Alternatives to an SLR?

[lykaon78]

I'm thinking the Canon SD4000IS which is basically the S95 minus the Hybrid Stabilization and the Raw file capabilities. Any others?

 

[alkemyst]

I'm thinking the Canon SD4000IS which is basically the S95 minus the Hybrid Stabilization and the Raw file capabilities. Any others?

nothing like a S95..

 

[speedy2]

Go mess with an S95. I bought one. I sold my 40D. But wanted a compact I could fit in my pocket. And something the wife would be more comfortable using. S95 is about the only choice.

 

[Muse]

CHDK beta now available for versions 1.00E, 1.00H, and 1.00L.
http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=5900.0

Just in time for the eclipse. woot!

Here's some shots I made. Was fortunate that the cloudy weather cleared enough between shots. I was too lazy to fetch my tripod and set it up in the dark wet yard, but the high ISO performance of my Pentax K-x (coupled with trying my hardest to hold steady) came through with some decent hand held shots using the 55-300mm kit lens, almost all shots cranked out to 300mm:

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/sredir?uname=110090306825051457033&target=ALBUM&id=5553314349426201489&authkey=Gv1sRgCN74svPPj6i4fA&feat=email

These were shot between approximately 10:35PM and midnight PST in Berkeley, CA. The brighter ones were at 1600 ISO, the dim ones near the end at 6400. Play the slide show, default is 3 seconds, but configurable.

 

[Muse]

Exactly. I have an S95 now. I had an XT and then a 40D previously. I see no reason to get anything bigger than the S95 unless I go back to a DSLR. If you already have a DSLR and you're looking for something as a compact alternative, I don't see how you can choose any P&S larger than the S95.

You can get an ultra-compact super zoom and be pocketable and probably carry 4 of them in that dSLR's 10x's case.

This thread is about alternatives to one.

IMHO if one has a dSLR, it makes no sense to pick up something like a SX series or 4:3.

I pretty much am thinking along these lines. Except as Zorba says if you need real range in the wild such as hiking Denali or out in a national park and want wildlife pictures without lugging a DSLR + zoom. Or, as Corkyg says, you are traveling and want versatility without bulk and weight. For those an SX30is looks good. Absent those considerations, the S95 looks like a very sensible addition to my DSLR in that it's so portable (pocketable!) without giving up too much, including low light capability without flash.

Edit: I have a question. Imaging Resource's review of the S95 makes this statement:

Cycle time is pretty slow, taking 2.58 seconds per shot, averaged over 20 shots. In RAW mode, it's 2.88 seconds. In Continuous mode, the Canon S95 turns out 1.87 frames per second, which is pretty good, certainly better than the S90, which didn't quite manage one fps.

By "cycle time" do they mean time between shots when using flash? If it's shot to shot, how can you take 1.87 frames/second in continuous mode? Unless it's at a reduced resolution?

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/PS95/PS95A.HTM

 

[alkemyst]

either way an S95 has no real zoom capability.

 

[Muse]

either way an S95 has no real zoom capability.

3.8x optical is the spec I saw.

Any answer to my last post question at the end? Why does the review say it takes 2.58 seconds to cycle but takes 1.87 fps in continuous shooting mode? Clearly I'm not getting the paradigm. What is the difference?

 

[alkemyst]

continuous shooting mode <> real shot to shot.

Most cameras can burst off shots in continuous mode much faster than going through a new pre-focus/focus/flash/process phase.

 

[sixone]

Here's some shots I made. Was fortunate that the cloudy weather cleared enough between shots. I was too lazy to fetch my tripod and set it up in the dark wet yard, but the high ISO performance of my Pentax K-x (coupled with trying my hardest to hold steady) came through with some decent hand held shots using the 55-300mm kit lens, almost all shots cranked out to 300mm:

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/sred...01489&authkey=Gv1sRgCN74svPPj6i4fA&feat=email

These were shot between approximately 10:35PM and midnight PST in Berkeley, CA. The brighter ones were at 1600 ISO, the dim ones near the end at 6400. Play the slide show, default is 3 seconds, but configurable.

Went out with my dad and his SLR. Got there early and set up, were waiting for the eclipse to start when an ice halo formed around the moon. He couldn't get a pic of it, because he hadn't brought the right lens. Said he probably wouldn't have put it on anyway, because then he'd have to re-set up for the eclipse, and he wasn't sure he'd have time. My shots are the only ones we brought back.

He was either on the ground so that he could look up at his LCD, or hunching over his tripod using the right-angle viewfinder attachment. I had my swivel LCD, so I was sitting comfy in my chair with the tripod in front.

Clouds moved in on us just after the full eclipse. Good timing, because it was COLD.

1600 seems way high for such a bright object against a dark background. We started out at 400, then went higher as the moon dimmed. I don't think either of us went above 1600, even at the moon's darkest.

 

[alkemyst]

That's just proof most that own dSLR's are fundamental retards.

How the fuck to you set up for a once in a lifetime deal and leave behind lenses if you are serious?

 

[yhelothar]

That's just proof most that own dSLR's are fundamental retards.

