Re: Best Camera for NIght Shots?

On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:17:43 -0800, nospam <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
in <061120070117436106%nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

In article <sj30j350600ososei6c25jnc6ph9r1pcu9@xxxxxxx>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 21:53:26 -0800, nospam <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
in <051120072153260641%nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

In article <6asvi3dqq3u742qp164o6k9oh15iilohfi@xxxxxxx>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

You bet. I recently shot a sailing regatta against pros working with
even more serious DSLRs than the 350D, and came away with better images.

compositionally or technically?

Both -- you can't really separate the two.

absolutely you can. many times, the 'magic moment' is not captured
with the correct focus and exposure, or its at a too high iso and
noisy. what matters most is the timing of the shot, such as the
expression on the subject's face. often, the images that are
technically 'correct' have far less impact, and sometimes the lower
quality even adds charm, such as with grainy black and white images or
the 'dreaminess' of something out of focus.

Thank you for making one of my points. "The best camera is the one you
have with you." Which is why I keep other compact digital cameras in my
car, sailing bag, etc.

Another of my points is that the handling edge of the DMC-FZ8 meant that
I had the correct focal length, exposure, stabilized sharpness, and
focus more often than the DSLRs.

The big handling advantage
of the DMC-FZ8 over the DSLRs gave me a big advantage in both areas --
I more often had the right focal length and was shooting when others
were either frantically changing cameras or settling for the lens in
hand or just watching helplessly.

that's why the superzooms, such as the 18-200vr, are so popular.
optically, they may not be the best lenses, but they are good enough in
many situations and the convenience can't be beat.

The Leica lens on the DMC-FZ8 is superior in terms of optical quality,
zoom range, handling ease, and speed.

My images are very good by any reasonable standard.

perhaps they are, but a better camera would take an image that
surpassed it on technical merits such as noise and resolution. and
since you say you can't separate the two...

Only on noise, and only if you're pointlessly pixel peeping.

In terms of resolution, the DMC-FZ8 Leica super-zoom actually surpasses
the fixed prime Canon EF 50 mm f/1.4 on the EOS D60, 10D, and 300D, as
well as the fixed prime Nikkor 50 mm f/1.4 on the Nikon D100, and fixed
prime Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8 on the Nikon D50, D70s, and D40:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz8/page16.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS10D/page22.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD100/page20.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page25.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page24.asp

When typical comparable images (lens and exposure) are viewed as
intended in the real world (e.g., as 8x10 prints), there is no
meaningful difference, and the shot from the DMC-DZ8 will frequently be
the better because of handling advantages.

I've yet to see a Tamron lens that was even close to Canon L-series in
terms of optical quality, and I think it's a pretty sure bet this lens
will have compromises, including being slower at the long end (f/6.3).

the tamron 90mm macro is one of the sharpest macro lenses made.

Perhaps, although the quality isn't Canon L-series, and it has nothing
to do with super-zoom lenses in any event.

you said you never saw a tamron lens that was close to canon l-series.

I have no interest in a pointless side debate on macro lenses.

and what's interesting is that you chastise the canon 100 macro as not
being l-series, but yet it has higher mtf than canon's 180:

Different focal lengths and different objectives.

<http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_100_28/index.htm>

and since you want 180mm, tamron also has a 180mm macro and it too has
higher mtf than canon's 180mm:

No thanks. All my 35mm glass is now Canon. My experiences with
off-brand lenses has too often been bad for me to keep taking such
chances.

of course, mtf isn't the only metric that denotes a good lens, but the
point is that tamron CAN make *very* capable lenses that rank right up
there with canon and nikon's best.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Not an L-series lens.

see above. l just means it has fluorite, not that it necessarily is
the best lens. ...

L does mean the best lens, and doesn't necessarily mean fluorite -- see
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_L_lens>

An L lens is a line of SLR photography lenses made by Canon. L lenses
are Canon's top-of-the-line lenses and the "L" is often said to mean
"Luxury" because of their large price tag and quality construction.
Canon produces both L-series zoom and prime lenses for their obsolete
FD lens mount and for their current EF lens mount used on all Canon
EOS cameras (digital and film). ...

