So i'm looking for a new digi cam. I've got a 2.1 mp Olympus right now that i'd like to replace.

I can get the Sony DSCF707 for a really good price. At 5 mp, its a great camera, but i'm wondering if i'll really need all the extra "jazz". The 4mp alternatives i've looked at look pretty decent for quite a bit less.

I guess my question is, for a normal 4 x 6 or 5 x7 print, will a 4mp vs. 5mp picture's difference really be noticeable?

My understanding is if it's a high detail picture i.e. a picture of a circuit board with lots of traces and components then yes, if it’s a family picture at a few feet and the background is somewhat important but won’t make or break the shot then no. Don’t take that as pictures of people aren’t important but ones face, body and clothing don’t tend to have a huge amount of detail that needs to be separated and super clear.

No. Not at that small. If you want to start printing 8x10's or bigger, then maybe. Look Here.

Do you mean the Sony DSC-F717 or the Sony DSC-F707, as the DSC-F707 has been discontinued for quite a while.

Once you get to that price level you are not paying extra money to get extra pixels, you are paying for a camera with a bigger and better lense. In my experience having a good big lense is very important.

When I bought my current digital camera (an Olympus D-600L) 5 years ago I bought the camera with the largest/best lense I could find. I have not regretted my decision to spend the extra. Despite the fact that it only has 1.3 mega pixels, it is still taking pictures on par with the average consumer digital cameras available now.

If I had spent a couple of hundred $100 less I would probably have had to replace it a couple of years ago.

P.S. I'm hoping to be upgrading to a Canon 10D + a 28-135mm image stabilized lense next month. If I can convince myself that spending $2500 on a camera is a sensible thing to do...

Hi!!

I got a F707 last year and it's wonderfull!! I really appreciate the ability to get extra lens to further improve the already amazingly crisp 5x zoom. The onboard flash is great (compared to smaller models). It's well built and most of all, battery lasts forever!! 3 hours of continuous use!! Some will say that AA Nimh batteries are more available, but doing a day of shooting without even changing battery is great too ;-)

Now, If I had to choose between 707 and 717, I'd get a 717. Maybe a little bit more expensive, but I got my 707 for 200$ more than what is the 717 now ;-/ Plus, you get 128Meg+ support for memory sticks (707 support 128 max, not the new 256 or 512) and hotshoe flash receptacle (not bound to Sony flash) and unlimited lenght video (which is great if you don't have camcorder... 25 minutes of movie on a 128M stick)

As for the 4 vs 5 megapixels, you can see the difference for large prints (16x20). What is different for small formats, is that you can crop a little bit more from the original shot to improve composition of the picture without noticeable degradation of quality. If I remember correctly, it is recommended to keep at least 200 to 300 dot per inch on printed pictures. so for 5x7, you need 1500x2100 which is 3 megapixels or so...


You can read more at www.dpreview.com.

So unless you have rally good deal on 707, I'd recommend getting the 717 (the are around 749$ US right now)

Patrick

It's true about the lenses. My friend has a digital SLR and we did some comparison shots between his good lenses and his not so good lenses. I was very surprised. The good lens appeared to have like twice the resolution around the edges of the image along with much less chromatic abberation (color fringing)

The imaging and processing chips are commodities. What's really important is the lens and usability. I think a good rule of thumb is to stick with the traditional film/optics companies like Olympus, Nikon and Canon.

-Dylan

Get the 24-85 F3.5-4.5 lens instead of the 28-135IS.

It's sharper, lighter, and more contrasty (all good things), and is compact enough to still permit use of the built-in camera flash. The 28-135 partially blocks the flash, and just isn't as good overall.

I have the 28-135, and wish I'd gotten the 24-85 instead for my "small" lens.

My main lenses are the standard L series zoom trio: 16-35, 24-70, 70-200-IS, all with constant F2.8 maximum aperatures. But those are all big and heavy, and definitely block the built-in flash.

