Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

wide angle compact questions

Tags:
Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
August 22, 2005 11:50:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi, I wonder if anyone can help...

After using friends cameras I am finding my Fuji MX-1700 [1.5Mp] a bit slow
and clunky.

Looking at the options for a compact digital camera I founnd the Ricoh
Caplio range. The wide angle lens appeals to me although I've never used
one!

The reviews are generally not complimentary though, so I'm put off. [I have
spent too many hours on the review sites]

The next option was the Canon s60/s70 which although more expensive, is
still affordable to me. That, according to the reviews, has trouble in low
light conditions.

The only other wide angle option seems to be the Fuji 500/510, again soft
images, poor indoors etc.

Am I being too picky? Do these cameras have real faults, or are the reviews
over critical?

Is the wide angle worth having?

I'd like a small metal bodied camera for groups, portraits, low light
conditions and landscapes. I would rarely print larger than 7X5, with the
odd A4.

If anyone has any advise on the above cameras, or something different that
fits the bill I'd appreciate it.

Thanks

Andy
August 22, 2005 11:50:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Andy wrote:
> Hi, I wonder if anyone can help...
>
> After using friends cameras I am finding my Fuji MX-1700 [1.5Mp] a bit slow
> and clunky.
>
> Looking at the options for a compact digital camera I founnd the Ricoh
> Caplio range. The wide angle lens appeals to me although I've never used
> one!
>
> The reviews are generally not complimentary though, so I'm put off. [I have
> spent too many hours on the review sites]
>
> The next option was the Canon s60/s70 which although more expensive, is
> still affordable to me. That, according to the reviews, has trouble in low
> light conditions.
>
> The only other wide angle option seems to be the Fuji 500/510, again soft
> images, poor indoors etc.
>
> Am I being too picky? Do these cameras have real faults, or are the reviews
> over critical?
>
> Is the wide angle worth having?
>
> I'd like a small metal bodied camera for groups, portraits, low light
> conditions and landscapes. I would rarely print larger than 7X5, with the
> odd A4.
>
> If anyone has any advise on the above cameras, or something different that
> fits the bill I'd appreciate it.
>
> Thanks
>
> Andy

Each camera has it's own set of plusses and minuses. You'll not find a
camera that's perfect - it just doesn't exist (yet....). However, the
focus issue is being overblown a bit, IMHO.

I have an Oly C-5060; not a great low-light camera, but - I adapted to
the shortcomings of the camera; I do what it takes to get the shot. The
issue is due, in part, to the relatively slow lens being used; F/2.8 is
not that fast, especially when you're limited to ISO 100 because of
excessive noise at higher ISO's.

If your focus lock fails, you just try again; if it fails again, you
rotate the camera a bit; again, and you find another equivalent
distance object to focus on, and then recompose the scene; if it fails
again, you switch to manual. Frustrating, especially if you're used to
a fixed-focus point and shoot 35mm film camera, but the pictures are
better.

Look for a model with a focus-assist light - it helps a lot; an
external flash will really improve your indoor pics, too - especially
if you can bounce-flash.

The 27mm wide angle on the C-5060 is useful, and I use it fairly
frequently; still, it's all relative and 35mm equivalent is ok too.
Frankly, I'm usually shooting between 35-100mm; the extremes on any
lens will have issues - distortion, CA, corner softness, small
aperture, etc. The C-5060's weakness is a small amount of barrel
distortion at full wide, and small aperture at full tele; better than
almost all the rest, but still not perfect.

With your fairly mild requirements, you'd do fine with any of several
cameras - the only thing is you should try to get it in your hands for
a trial before you buy it, so you know what it feels like. Personally,
the cameras that fascinate me right now are the Fuji F10 and the
Panasonic FZ-5; YMMV. Neither is considered "wide angle", but the F10
is fast with better-than average focus speed, almost no shutter lag and
a usable ISO 800; the FZ-5 is a good image-stabilized super-zoom. Now
if I could get all those features in one camera.....