Characteristics

L-lenses have superior optical performance and are typically built
with a solid construction to withstand constant use and harsh
conditions. They can be recognized by a red ring around the front
part of the lens. Most recent L lenses have sealing to help resist
dust and water. L-lenses are typically used by professionals and
serious amateurs due to their high price and large mass.

Most L series lenses share a number of common characteristics:

* Tough build, made to withstand the trials on the fields (some
incorporating dust and moisture resistant rubber seals).

* At least one fluorite or ultra-low dispersion glass element,
combined with super-low dispersion glass and ground aspherical
elements.

* Non-rotating front elements, which are optimal for some filters
(e.g. circular polarizers).

* Relatively large apertures compared to other Canon lenses in the
same focal lengths.

* Where included, true ring-type USM (ultrasonic motor) and full-time
manual focusing.

Note that there are some lenses which include one or more of these
technologies yet which are not designated L-lenses. L-lenses are
often equipped with USM and/or IS, but the optical performance is the
key criteria.

the only 'flaw' they found was that it is noisy and extends when
focused. big deal.

I personally think that's a fairly big deal for macro, but then I'd
rather have the Canon EF 180mm L Macro in any event. Regardless, this
all says nothing about Tamron super-zoom lenses or quality.

noise and lens extension do not affect image quality.

They affect handling and use, which matters to someone like me.

and again, you implied that tamron always makes junk. some of their
lenses are excellent and some are not, just like just about every other
lens manufacturer.

What I actually said, not implied, is that Tamron doesn't measure up to
Canon L-series lenses. It doesn't measure up to Leica lenses either.

I just said the very good Canon L-series zoom was a lot less wide at the
wide end than the DMC-FZ8. I still want the long end of the range.

then why mention that it's not as wide?

Because I want that too.

well i want an 8-500mm f/2.8 stabilized zoom. :)

The difference is that I actually have a 36-432 mm f2.8-3.1 optically
stabilized Leica super-zoom lens, and that nothing in the 35 mm world
measures up to it.

So you know, I have a Canon film camera with all the glass, so I know
both the pros and cons of 35 mm SLR.

i've seen you mention that you have canon fd lenses and got burned when
they changed mounts.

Yep, although irrelevant in this context.


Photographers are what make pictures. Cameras are just photographer
tools, and even mundane cameras are capable of great images. The real
differences between cameras are in how well they facilitate the
particular objectives of the photographer, and that's just the area in
which the DMC-FZ8 particularly shines for me.

SLRs do have their place. When I do studio photography, where handling
doesn't matter, I usually (but not always) use my film kit.

But when I'm out and about, the SLR kit now stays home in favor of my
DMC-FZ8. I dragged my SLR kit all over Europe, and while I did get some
great images, it's not an experience I care to repeat.

A working pro friend of mine has likewise finally had it with lugging
her SLR kit all over the place, and is now taking my advice to get a
Panasonic with Leica super-zoom lens that she'll always have with her
when out and about.

All that said, different strokes for different folks, and if SLRs better
facilitate the way you work, then more power to you, and that's what you
should use.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Canon EOS 400D & Nikon D40x : EOS EF lenses
    ... every lens in sight to get my quota of "sellen' lenses". ... No, surely not, Nikon makes no mistakes, ever. ... not anything from Canon" ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: No more needle insertions for Continuous Glucose Monitors (CGMs)?
    ... Well, the Parviz development, thoroughly ... Super Smart Contact Lenses, ... can display images on top of your retinas. ... wirelessly to a resonating antenna in the lens ...
    (misc.health.diabetes)
  • Re: Best Camera for NIght Shots?
    ... even more serious DSLRs than the 350D, and came away with better images. ... and I think it's a pretty sure bet this lens ... the tamron 90mm macro is one of the sharpest macro lenses made. ... Perhaps, although the quality isn't Canon L-series, and it has nothing ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: What caused the demise of 135 mm lenses?
    ... inexpensive yet it delivered acceptable images on 135 format film. ... Around that time it was quite common for amateurs to have 3 lenses, ... This "standard lens" for each format has a roughly 47 degree diagonal ...
    (alt.photography)
  • Re: Best Camera for NIght Shots?
    ... convenience comes with a price, and that price is image quality. ... the canon resolves more than the panasonic does before aliasing ... more to do with its lack of an anti-alias filter than the lens itself. ... I have no interest in a pointless side debate on macro lenses. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)