outside that range, then I may have to refocus (push button again) and risk missing the shot. Although I could use the rangefinder pretty fast, there were still shots I missed for the same reason. Oh, and to avoid camera delay due to viewfinder, use *both* eyes - one on the subject, one on the viewfinder. I was fortunate - I was taught to do that in my biology lessons at school - one eye through the microscope, one eye on the paper where I'm drawing what I see! Mike [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] SignatureMichael J Davis <>< Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused the meaning of "discussion" with "digression". <>< |> |> ... which is to preset the focus by aiming at something between 3-5m |> ahead, and wait for the action. Lift the camera (which is *on*) and |> allow the exposure to be calculated as I fire the shutter. I'll have another go, but I couldn't use the button precisely enough for such shots with the Olympus mju. Other cameras may be better, but holding it half down just isn't on - the focus would have to be sticky for at least several minutes. |> Oh, and to avoid camera delay due to viewfinder, use *both* eyes - one |> on the subject, one on the viewfinder. I was fortunate - I was taught |> to do that in my biology lessons at school - one eye through the |> microscope, one eye on the paper where I'm drawing what I see! I can't do that - and I mean I REALLY can't do that. Regards, Nick Maclaren. Nick Maclaren <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk> observed >|> ... which is to preset the focus by aiming at something between 3-5m >|> ahead, and wait for the action. Lift the camera (which is *on*) and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >but holding it half down just isn't on - the focus would have to be >sticky for at least several minutes. No - I agree unless there is a separate focus button, rather than half-press, the above won't work. (As I intend!) >|> Oh, and to avoid camera delay due to viewfinder, use *both* eyes - one >|> on the subject, one on the viewfinder. I was fortunate - I was taught >|> to do that in my biology lessons at school - one eye through the >|> microscope, one eye on the paper where I'm drawing what I see! > >I can't do that - and I mean I REALLY can't do that. Oh, sorry. Mike [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] SignatureMichael J Davis <>< Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused the meaning of "discussion" with "digression". <>< >|> >|> ... which is to preset the focus by aiming at something between 3-5m [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > but holding it half down just isn't on - the focus would have to be > sticky for at least several minutes. Some cameras do offer a proper focus lock separate to the half-press. For instance my Panasonic FX01's underwater mode lets you lock the focus which will then stay locked for all shots until you release it. Why this is only available in "underwater mode" I don't know, and it means you later have to undo its attempt to "correct" underwater blues! One useful thing about the manual focussing on the Ricohs is that it also serves as a focus lock - if you autofocus and then swith to manual, the focus remains where it was autofocussed until you manually change it, thus you can hold focus for as long as you like. This is true of the GX100 anyhow, and I assume it's also true of the R6 etc since they seem to offer identical features. > Following your posting and the responses to my query, I have tried > looking for some way of doing manual focussing on the sort of camera [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > camera by touch alone while watching for the moment - and then snap > and shoot in a fraction of a second. Look at the D40 or D40x. Small and light and the AF-S lenses give you the best of both worlds -- fast autofocus easily manually overridden. Relatively cheap and uncomplicated too. SignatureChris Savage Kiss me. Or would you rather live in a Gateshead, UK land where the soap won't lather? - Billy Bragg |
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
|
©2008 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.