Cheers

I splurged about a year ago and got an Olympus E-20N 5MP. Best investment I've made for my ameture photography. I love it to death. It's quality is awesome. And now you can get them for abotu $1200 (prolly out of many peoples ranges still). In all reality, unless you are doing lots of photo manipulation or printing REALLY large stuff, there's no needs. (I can have a friend do a 36" print at 100dpi and it looks wonderful).

Get the 24-85 F3.5-4.5 lens instead of the 28-135IS.

It's sharper, lighter, and more contrasty (all good things), and is compact enough to still permit use of the built-in camera flash. The 28-135 partially blocks the flash, and just isn't as good overall.

I have the 28-135, and wish I'd gotten the 24-85 instead for my "small" lens.

My main lenses are the standard L series zoom trio: 16-35, 24-70, 70-200-IS, all with constant F2.8 maximum aperatures. But those are all big and heavy, and definitely block the built-in flash.

Thanks for that. I have to admit I hadn't even considered the 24-85 as a possibility.

All the L lenses are definitely out of my range at the moment and I think they would be wasted on me anyway. This is my first SLR so I have got a lot of learning to do.

Whatever I get needs to cover at least the same focal length that my Olympus covered, which is 36-110mm (35mm equivalent). With the 1.6x multiplier on the 10D that means 22.5-69mm.

So I think I need to get a zoom to cover the majority of the range. I think I also need to buy a wide angle prime to cover the bottom end, as with the 1.6x multiplier none of the affordable zooms go low enough. I would like to get a 20mm f2.8 USM, but I'm not sure whether I can afford it at the moment, especially at the rip-off prices they are sold at here in the UK (I'm thinking about buying the wide angle in the US later).

Much of my photography (excluding snapshots) is of buildings and landscapes (with the odd macro shot). I don't really go in for portraits and I am never going to use it in a studio. I tend to spend most of my time at the extremes of the zoom on my Olympus and am often frustrated that it doesn't go far enough in either direction. Am I thinking about the right sort of range of lenses ?

Despite what you say about the about the 28-135IS I am still tempted by it. I very rarely do any flash photography and I'm not worried about the extra weight. How much sharper/more contrastly is the 24-85 ? The first big thing that I am going to be doing after getting this new kit is going off to Seattle for three weeks on holiday so I like the idea of having the IS to bail me out of some of the ham-fisted efforts I am likely to make when using my first SLR.

Perhaps I'm putting too much faith in technology ;-)

I'm off to Seattle on June 23rd, but I doubt whether I'll be able to get the camera until sometime in May, as I haven't joined the end of the pre-order queue yet (and Canon UK have yet to ship any 10D stock).

The thing about IS, is that it isn't normally needed on the shorter zoom ranges. And on longer zoom ranges, the 24-85 is between .5 and 1.0 stops faster than the 28-135-IS -- so having the IS just cancels out the slower lens speed, giving the same net effect in a lower quality lens. And IS is tough on batteries.. one can shoot all weekend (500+ shots) on a single battery without IS, but with it one might easily go through two batteries per day.

But IS has that coolness factor, I suppose..

Figure it this way: you'll probably buy a longer zoom next year, so the tiny amount you give up (85mm vs. 135mm) is only going to be a short term thing.

Don't worry much about the wide angle for now -- 24mm is good enough, but 28mm is NOT wide enough (another black mark on the 28-135).

But if you really desperately want one anyway, I'll sell you mine!

Quite the sales job, eh?

> I very rarely do any flash photography

That was the case here too, until I got a good enough camera (D60). Using the built-in flash on a tiny point-and-shoot just gives tons of red-eye and not terribly good effect.

But even the built-in ETTL on the D60 (and 10D) is a huge leap above that. I now use flash as much as possible, mostly as "fill" lighting to brighten faces and help even out overly contrastly scenes (eg. anything close with sunlight involved). The net effect on my photography has been nothing short of total revelation.

But since most of my lenses block (or partially block) the built-in flash, I frequently find myself lugging along my bulky shoe-mount external flash for use with them -- thus the regret for not having purchased the 24-85mm.