How the fuck to you set up for a once in a lifetime deal and leave behind lenses if you are serious?

Not most, just her dad

 

[sixone]

That's just proof most that own dSLR's are fundamental retards.

How the fuck to you set up for a once in a lifetime deal and leave behind lenses if you are serious?

Since when are eclipses "once in a lifetime deals"?

You just lost any credibility to call anyone a retard.

 

[alkemyst]

Since when are eclipses "once in a lifetime deals"?

You just lost any credibility to call anyone a retard.

Well if they are going to stay up all night again they have another year to practice.

Be prepared for June 15, 2011.

 

[tommo123]

howdy all, thought i'd ask here

is there a superzoom camera like the canon sx30 (35 optical) but with 1080p recording instead of just 720p? i need a new camera before may.

ta all

 

[thespeakerbox]

I was in the same situation today. I got tired of my old P&S , and wanted something a little bigger to replace my dslr for everday. I found out that my BB (YMMV) was clearing out some not so old sony SX's. I picked up an hx1 , out the door for ~190. These were originally 399. If you can find one locally, the price/performance can't be beat.

I was going to original go with with the is s130 from canon, but couldnt get over the feel and looks. For the price, im sure it's an excellent camera, but it really reminds me of something my mom would put film during a 1990's school play.

 

[tommo123]

thanks, it's better than the the canon sx30 as far as video (only 720p on the canon) but doesn't have the kind of zoom i'd like. i'd prefer 30x + if poss

i had a look at the fuji hs10 which looks decent enough apart from no image stabilization when using the video function which according to trusted reviews means no full zoom video without a tripod and the hs20 isn't out yet afaik.

 

[mooncancook]

I sold all my P&S and bought the Sony NEX-5 with 18-55 lens. This is a true alternative to dSLR. I had a Canon S5 and Panny ZX7 before it, none of them come close to the IQ of my D90, and under low light the photos look unacceptable. The NEX5 perform very well under low light, even at high ISO it's almost as good as the D90. Only drawback is the cost of entry is a lot higher than P&S, but it's worth it imo.

 

[alkemyst]

I sold all my P&S and bought the Sony NEX-5 with 18-55 lens. This is a true alternative to dSLR. I had a Canon S5 and Panny ZX7 before it, none of them come close to the IQ of my D90, and under low light the photos look unacceptable. The NEX5 perform very well under low light, even at high ISO it's almost as good as the D90. Only drawback is the cost of entry is a lot higher than P&S, but it's worth it imo.

how do you carry it everywhere your ZX7 goes?

 

[mooncancook]

how do you carry it everywhere your ZX7 goes?

NEX5 is compact and light but definitely not pocketable. It's an excellent alternative to a dSLR but not as a good alternative to a compact P&S. For now I just use my smartphone as my pocketable P&S. I haven't missed my ZX7, yet.

 

[Rustican]

NEX5 is compact and light but definitely not pocketable. It's an excellent alternative to a dSLR but not as a good alternative to a compact P&S. For now I just use my smartphone as my pocketable P&S. I haven't missed my ZX7, yet.

i'm considering the NEX-3 myself. Did you get the wide angle pancake lens with the nex-5? Just wondering how well that performs in low light and how the distortion is on it. It seems to be the setup to get if you want the nex to be more portable.

 

[mooncancook]

i'm considering the NEX-3 myself. Did you get the wide angle pancake lens with the nex-5? Just wondering how well that performs in low light and how the distortion is on it. It seems to be the setup to get if you want the nex to be more portable.

Unfortunately I don't have the 16mm pancake lens, but even with the 18-55 I think the photos come out better than my friend's D40 w/ kit lens in low light indoor condition. Videos are excellent under low light too. If I'm buying now I'll definitely go with the 18-55 + 16 package coz it saves $150. Keep in mind that changing advance setting in the NEX is not as easy as in a dSLR. I get used to it, but you might want to look into other 4/3 system like the GF2. Also the handgrip on the NEX5 is much better than the NEX3, that's one of the reason I pick the 5 over the 3.

 

[CPForYou]

If you want a small P&S with some "decent" quality, I would say the Canon S95 like most here, but if you don't need the improvements, the Canon S90 Refurbished are going for under $300 nowadays.

The NEX-3 I think gets a little too big. I might as well carry a small digital SLR like the Canon T2i.

 

[abaez]

I just read on SD a YMMV Nex-3 deal at Target for $300. So some might want to check at their Target for one.

 

[GoatMonkey]

Back to the original topic, I am also considering a Sony NEX, or a Panasonic or Olympus Micro 4/3 camera.

At this point I'm leaning toward the Sony, mostly because it has the larger sensor. Any of the 3 can take an adapter for almost any lens you want if you want to do that. I would be more likely to just wait for other lenses to show up on the market that are specifically made for the camera though.

I don't agree that it is not pocket-able. It's not pocket-able in ONE pocket, especially with the larger lens attached, that's true. If you either use the pancake lens, or take the lens off, and put on caps, then it will fit in your other pocket. Especially if you are willing to wear cargo shorts or a jacket if it's cold. Much better than a camera bag.