For wide angle look at the Oly C-7070, the update to the C-5060. The
images are superb, it has a hot-shoe, and it's focus is improved from
the C-5060. The price is amazing right now; at Beach, Profeel, 17th
Ave. Camera, etc. it's still U.S.$370. You'll have to put up with a
non-pocketable camera, though.

Good Luck!
ECM
August 23, 2005 9:35:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thanks.
I'll have a look at those.
I had seen the F10 and the good reviews.... will a slave flash help?

Andy

"ecm" <thedeepabyss@whoever.com> wrote in message
news:1124752173.868155.12960@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Andy wrote:
> > Hi, I wonder if anyone can help...
> >
> > After using friends cameras I am finding my Fuji MX-1700 [1.5Mp] a bit
slow
> > and clunky.
> >
> > Looking at the options for a compact digital camera I founnd the Ricoh
> > Caplio range. The wide angle lens appeals to me although I've never used
> > one!
> >
> > The reviews are generally not complimentary though, so I'm put off. [I
have
> > spent too many hours on the review sites]
> >
> > The next option was the Canon s60/s70 which although more expensive, is
> > still affordable to me. That, according to the reviews, has trouble in
low
> > light conditions.
> >
> > The only other wide angle option seems to be the Fuji 500/510, again
soft
> > images, poor indoors etc.
> >
> > Am I being too picky? Do these cameras have real faults, or are the
reviews
> > over critical?
> >
> > Is the wide angle worth having?
> >
> > I'd like a small metal bodied camera for groups, portraits, low light
> > conditions and landscapes. I would rarely print larger than 7X5, with
the
> > odd A4.
> >
> > If anyone has any advise on the above cameras, or something different
that
> > fits the bill I'd appreciate it.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Andy
>
> Each camera has it's own set of plusses and minuses. You'll not find a
> camera that's perfect - it just doesn't exist (yet....). However, the
> focus issue is being overblown a bit, IMHO.
>
> I have an Oly C-5060; not a great low-light camera, but - I adapted to
> the shortcomings of the camera; I do what it takes to get the shot. The
> issue is due, in part, to the relatively slow lens being used; F/2.8 is
> not that fast, especially when you're limited to ISO 100 because of
> excessive noise at higher ISO's.
>
> If your focus lock fails, you just try again; if it fails again, you
> rotate the camera a bit; again, and you find another equivalent
> distance object to focus on, and then recompose the scene; if it fails
> again, you switch to manual. Frustrating, especially if you're used to
> a fixed-focus point and shoot 35mm film camera, but the pictures are
> better.
>
> Look for a model with a focus-assist light - it helps a lot; an
> external flash will really improve your indoor pics, too - especially
> if you can bounce-flash.
>
> The 27mm wide angle on the C-5060 is useful, and I use it fairly
> frequently; still, it's all relative and 35mm equivalent is ok too.
> Frankly, I'm usually shooting between 35-100mm; the extremes on any
> lens will have issues - distortion, CA, corner softness, small
> aperture, etc. The C-5060's weakness is a small amount of barrel
> distortion at full wide, and small aperture at full tele; better than
> almost all the rest, but still not perfect.
>
> With your fairly mild requirements, you'd do fine with any of several
> cameras - the only thing is you should try to get it in your hands for
> a trial before you buy it, so you know what it feels like. Personally,
> the cameras that fascinate me right now are the Fuji F10 and the
> Panasonic FZ-5; YMMV. Neither is considered "wide angle", but the F10
> is fast with better-than average focus speed, almost no shutter lag and
> a usable ISO 800; the FZ-5 is a good image-stabilized super-zoom. Now
> if I could get all those features in one camera.....
>
> For wide angle look at the Oly C-7070, the update to the C-5060. The
> images are superb, it has a hot-shoe, and it's focus is improved from
> the C-5060. The price is amazing right now; at Beach, Profeel, 17th
> Ave. Camera, etc. it's still U.S.$370. You'll have to put up with a
> non-pocketable camera, though.
>
> Good Luck!
> ECM
>
Related resources
Anonymous
August 23, 2005 11:25:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Andy wrote:
[]
> Is the wide angle worth having?

