Best Non-SLR digital camera

[VuONG]

rirwin your 40d setup looks very similar to my 40d setup

[jonle714]

nice, rirawin. is it really as slow as people say it is?

[eff]

Rirawin, your camera takes pretty decent pictures i must say. Coming from a compact camera. Quite impressive! Too bad that isn't unavailable in my country or else i will seriously consider getting it. Seen pics from d-lux 3, GRD and GRD2 but picture quality doesn't come close to yours. Maybe i haven't seen the really good ones.

[ChadR]

wait so you bought a g9 to take picture on auto mode? that's awesomely retarded. way to spend $500 champ.

450. and I plan on learning a little bit more about photography so I am happy with my purchase.

[Pandemonium]

any competitors to teh DP1 that won't take as long to write a RAW?

[home]

alright, dropped into a store and checked out the g9 in person. build was impressive, but probably a bit larger than what i wanted. its not pocketable, so id be more inclined to go with a small DSLR over it (which isn't what i had in mind for travel).

i'm now looking into the lumix lx2 (the pana-leica). seems to have most of the features i'm after (decent manual interface, yeah?), but i have heard there are issues with noise. how bad is it?

ive read that the lx3 may be released in sept/oct (photokina anyone?) - would it be worth waiting or are there other cameras out there i should be looking at?

the ricoh gx200 looks tempting, but will be a nice hit more expensive than the lx2/3..

[aaronS]

the ricoh gx200 looks tempting, but will be a nice hit more expensive than the lx2/3..

I'm looking into the gx200 as well but i just can't see myself spending so much for my everday digital

but as far as the reviews go it seems awesome especially if you like the ricoh look.

[raWorkshop]

Any advice if I'm looking for a higher zoom point and shoot? I'm used to 16-20x lenses on video equipment and I just feel like a buffoon trying to frame anything less than 7x.

[Paean]

alright, dropped into a store and checked out the g9 in person. build was impressive, but probably a bit larger than what i wanted. its not pocketable, so id be more inclined to go with a small DSLR over it (which isn't what i had in mind for travel).

i'm now looking into the lumix lx2 (the pana-leica). seems to have most of the features i'm after (decent manual interface, yeah?), but i have heard there are issues with noise. how bad is it?

ive read that the lx3 may be released in sept/oct (photokina anyone?) - would it be worth waiting or are there other cameras out there i should be looking at?

the ricoh gx200 looks tempting, but will be a nice hit more expensive than the lx2/3..

have been using lx2 . didnt find too much an issue with the noise i believe its going for pretty cheap too ? haven been able to get my hands on the g9 ... looks impressive !

[aizan]

Any advice if I'm looking for a higher zoom point and shoot? I'm used to 16-20x lenses on video equipment and I just feel like a buffoon trying to frame anything less than 7x.

you're looking for something like the panasonic fz18 or fujifilm s100fs.

[fads]

nikon p6000 will shoot raw, competition to canon g9.

[aaronS]

rirawin, how pocketable is the sigma?

[Leeacto]

Random question:

I'm trying to use my G9 on manual. I want to take an action picture where the moving object looks still and everything behind it is blurred. I know the way to do the other way around is increasing shutter speed. How do I do it?

thanks

[kennmon]

Random question:

I'm trying to use my G9 on manual. I want to take an action picture where the moving object looks still and everything behind it is blurred. I know the way to do the other way around is increasing shutter speed. How do I do it?

thanks

having a fast shutter speed does not equal sharp back/foreground and blurry subject so that 2nd to last sentence is confusing/doesnt make sense.

you are trying to do a panned shot,

panning is when you track the subject with your camera

lets say its an f1 car (fun shooting by the way)

use a slower shutter speed (varies on how fast the subject is moving) and track it with your camera.

[chantheman]

anyone have an SD850? ive heard its better than the SD1000

[PQRS7]

camera phone isn't cutting it anymore

and I don't know anything about cameras/photographing

what are the differences and qualities between a ricoh GR II and a nikon D40?

will I really benefit from an SLR?

what's so good about the GRII?

all the shots I see from them are really sharp and clear, and nice colours?

someone please explain?

[highfructosecorn]

^ GRII is a fixed lens, so no zooming. It fills a bit of a niche market. I would say the D40 is much more versatile. Any actual point and shoot camera though would be better than what they put on most phones...

What are you going to use the camera for?

[airfrogusmc]

The best range finder digital camera is the Leica M8...

[Leeacto]

I can't say I'm a photo champ (understatement of the year), but I love my G9. Really easy to use Full manual controls so then u can experiment a lot

[homeboy]

I'm rocking a Cannon IXUS 70 and it's totally awesome. Takes great pictures, comes in a sexy all aluminum enclosure and is priced just right.

[aaronS]

The best range finder digital camera is the Leica M8...

granted its the only one released in at least 4 years i sure hope it is?

has anyone shot with it? how is image quality compared to the 5d?

[highfructosecorn]

^ didn't epson have one? or was that 4 years ago?

[aaronS]

^ didn't epson have one? or was that 4 years ago?

yea i believe beginning of 2004

[PQRS7]

^ GRII is a fixed lens, so no zooming. It fills a bit of a niche market. I would say the D40 is much more versatile. Any actual point and shoot camera though would be better than what they put on most phones...