Cheers

The thing about IS, is that it isn't normally needed on the shorter zoom ranges. And on longer zoom ranges, the 24-85 is between .5 and 1.0 stops faster than the 28-135-IS -- so having the IS just cancels out the slower lens speed, giving the same net effect in a lower quality lens. And IS is tough on batteries.. one can shoot all weekend (500+ shots) on a single battery without IS, but with it one might easily go through two batteries per day.

I had wondered about battery consumption. None of the reviews I have read mention what IS does to battery life.

The blurb I had read said the IS gives you the equivalent of 1.5-2.0 stops.

But IS has that coolness factor, I suppose..

It certainly does. When I mentioned to my boss that I was getting the 10D he said "You are getting an IS lense, aren't you ?".

Figure it this way: you'll probably buy a longer zoom next year, so the tiny amount you give up (85mm vs. 135mm) is only going to be a short term thing.

Don't say things like that...

...I knew this was going to be an expensive move !

Don't worry much about the wide angle for now -- 24mm is good enough, but 28mm is NOT wide enough (another black mark on the 28-135).

Yeah, the 28mm (45mm with the 1.6x) would leave me well short of the 36mm I am used to. However the 24mm (38mm with the 1.6x) would still leave me short of what I'm used to, and I already often wish I could go wider than 36mm. So I think I'll end up getting a wide prime when I get to Seattle anyway, whichever zoom I buy :-(

But if you really desperately want one anyway, I'll sell you mine!

By the time you ship it from CA to UK and I frett about problems of getting a CA sourced lense repaired in the UK it wouldn't be worth it...

Quite the sales job, eh?

Indeed.

Why does life have to be so complicated

The IS on the newest "L" lenses gives 2-3 stops of latitude, but on this 28-135-IS lens it's more like 1 - 1.5 stops max, and lacks some of the other advanced IS functionality (like tripod detection, panning compensation).

Cheers

Hmmm. I get the feeling I need to find a decent camera shop that has a D60/10D and actually have a play with both of these lenses.

Anyone recommend a good camera shop in the London/Surrey/Berkshire area where I can actually get my hands on a decent range of kit ?

Jessops in Oxford Street always have a good selection (as do most Jessops shops).

If you fancy a drive, how about a trip to Sussex (Haywards Heath) to see Park Camera. Got my 1V, 70-200L (non-IS) and my 100-400L IS from them a couple of years ago. Always have a good stock and reallyknowledgable folks.

I saw an EOS 1Ds on email for 2000quid last week. Now that's a bargain as it retails for 7k. Not bad for a 11mp camera :-)

If you fancy a drive, how about a trip to Sussex (Haywards Heath) to see Park Camera. Got my 1V, 70-200L (non-IS) and my 100-400L IS from them a couple of years ago. Always have a good stock and reallyknowledgable folks.

That sounds like a good plan, they also have a good deal on the 10D + 28-135IS at only £1650.

Oh yeah, the IS on the 28-135 is also a lot slower than on the L series -- takes about 2 seconds to stabilize, which basically means a minimum 2 second self-inposed shutter lag when using it. By comparism, lag when shooting with non-IS is about 0.1 seconds on the 10D.

Cheers

Is it still 2 seconds if you have pre-focused ?

The IS kicks in when the shutter button is depressed midway. So if you have the camera set up to pre-focus on a half press, then after two seconds it's all ready to fire quickly. And draining the battery while it spins away..

Get the 24-85 F3.5-4.5 lens instead of the 28-135IS.

I'm pleased to say that I bought my EOS-10D and 24-85 F3.5-4.5 earlier today. When I went into the shop to buy them I was sit undecided on which lense to buy.

My choice was force, because they didn't have a 28-135 in stock...

...I was already leaning towards the 24-85 anyway, as it covers the same range that I am used to. I also tried the Sigma 16-35, but the auto focus was just so much faster on the Canon.