Generally, yes. If that's your style of photography, you should also look
at the Nikon Coolpix 8400 which has the widest view of all such cameras -
24mm, and 18mm with an adapater.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp8400/

David
August 23, 2005 12:31:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I have the 5060 and bought a slave flash and only used it once as it was
more trouble setting up and remembering the settings between sessions. I
like the 5060 but at times it does feel bulky and if I had something smaller
I would take a camera out more. Because of this even after only a few months
I am thinking of changing as I need (for my work) a smaller sized camera.

I also have looked at the reviews (perhaps too much) and am not happy with
those for the Ricoh and feel the camera (like the Fuji) feels fragile. The
S60 and S70 are like my 5060 -- 'carved out of a block of metal' -- feel.
Unless anything else comes up soon I have decided on the S70 but still
reading the reviews. I wish I didn't have the need for the wider angle but I
do otherwise I would get more confused looking at the vast range of none
wide angle options.

Let us know what decision you make.

K

"Andy" <Andy@fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fAyOe.563$%5.215@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
> Thanks.
> I'll have a look at those.
> I had seen the F10 and the good reviews.... will a slave flash help?
>
> Andy
>
> "ecm" <thedeepabyss@whoever.com> wrote in message
> news:1124752173.868155.12960@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Andy wrote:
>> > Hi, I wonder if anyone can help...
>> >
>> > After using friends cameras I am finding my Fuji MX-1700 [1.5Mp] a bit
> slow
>> > and clunky.
>> >
>> > Looking at the options for a compact digital camera I founnd the Ricoh
>> > Caplio range. The wide angle lens appeals to me although I've never
>> > used
>> > one!
>> >
>> > The reviews are generally not complimentary though, so I'm put off. [I
> have
>> > spent too many hours on the review sites]
>> >
>> > The next option was the Canon s60/s70 which although more expensive, is
>> > still affordable to me. That, according to the reviews, has trouble in
> low
>> > light conditions.
>> >
>> > The only other wide angle option seems to be the Fuji 500/510, again
> soft
>> > images, poor indoors etc.
>> >
>> > Am I being too picky? Do these cameras have real faults, or are the
> reviews
>> > over critical?
>> >
>> > Is the wide angle worth having?
>> >
>> > I'd like a small metal bodied camera for groups, portraits, low light
>> > conditions and landscapes. I would rarely print larger than 7X5, with
> the
>> > odd A4.
>> >
>> > If anyone has any advise on the above cameras, or something different
> that
>> > fits the bill I'd appreciate it.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Andy
>>
>> Each camera has it's own set of plusses and minuses. You'll not find a
>> camera that's perfect - it just doesn't exist (yet....). However, the
>> focus issue is being overblown a bit, IMHO.
>>
>> I have an Oly C-5060; not a great low-light camera, but - I adapted to
>> the shortcomings of the camera; I do what it takes to get the shot. The
>> issue is due, in part, to the relatively slow lens being used; F/2.8 is
>> not that fast, especially when you're limited to ISO 100 because of
>> excessive noise at higher ISO's.
>>
>> If your focus lock fails, you just try again; if it fails again, you
>> rotate the camera a bit; again, and you find another equivalent
>> distance object to focus on, and then recompose the scene; if it fails
>> again, you switch to manual. Frustrating, especially if you're used to
>> a fixed-focus point and shoot 35mm film camera, but the pictures are
>> better.
>>
>> Look for a model with a focus-assist light - it helps a lot; an
>> external flash will really improve your indoor pics, too - especially
>> if you can bounce-flash.
>>
>> The 27mm wide angle on the C-5060 is useful, and I use it fairly
>> frequently; still, it's all relative and 35mm equivalent is ok too.
>> Frankly, I'm usually shooting between 35-100mm; the extremes on any
>> lens will have issues - distortion, CA, corner softness, small
>> aperture, etc. The C-5060's weakness is a small amount of barrel
>> distortion at full wide, and small aperture at full tele; better than
>> almost all the rest, but still not perfect.
>>
>> With your fairly mild requirements, you'd do fine with any of several
>> cameras - the only thing is you should try to get it in your hands for
>> a trial before you buy it, so you know what it feels like. Personally,
>> the cameras that fascinate me right now are the Fuji F10 and the
>> Panasonic FZ-5; YMMV. Neither is considered "wide angle", but the F10
>> is fast with better-than average focus speed, almost no shutter lag and
>> a usable ISO 800; the FZ-5 is a good image-stabilized super-zoom. Now
>> if I could get all those features in one camera.....
>>
>> For wide angle look at the Oly C-7070, the update to the C-5060. The
>> images are superb, it has a hot-shoe, and it's focus is improved from
>> the C-5060. The price is amazing right now; at Beach, Profeel, 17th
>> Ave. Camera, etc. it's still U.S.$370. You'll have to put up with a
>> non-pocketable camera, though.
>>
>> Good Luck!
>> ECM
>>
>
>
August 23, 2005 6:18:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Andy wrote:
> Thanks.
> I'll have a look at those.
> I had seen the F10 and the good reviews.... will a slave flash help?
>
> Andy
>
> "ecm" <thedeepabyss@whoever.com> wrote in message
SNIP

