|
|
|
|
kachoong
Dec 3, 2010, 6:07 PM
Post #26 of 27
(925 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
You're still not too late to the party. You know, I've gone back and forward between a few cameras. I was quite impressed with what was said for the P7000 but quite a few people said it had a very poor/slow automatic focus, especially in low light. Also the TL350 sounds great for fast-paced shooting and video... but then I saw all the reviews about how "blue" the stills were at all ISO settings and generally lower quality than the P95. It also claimed to have 60f/s in HD, which would be great for doing time-lapse stuff, but it doesn't actually support 60f/s.
So anyway, after all the looking, reviewing, reading and learning I'm still very much onboard with the P95. I'm sitting around waiting for a decent deal. Would be nice to get it for 350 or less.
Despite a lack of big zoom I think picture quality overall trumps everything. Besides, if we can crop a great image and still get a good pic of something further away, I'd prefer that than being able to zoom in on something but only get a bad quality image.
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Dec 3, 2010, 7:46 PM
Post #27 of 27
(919 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
Big zooms are over-marketed in PAS in my opinion. You rarely get decent pics. PAS already suffer from noise, inherent from the small chips. Add into this the small apertures – personally I don’t think PAS should use traditional f-stops, it’s very misleading. F-stop is just a ratio, the actual aperture size on a PAS at f/2.8 is tiny compared to full-frame or APS. So you have a huge zoom on a tiny camera with a tiny sensor and a tiny aperture… and how many PAS photographers carry around a tripod? The end result is a blurry subject.
I'd be more interesting in cramming the largest sensor I could in a tiny camera, and a wide angle for all the shots of friends and landscapes that you'll probably be using the camera for most.
|
|
|
|
|
|