I have to say that the 10D is possibly the most desirable bit of kit I have ever owned. I think it is the first thing to eclipse the empeg MK2 in sheer well built, well designed solidness. Gorgeous...

P.S. why do sales people feel the need to try and sell a product to you even when you have told them you are going to buy it ?

Good stuff, Andy!

I'm really scratching my eyes out trying to resist picking one up -- I already have the D60, and, willpower permitting, I plan to hold out for the next upgrade rather than this one. But I really really want one..

Cheers

Of course, now that makes one more person added to the ranks of those trying to work out a convenient way to use the Empeg as a photo dump when on road trips..

-ml

Of course, now that makes one more person added to the ranks of those trying to work out a convenient way to use the Empeg as a photo dump when on road trips.

Haha that's good. But it won't hold that many 10MB RAW pictures. Well, it WILL, but yeah.

I happen to always bring my laptop, 2 extra sets of NiMH batteries, and a charger with my USB cable to transfer the pictures over. Takes about 40 minutes to transfer the full 1GB Microdrive over to the laptop. I need to find a new PCMCIA adapter that can take CF2 since my Microdive PCMCIA adapter disappeared.

I think you need to wait for a Canon camera with an Ethernet port then

I'm pleased to say that I bought my EOS-10D and 24-85 F3.5-4.5 earlier today. When I went into the shop to buy them I was sit undecided on which lense to buy.

My choice was forced, because they didn't have a 28-135 in stock...

...I was already leaning towards the 24-85 anyway, as it covers the same range that I am used to. I also tried the Sigma 16-35, but the auto focus was just so much faster on the Canon.

Ok, question for Mark here.

I haven't done too much playing with my camera/lens yet, but even so I am beginning to wonder whether I have made a mistake with the lens. Coming from a non-SLR background I am at the moment very reluctant to resort to a tripod.

I am also not very good at avoiding camera shake when handheld at much below 1/90th of a second. Taking photos outside today (it was somewhat overcast) I wasn't often able to go as fast as 1/90th, so most of the pictures suffered from at least some degree of camera shake. Most of the shots were with the lens wide open.

Would the IS on the 28-135 have bailed me out in these situations ? How low a shutter speed would I get away with with the IS in these sort of conditions ?

How much would a monopod help me ? (I think I'd be more likely to use a monopod than a tripod)

I guess when I get the 20mm f/2.8 it will be useful in these sorts of conditions ?

Do please tell me if I'm just being naive or silly

On a plus note, the pictures that I didn't blur are beautiful. I can't get over how wonderfully smooth and detailed the images are. I am very impressed with this camera.

P.S. I know I have a lot to learn, for instance it has occured to me that all my shots today were at 100 ISO, so I guess I could have helped myself by using 200 or 400 ISO.

P.P.S. Why doesn't the 10D have the ISO value permanently displayed on the LCD display ? Seems like a silly omission to me, every other important setting is there.

Coming from a non-SLR background I am at the moment very reluctant to resort to a tripod.

You shouldn't need to (most of the time).

I am also not very good at avoiding camera shake when handheld at much below 1/90th of a second.

Join the club. Actually, I'm getting pretty decent at minimizing camera shake during slow shutter speeds when I don't have a tri/monopod handy. I took a tip from winter biathletes (you know, those nutters that go around xcountry skiing and target shooting) -- breath slow, take the picture after you've exhaled, and after your heartbeat (I've got about 1/2 second to a full second between heartbeats, depending on how much activity I've been doing, which is plenty of time). In addition to that, stabilize the camera as much as possible by tucking your elbows into your chest -- don't let them flap in the wind. If you slouch a bit, you can even use your tummy as a bit of a rest for your elbows (this may be easier for some people than others ). Of course, if there's something to lean against, lean against it -- use your body as the tripod.

How much would a monopod help me ? (I think I'd be more likely to use a monopod than a tripod)

Probably a bit in this case. One option that you could try is a small tripod that you can double as a monopod by just extending one leg. I have a small Gitzo tripod that I bought for my recent trip to Costa Rica, which I used as a monopod on occasion. It's not much bigger than my monopod, and it gave me more flexibility than just having a monopod.