It could, if you're willing to experiment a lot with exposure - get one
specifically for digital cameras, with bounce capability - like the
Vivitar DF200 or the Phoenix D92-BZS. You'll have to learn flash
exposure like the oldsters did it - manually - check subject distance,
check the guide number table on the flash, then on the camera set the
aperture for the guide number and distance. For set portraits I use an
old slave flash for backlighting; for anything else (chasing kids, for
instance) you'll want that hot-shoe so you can use a TTL dedicated
flash. I have a Promaster 5750 flash for my C-5060; works great;
exposure is hardly ever wrong (even in bounce mode) and I don't have to
fiddle with it.

That's the thing I like about the F10 and it's high useable ISO; it'll
take a pic WITHOUT flash where any other point-n-shoot couldn't. I
don't bother using anything higher than ISO 200 on my C-5060; there's
too much noise; that's true of virtually all non-dSLR cameras right
now. ISO 800 needs 3X less light for the same exposure; that means
either 3X faster shutter - great to stop the action - or 3 stops less
aperture - great for DOF. The built in flash on the F10 is one of it's
two major weaknesses - apparently it's not good. The other weakness is
xD flash cards; it's a lot cheaper than Sony Memory Stick but it's
still too pricey. Otherwise, it's got a metal body, a large LCD, and a
500 shots/charge battery; it's not at all sexy to look at but it's got
me hot.... :-)

ECM
August 23, 2005 9:42:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

ASAAR wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2005 14:18:37 -0700, ecm wrote:
>
> > That's the thing I like about the F10 and it's high useable ISO; it'll
> > take a pic WITHOUT flash where any other point-n-shoot couldn't. I
> > don't bother using anything higher than ISO 200 on my C-5060; there's
> > too much noise; that's true of virtually all non-dSLR cameras right
> > now. ISO 800 needs 3X less light for the same exposure; that means
> > either 3X faster shutter - great to stop the action - or 3 stops less
> > aperture - great for DOF.
>
> I assume that you wrote "3X" but understand that it's a factor of
> 8 (2x2x2). But wouldn't that be compared to ISO 100, not 200? Same
> for the shutter speed. A difference of three stops is 8 times
> faster or slower.
SNIP

Yeah, sorry, I was rushing and I didn't pay proper attention - I was
initially going to compare ISO 100 on the C-5060 to ISO 800 on the F10,
but I reviewed the pics at Steves Digicams and I think that ISO 200 is
more similar, noise-wise. The difference between ISO 200 and ISO 800 is
2 stops (not three); 2 X 2 = 4X the light.... so shutter would be 4X
faster at ISO 800.

