My Panasonic lacks a proper manual mode, so I won't recommend it for you. For manual I sometimes shoot film with a folding Agfa Isolette, using any digital camera that shows exposure details to give me a guide on settings:
Digitec also sell cheap and fast SanDisk 8GB SDHC cards, for about 30chf. I have used one for the past month without any problems in a tiny Panasonic FX100 (12mp). The read/write speeds of the SandDisk card are quite high too.
Hi
I have had a G9 since it 1st arrived in the USA and honestly love the camera, my only quibble is the wide angle of the lens, the G9 is 35-210 in 35mm equivalents. I am a lover of the availability of the majestic panorama without stitching photographs together (10-22 Canon on my 400 & 450) and that is one of the three key differences between the 9 & 10, the 10 has an 28mm equivalent wide and a shorter tele 180, it also has the IV processor which should help greatly with noise reduction, and of course more MP. Cards are now cheaper even here in CH I use mostly 4GB cards in my cameras which usually does well for a trip or an event.
Bill
Hi Roland
I shoot (as mentioned earlier) in RAW format. I then convert the pics to 8 bit TIFF files at 350 - 400 dpi. I just send them to our in-house graphics man and he uses his technical wizardry to put them into the catalogue as CMYK files.
I don't think that he rescales them at all.
HTH
Tom
What do you reckon to the G9 im thinking of getting one
Buy one. You won't be disappointed... except maybe at the moderate (35mm equivalent) wideangle. But then again, you can always buy an adaptor.
The most important thing in a camera is not the megapixels. This is a bit like buying a car because of the 0-60 mph speed it has. Interesting but hardly the most important thing.
If you are buying a camera, any camera, always try and go for the best lens possible. The main cost in a camera is the lens. That is why one of the previous posters recommended Canon and Nikon. Unless you are talking serious money and entering the Leica, Hasselblad, Rolleiflex etc. etc. market Canon and Nikon will have the largest selection of lens at the most affordable prices.
If you are wanting to start doing serious photography, then you might as well start off with a SLR. Buy the best lens you can afford, as camera bodies change but the lens ( which is glass ) will always remain as good as the day you bought it. That way you slowly, over a period of years, build up a complete system, without breaking the bank at any one time.
Good point. Just acquired a Panasonic LX-3 which has low pixels for its chip size.
But the reward was wonderful photos of visiting family taken only by Christmas tree candle light.
It's not as simple as going for the best lens for compact digital cameras. Panasonic cameras in this category have the best lens but the picture is marred by sensor noise.
[quote=Sagar_KD;349354]I would always encourage ppl to buy a camera from only 2 companies i.e. Nikon or Canon, because they have a proven pedigree in making cameras....
Toyota also have a proven pedigree making cars but they still improved making Lexus..... I think the digital age completely changed camera design/manufacture and many others manufacturers are equally as good, Sony, Panasonic, to name but 2.
As for Haslebad or Leica guess these don't make the grade....
[quote=Charlie R. Soles;375146]
Hasselblad H-39 professonal camera - one of the most widely used pro digital cameras around
& this puppy in the pipeline from Leica. The S2.
http://www.bjp-online.com/public/sho...ml?page=816234
I think they are probably just in grades way above ones you are familiar with
(also, Leica's D-Lux 3 compact - essentially the panasonic LX3 - or the other way around)
The original quote said ...only buy from Nikon or Canon..both are good, indeed very good, but all i did was to point out that other better options exist.
Ah sorry, I thought you were implying that in your opinion, Hassy & Leica didn't make the grade anymore.
Sorry for my mis understanding
Manufacturers of traditional camera/lenses are teaming up with electronics giants to produce digital SLRs. Canon has always done both so you'd think they should be top of the heap, yet Canon has produced a series of expensive buggy SLRs recently, and the brand new 5D mkII I had my eye on also has issues.
Nikon is fighting a rearguard action all on its own. It is unclear who makes their sensor chips, but they have made some clever cameras like the D3 and now the D700.
Sony has teamed up with Minolta but seem to have difficulty with their sensor concept.
Leica worked closely with Minolta from 1928, starting under the name Nichi-Doku Shashinki Shoten (Japan-Germany Camera Company) and changing to Minolta (Machines, INstruments, Optics and Lenses TAshima - Kazuo Tashima being the company founder), but today Leica works with Panasonic mainly. As in Sony/Minolta, again we have a situation where the glass is excellent but the sensor often disappointing.
The OP was interested in compact cameras. Hasselblad is in a category of its own.
In my experience, Nikon digital cameras are not as reliable as Canon digital cameras.
For digital cameras, Leica certainly make the grade in the lenses they make for digital cameras (well, under their label anyway). The great sadness is that their lenses are used on Panasonic cameras and the sensor used in these cameras are mostly noisy and let the lens down.
What is your experience?
& have you got anything to back up that statement?
Because as a professional user of both systems, I would counter that this is absolute rubbish.
As I said though, feel free to prove me wrong with some factual links though
(hint: not cut & past posts from dpreview)
(Sorry to others: I don't want to seem touchy, but blatant, fact free conjecture isn't helpful to anyone.)
The Leica D-Lux 4 & Panasonic LX3 are essentially the same camera.
You can just choose to spend an extra 400 francs for the little red Leica badge if you like.
With you on this one...
Provide facts if you are downing a product.
Roland (and everybody else that posts their opinion what the OP should
buy), your personal opinion is just that, personal... and like assholes,
everybody has one
For example, I have been using the Four-Thirds system for 6 years and am
happy with the results. I also know what happens when the ISO is placed
above 800 - noise. Sometimes, that is a desired effect.
The Panasonic LX3 has gotten rave reviews but I was disappointed by the lens reach. I mean 60 mm at the telephoto end is like a showstopper for me.
The Canon Powershot G10 has a better reach (although not as high a wide angle as compared to LX3) but the bump up to 14.7 MP has apparently caused the picture quality to suffer at higher ISOs.
Am in a quandary.... should I go for LX3 or G10 (or maybe look in a different category itself and go for one of the mega zooms like Panasonic FZ28 or Canon SX 10 IS)?
Any advice? I have a Canon Powershot A85 (vintage 2005) which is essentially a simple point and shoot. Am looking to learn more features, tinker around a bit more with controls and experiment).
The LX3 is admirable for sitting out of the mega pixel fight.
I bought one as it's one of the only compacts that has been thoughtfully designed with the photographer in mind.
If you want big zooms though it's not for you - it's quite deliberatly been made with the lens it has on it - it's not an oversight.
Also the lens opens up to f2.0 & it's a Leica, which is another photographic winning point.
The manual, & apature priority settings are really great, as is the adjustable white balance and a lot of the other features.
It does get a little scruffy at the higher end of the iso's - but then what doesn't at this level/price in reality? 80 - 800 is very impressive though.
I'm a pro photographer used to working on serious digital equipment and I'm genuinely impressed with the quality of the images from it - essecially if captured in RAW format.
Having said all that, it's also hard to fault the G10. It's also a supurb compact camera with stunning image quality for the price.
Either one of these two and you've got yourself a winner, tbh