What are you going to use the camera for?

no zooming?

what's the benefit of that?

also, why are all the GRII photos I see so nice?

I played with a D40 for a while, and none of the shots were as sharp as I wanted

[highfructosecorn]

Well like I said, the GR2 is sort of a niche product, so the people with the money to drop on it typically are pretty capable or enthusiastic photographers. Probably the biggest factor in the "sharpness" of an image is the experience of the photographer in choosing the right aperture/shutter speed/focus for the shot he wants, and then having a steady enough hand to take it.

The sharpness of the lens and sensitivity of the ccd won't really make a difference until you get the hang of being a photographer.

[party pooped]

Just to put it out there... the Sigma DP1 with its large sensor takes amazing photos. DOP is pretty good for a point and shoot with a f/4... but... it's very very very slow in terms of LCD speed, focusing, shooting, and writing (RAW, zzZz).

I borrowed a DP1 for a weekend and I was initially overwhelmed with how slow the unit was. But it turns out, for my style of daily point and shooting, it didn't really matter. If you normally take the time to frame and shoot, this camera is "perfect." Otherwise, most people will find this camera to be way too slow.

High ISO is surprisingly good on this camera, but a small tripod is really recommended for night photography. Flash is bright and slow. Every photo will come out looking like Terry Richardson was behind the camera.

Also, a lot of the time, photos came out looking blown out and hot on screen, but the included software (Aperture and Lightroom doesn't support Sigma's RAW format still) does well in recovering the photos. I couldn't seem to figure out how to get consistent lighting even under the same lighting conditions.

P.S. My other camera is a 1DS-MII.

[dasper]

Right now id definitely go for the Sigma DP1. Color shots in artificial light at/above 400 iso often fall apart with the nasty Foveon color blotches but you can crank up the ISO in B&W and basically there is no other fixed lens digital that lets you control depth of field like that. Im waiting for Photokina but if nothing significant drops ill cop a DP1 or two.

In terms of user interface the Ricoh GRD rules all pocket cams. Whatever guy was bitching before about the GRD being for hipsters that dont care about image quality/noisy pics has no idea what hes talking about and probably just read some consumer digest report on how the measured noise levels were high. The noise is high because they dont reduce it with some crap, second rate, detail smearing in-camera noise reduction algorithm like almost every other compact digital. Thats what makes the PanaLeicas suck, the noise measures low but the fine detail is gone (yes, even in raw).

In terms of little cams ive had the Panasonic LC1 (Leica Digilux 2), Panasonic LX1 (Leica DLux 2), Sony V3, Ricoh GRD, etc and none of them come close to the classic film compacts like the Ricoh GR1, Contax T, etc. Each has one or two things it does well and generally sucks at everything else. Word on the street is that Nikon, Canon and Panasonic are working on APS sensored fixed lens digis so hopefully they drop soon.

If youve got a bit more cash cop the Leica M8. Its a flawed jewl but its the only digital camera that operates properly if youve got the old school flow. I had an Epson RD1 a long time ago and it was decent but its quite a pain in the ass to shoot wide. Used it for one project and sold the mofo.

Anyway film rules so ill be the first asshole to say buy an old film camera and a negative scanner and shoot away.

[highfructosecorn]

M8 is a little more than a bit more cash. I think if any of us COULD, we would grab one in a heart beat.

I would agree on the film cameras, with two caveats. First, unless you have your own development studio or access to one, you're at the mercy of the film developer, especially with color film. Second, for any beginner the best part about digital is that you have instant feedback, often even with some handy info like exposure histograms or whatever.

Also, the guy bashing the Ricohs eventually gave up. In the end it seemed like any setup not exactly like his DSLR was "wrong", which is never the case. I mean even those broken down plastic Lomo cameras make interesting shots...

[VuONG]

my friend has that sd 790 is and it is godly for reals. for just a general point and shoot type of stuff its really good

[dasper]

M8 is a little more than a bit more cash. I think if any of us COULD, we would grab one in a heart beat.

I would agree on the film cameras, with two caveats. First, unless you have your own development studio or access to one, you're at the mercy of the film developer, especially with color film. Second, for any beginner the best part about digital is that you have instant feedback, often even with some handy info like exposure histograms or whatever.

Also, the guy bashing the Ricohs eventually gave up. In the end it seemed like any setup not exactly like his DSLR was "wrong", which is never the case. I mean even those broken down plastic Lomo cameras make interesting shots...

For film if you have a dark bag and a bathroom the actual studio isnt the problem so much as most people dont want to take the effort to learn how to do it properly. Everyone loves instant feedback but based on my personal experience id say that often people who start with film learn from their mistakes more quickly while people that start with digital will often just end up with 10x more pics and 10x more crap.

Yeah the Ricohs are great, if they could stick a decent aps chip in a grd and give me a gr35d and a gr50d as well id be set for a loooong time. Well, at least until they managed to squeeze in a 24x36 chip. Nothing compares to all mechanical controls but for compacts the Ricohs are damn fast in operation.