> If xD cards are more expensive than all but the cheapest CF cards
> (which would be slower anyway) then you're looking at vendors that
> don't update their prices in a timely manner. I bought xD and CF
> cards several months ago and the prices were identical.
SNIP

Hmmm.... a quick check at my favorite vendor (www.newegg.com) shows a
generic 45X 1GB CF going for about $50, 1GB xD is running $85. The
disparity is worse for 512 MB, my favorite size - $29 vs. $55-60.
Sandisk Ultra II is also about $85, but.... I have to say, I don't put
xD in the same league as Ultra II.

As for which is faster/slower, I've never been able to find that
out.... I haven't found anywhere that publishes the actual "speed" of
xD. My own very informal tests using a USB 2 reader and the 32MB card
that came with my C-5060 seemed to indicate it runs about 15-20X, if
you consider 150Kb/s = 1X. The Ultra II is faster than the xD card in
my camera (by about 20% - 7.5s vs. 9.5s) when shooting RAW.

> If you like
> the F10 but don't care for its 'all auto' operation, wait a bit for
> the E900. I kinda doubt that it'll have as large a display, but it
> should have a similar sensor (but with a higher-res 9mp), a
> viewfinder, and manual controls in a package similar to the E550.

Yeah, it looks good; I'm waiting to see the reviews and samples. It's
actually the S5200 and S9000 that I'm watching for, though.... might be
enough of an improvement that it'll make me retire my C-5060....

ECM
Anonymous
August 23, 2005 10:29:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 23 Aug 2005 14:18:37 -0700, ecm wrote:

> That's the thing I like about the F10 and it's high useable ISO; it'll
> take a pic WITHOUT flash where any other point-n-shoot couldn't. I
> don't bother using anything higher than ISO 200 on my C-5060; there's
> too much noise; that's true of virtually all non-dSLR cameras right
> now. ISO 800 needs 3X less light for the same exposure; that means
> either 3X faster shutter - great to stop the action - or 3 stops less
> aperture - great for DOF.

I assume that you wrote "3X" but understand that it's a factor of
8 (2x2x2). But wouldn't that be compared to ISO 100, not 200? Same
for the shutter speed. A difference of three stops is 8 times
faster or slower.


> The built in flash on the F10 is one of it's
> two major weaknesses - apparently it's not good. The other weakness is
> xD flash cards; it's a lot cheaper than Sony Memory Stick but it's
> still too pricey. Otherwise, it's got a metal body, a large LCD, and a
> 500 shots/charge battery; it's not at all sexy to look at but it's got
> me hot.... :-)

If xD cards are more expensive than all but the cheapest CF cards
(which would be slower anyway) then you're looking at vendors that
don't update their prices in a timely manner. I bought xD and CF
cards several months ago and the prices were identical. If you like
the F10 but don't care for its 'all auto' operation, wait a bit for
the E900. I kinda doubt that it'll have as large a display, but it
should have a similar sensor (but with a higher-res 9mp), a
viewfinder, and manual controls in a package similar to the E550.
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 1:35:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 23 Aug 2005 17:42:45 -0700, ecm wrote:

>> If xD cards are more expensive than all but the cheapest CF cards
>> (which would be slower anyway) then you're looking at vendors that
>> don't update their prices in a timely manner. I bought xD and CF
>> cards several months ago and the prices were identical.
> SNIP
>
> Hmmm.... a quick check at my favorite vendor (www.newegg.com) shows a
> generic 45X 1GB CF going for about $50, 1GB xD is running $85. The
> disparity is worse for 512 MB, my favorite size - $29 vs. $55-60.
> Sandisk Ultra II is also about $85, but.... I have to say, I don't put
> xD in the same league as Ultra II.
>
> As for which is faster/slower, I've never been able to find that
> out.... I haven't found anywhere that publishes the actual "speed" of
> xD. My own very informal tests using a USB 2 reader and the 32MB card
> that came with my C-5060 seemed to indicate it runs about 15-20X, if
> you consider 150Kb/s = 1X. The Ultra II is faster than the xD card in
> my camera (by about 20% - 7.5s vs. 9.5s) when shooting RAW.

