Getting closer to purchasing a new digital camera, but with a
twist.
The problem is that I really am wanting a full-frame (35mm)
digital camera, but the cost and cameras just haven't arrived
yet. But getting closer. But I can't wait. It'll be another
8-12 months before an interchangeable lens SLR system will be
viable for me.
What to do? I've been thinking "bridge camera". I've been
looking at my specific needs in the short term and there are a
couple cameras on the market that actually meet and exceed them.
The advantages of getting a "bridge camera" right now is several
fold:
1. Decent sensors (5-8MP)
2. Feature rich (many very usable ones not found on "real
cameras")
3. Compact size
4. Light weight
5. Extremely good battery life
6. Inexpensive spare/backup to full-blown system
7. Quality 7x zoom lens
8. Electronic Viewfinder with larger image than APS-sized SLR's
I've got it narrowed down to two cameras. The one that is
winning the race right now is a 5MP. What it loses out on in
pixels it makes up for in real professional features and
capabilities and reasonable noise. All that and a 7x zoom with
no visible chromatic aberations.
I'm operating on the premise that for the next 12 months I can
operate in a pluralistic manner. Digicam for everything it is
appropriate for, 35mm for B&W, redundancy and things needing
greater capability than what 5MP can provide, and 4x5 for snooty
stuff.
Amazingly enough, nearly all of my professional work could have
been done with the IS-3 for the past three years. With the
exception of a handful of shots needing the 100/2.8, 24/2.8 or
macro lenses, everything could have been done better with the
IS-3. Having shot a couple thousand pictures with it, I am
comfortable with the concept of a unilens camera for 90% of my
work--as long as I have an alternative system available if
needed.
I've been talking with several pros using these cameras and have
seen their results. Unedited results! Ok, I'm impressed. I've
never gotten as good with any Portra film in 35mm. 8x10s right
out of the camera with no interpolation. 11x14 with standard
bicubic is excellent, and flawless when a little bit of
post-production is applied.
An issue of extreme importance to me is usability. The new S*ny
eight-two-eight has a wonderful imaging sensor, good lens and
some awesome features. But it falls flat on some major
usability points. I spent an hour with it on Saturday and came
away wanting. The "coolness factor" wore off in minutes, if not
seconds.
One of my other finalists has usability down to an artform. I
love holding it and shooting with it. Even though the
courseness of the EVF is bothersome, the additional features
found in it are not. I REALLY like a real-time histogram.
Makes zone-system photography a whole lot easier! The
time-delay of the EVF is somewhat a problem, but I'm a two-eyed
shooter for people photography anyway.
Picking which system to buy is kinda tricky as I'd like it to be
part of the same brand as the high-end stuff. That would mean
Fuji, Canon or Nikon. Unfortunately, all three have certain
design weaknesses in their bridge-cameras that I dislike in my
IS-3. First and formost, a motorized zoom. Secondly,
absolutely horrendous manual focus. Thirdly, a gutwrenching
viewfinder.
What are my priorities for a bridge camera?
1. A manual zoom lens with at least a 28mm equivelent wideangle
2. Real-time histogram in viewfinder
3. Fast, accurate autofocus with short shutterlag
4. Exceptional battery life
5. 5MP or greater sensor
6. Vertical grip with additional batteries
7. RAW mode with Photoshop plugin support
8. Fast lens, prefer F2-2.8 equivelent
9. Matrix metering/spot metering
10. Fast write times.
11. PC Flash terminal for studio flashes
12. Excellent skintones (this is rare)
13. Big, comfy 100% viewfinder viewable with glasses
14. Last, but definitely not least--a comfortable grip
15. Oh, and nice professional looks.
I think I've found a camera meeting most of these desires. You
can tell when a camera is designed and built by a real camera
company. Now, if they only had a full-frame SLR on the market
in a no-excuses top-flight body.
Buying a bridge camera is the right thing to do because:
1. $1,000 spent now to delay the purchase of an overpriced DSLR
hence saving probably $2,000.
2. Spare digital camera. I'll want a backup digital body anyway
and this will be cheep.
3. Go anywhere with high feature set and quality.
4. Other features not supported on "real" cameras.
5. It may integrate with some componants from the "real" system.
For everybody who has read my anti-digital rants, this must come
as a suprise. But, I'm seeing how this could be a realistic
solution to a temporary problem. I'm still planning on a major
DSLR system, but unfortunately, it isn't ready for me. I'm now
convinced that the best DSLR system hasn't even been revealed
yet. But rumour has it...
:)
Oh, and please don't suggest the C*NON DR*BEL. I was too
thankful to hand it back to the salesman. Beauty may be only
skin deep, but ugly goes to the bone. The viewfinder was simply
aweful, and the shutter-bounce was enough to shake a dead person
from their eternal slumber. I also recognized niceties of it,
and can see why many of us are buying them in droves, but it
ain't for me.
AG-Schnozz
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|