P.S. I know I have a lot to learn, for instance it has occured to me that all my shots today were at 100 ISO, so I guess I could have helped myself by using 200 or 400 ISO.

That would have helped.

Hi Andy!

Since you have a 10D, the first thing you can do to greatly reduce the effects of camera shake, is to bump the ISO up to 200 or 400 when not in direct sunlight --> doubling/quadrupling the shutter speed.

Next thing to keep in mind is, this is a full 35mm format SLR (even if the sensor itself is smaller than 35mm, the geometries are all the same), and so it will exhibit very little depth of field at wide aperatures. If you've been using a smaller point and shoot digicam before, then you'll have been spoiled by the immense depth of field (aka. Depth of Focus) inherent in such designs. On the other hand, you'll probably also have been frustrated by the inability to use depth of field to isolate or emphasize a subject on occasion. No more.

Next, you'll need to practice eliminating camera shake. I use a monopod and or tripod whenever feasible, especially for landscape work, but good body posture and holding the camera correctly can combat shake a fair amount. Tuck your elbows straight down and hard into your chest when taking photographs.

My first hundred or so photos were quite blurry, even with the IS lens. But I've learned since then, and get excellent crisp photos much of the time now.

Cheers

And, oh, if you're still in doubt by the time the Euromeet comes around, I'll gladly swap lenses with you at par.

Cheers!

And, oh, if you're still in doubt by the time the Euromeet comes around, I'll gladly swap lenses with you at par.

Ironically while you are over for the Euromeet, I'll be over in Seattle for three weeks holiday. Which is one of the key reasons I now have the 10D...

bump the ISO up to 200 or 400 when not in direct sunlight

I keep forgetting that I have changed the ISO. I'm on P mode about to take a shot, when I suddenly think "my, that's a fast shutter speed". Then I realise that it's still on 3200 after some playing about earlier. Like I said earlier, it would be good if the LCD displayed the ISO all the time.

On the other hand, you'll probably also have been frustrated by the inability to use depth of field to isolate or emphasize a subject on occasion. No more.

Indeed. Most of my best photos taken with my Olympus have shallow depths of field. Because the only manual control I had over the camera was minor exposure adjustments I always had to "trick" it into giving me a shallow DOF. Being able to choose a DOF myself, without having to do wacky thing is great.

I need to learn some restrain though and remember that a shallow depth of field isn't always what is required or desired

Looks like there is going to be some decent weather in the UK over the next few days, so I think I'll be leaving the office early and getting some more practice in.

Monopods help heaps and are usually pretty compact. If you can try one out in the shop, that'd be best.

Hmm, do monopods and tripods help... I consider a small tripod invaluable (Velbon 343E for instance). I haven't bothered with a monopod but I'd feel comfortable investing in one for hiking/climbing trips. I can hand-hold a shot for a rock-steady and tack sharp shot at 1/30s. I used to be able to do slower. But I still love using a tripod. Much less anxiety when you really want to get a shot down. Plus they're an absolute necessity if you an to take multiple shots from the same position/angle. Or make small variations based off previous shots.

When not armed with a tripod, the suggestions givin in the thread are classic. You can also rest your camera on a flat surface and use its timer, brace yourself against a fixed object such as a wall or tree, brace part of the camera body and/or lense against same (creatiing a a three-point contact with the object by using the camera body and end of lense (or lense hood)) - this works especially well with trees.

One of the best shots I've ever taken was in Venice with the camera sitting on a ledge on a bridge. I manually held the shutter open for 2 seconds (timed it by eye ) Tht was with a a film-based SLR (which I've used for most of my shooting). I'm using a Nikon 5700 right now until DSLRs climb to the levels of quality I'm looking for and drop to the prices I'm comfortable with. The consumer-DSLRs aren't there on technical merit yet.

Bruno