It happens that the CF card I bought was the Ultra II. It's
faster than the xD card (Olympus label), but not by a tremendous
amount. I don't recall the xD card's speed but I mentioned it a
while back in another message. I think it was something in the
neighborhood of 30x, or 4.5 mb/s, much faster than my camera and
most DSLRs can take full advantage of. Slower than the Ultra II but
faster than generic CF cards. This, though is probably the read
speed. Write speed should be a good bit slower, maybe 3.5 mb/s, but
still faster than the camera needs for fastest operation. It might
be that your xD's slower performance is due to camera design. It's
certainly true for the Ultra II CF card which is rated well above
15-20x.
August 24, 2005 3:56:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

<snip>

Hang on there.... this is all going over my head!

I want to learn more, and am picking things up slowly by reading reviews and
this group.

One thing I'm not sure of is the listed ccd size ie: 1/2.7-inch CCD

I dont know if I should read it as one inch and two point seven of an inch,
or one divided by two point seven [.037"?] Is a larger # after the / better?

Maybe I should get a cheaper manual camera and learn how it all works and
decide what I _really_ need before spending ~300gbp.

Any suggestions? My fave choice Canon S60 has been superceeded again today
so maybe I can get a cheap manual camera, decide what I need and get that or
the S70 when the price goes down in a few months when I understand things
better.

Also , any recommendations for sites that cover basic digital photography
principles?

Cheers

Andy
August 24, 2005 10:36:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Andy wrote:
> <snip>
>
> Hang on there.... this is all going over my head!
>
> I want to learn more, and am picking things up slowly by reading reviews and
> this group.
>
> One thing I'm not sure of is the listed ccd size ie: 1/2.7-inch CCD
>
> I dont know if I should read it as one inch and two point seven of an inch,
> or one divided by two point seven [.037"?] Is a larger # after the / better?

It's a size designation that comes from the early days of T.V. - see
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=Sensor_Sizes

>
> Maybe I should get a cheaper manual camera and learn how it all works and
> decide what I _really_ need before spending ~300gbp.

I agree - I started into digital with a cheap (for the time), plain HP
315xi - it served me well for 3 years before I wanted an upgrade.
Digicams are still evolving; get something that'll do for now, don't
break the bank, upgrade in the future if you still want to.

>
> Any suggestions? My fave choice Canon S60 has been superceeded again today
> so maybe I can get a cheap manual camera, decide what I need and get that or
> the S70 when the price goes down in a few months when I understand things
> better.

There will ALWAYS (at least for a few years) be something better just
down the road.... The camera you bought for $300 this week will be $250
next week. And in the meantime, you're not taking pictures....

>
> Also , any recommendations for sites that cover basic digital photography
> principles?

Many, depending on what you want - there was a recent thread that
recommended several that I can't find right now. Try about.com; they
have lots of good articles on digital photography. I've been reading
books, a good one that I found at my local library was "The Joy of
Digital Photography" by Jeff Wignall.

>
> Cheers
>
> Andy

Good Luck!
ECM
August 24, 2005 11:02:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"ecm" <thedeepabyss@whoever.com> wrote in message
news:1124890609.173721.86330@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
> Good Luck!
> ECM
>

Thanks for all your advise.

I'll carry on reading this group.

Cheers

Andy
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 12:00:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 23:56:19 GMT, Andy wrote:

> One thing I'm not sure of is the listed ccd size ie: 1/2.7-inch CCD
>
> I dont know if I should read it as one inch and two point seven of an inch,
> or one divided by two point seven [.037"?] Is a larger # after the / better?

A larger sensor is usually better, but it depends on other
factors, such as how many megapixels it contains. Too many pixels
and they have to be smaller. Smaller pixel sites mean more "noise"
in the images, i.e., you'll be restricted to low ISOs such as 100 or
200 if you don't want to see images degraded by excessive noise. As
far as the actual numbers are concerned, you got it right, almost.
1/2.7 is 0.37", and is a good "ballpark" figure for a sensor's size,
as it lies between 1/3" and 1/2". If the sensor was 0.037", then
its dimension would be just about one millimeter, far too small for
any reasonable sensor this side of what a spy might want to use for
planting "bugs".


> Maybe I should get a cheaper manual camera and learn how it all works and
> decide what I _really_ need before spending ~300gbp.
>
> Any suggestions? My fave choice Canon S60 has been superceeded again
> today so maybe I can get a cheap manual camera, decide what I need and
> get that or the S70 when the price goes down in a few months when I
> understand things better.

Both are nice cameras, but I don't see any good reason to wait
months for the S70's price to drop. By then you might talk yourself
into waiting a few more months for the price of the S80 to drop. I
have to say, I don't understand what you mean by "in a few months
when I understand things better." Are you referring to getting a
cheaper camera first in order to learn more about how to take good
pictures using many of its more complex features, or about
evaluating cameras to determine what to get? If it's the latter,
then there's no guarantee you'll not want something entirely
different than the S70 several months from now.

> Also , any recommendations for sites that cover basic digital
> photography principles?

Sorry, no. I tend to use google when I need answers to specific
questions. Although it might be overkill, a good book might be a
reasonable option. I like Michael Freeman's "Pro Digital
Photographer's Handbook" (Lark Books, ISBN 1-57990-632-X).
August 27, 2005 12:59:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"ASAAR" <caught@22.com> wrote in message
news:cm0qg11ha4l8oo42st2nos09nbcucbf2im@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 23:56:19 GMT, Andy wrote:
>
> > One thing I'm not sure of is the listed ccd size ie: 1/2.7-inch CCD
> >
> > I dont know if I should read it as one inch and two point seven of an
inch,
> > or one divided by two point seven [.037"?] Is a larger # after the /
better?
>
> A larger sensor is usually better, but it depends on other
> factors, such as how many megapixels it contains. Too many pixels
> and they have to be smaller. Smaller pixel sites mean more "noise"
> in the images, i.e., you'll be restricted to low ISOs such as 100 or
> 200 if you don't want to see images degraded by excessive noise. As
> far as the actual numbers are concerned, you got it right, almost.
> 1/2.7 is 0.37", and is a good "ballpark" figure for a sensor's size,
> as it lies between 1/3" and 1/2". If the sensor was 0.037", then
> its dimension would be just about one millimeter, far too small for
> any reasonable sensor this side of what a spy might want to use for
> planting "bugs".
>

Almost right then!
>
> > Maybe I should get a cheaper manual camera and learn how it all works
and
> > decide what I _really_ need before spending ~300gbp.
> >
> > Any suggestions? My fave choice Canon S60 has been superceeded again
> > today so maybe I can get a cheap manual camera, decide what I need and
> > get that or the S70 when the price goes down in a few months when I
> > understand things better.
>
> Both are nice cameras, but I don't see any good reason to wait
> months for the S70's price to drop. By then you might talk yourself
> into waiting a few more months for the price of the S80 to drop. I
> have to say, I don't understand what you mean by "in a few months
> when I understand things better." Are you referring to getting a
> cheaper camera first in order to learn more about how to take good
> pictures using many of its more complex features, or about
> evaluating cameras to determine what to get? If it's the latter,
> then there's no guarantee you'll not want something entirely
> different than the S70 several months from now.
>

The former. I want to understand what I am doing when taking photos, rather
than letting the camera do it for me.

> > Also , any recommendations for sites that cover basic digital
> > photography principles?
>
> Sorry, no. I tend to use google when I need answers to specific
> questions. Although it might be overkill, a good book might be a
> reasonable option. I like Michael Freeman's "Pro Digital
> Photographer's Handbook" (Lark Books, ISBN 1-57990-632-X).


Cheers for the help.

Andy
!