Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 
2853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 491


  Reply # 1618601 28-Aug-2016 09:10
One person supports this post
Send private message

timmmay:

30X optical zoom is a waste of time. 10X is probably a waste. A range of something like 24 - 105 is fine in a compact camera, if you need things bigger just stand closer. The higher the zoom range the lower the image quality, generally, but it's probably not a huge thing. The best quality DSLR lenses don't zoom, they're fixed, next best is zoom with a range of up to 3, then everything else.



Yes everything is a compromise.

Standing closer isn't always an option, that's where bigger optical zoom comes in. Carrying around a range of fixed lenses to cater for a variety of situations isn't practical for the average person.

As a compromise for the average person optical zoom like there is on the TZ70 is not a bad option. Certainly much better than digital zoom.




Sony Xperia X running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS 
Samsung Galaxy Tab S3
Nokia N1
Dell Inspiron 14z i5


385 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 208

Trusted

  Reply # 1618603 28-Aug-2016 09:11
3 people support this post
Send private message

timmmay:

 

30X optical zoom is a waste of time. 10X is probably a waste. A range of something like 24 - 105 is fine in a compact camera, if you need things bigger just stand closer. The higher the zoom range the lower the image quality, generally, but it's probably not a huge thing. The best quality DSLR lenses don't zoom, they're fixed, next best is zoom with a range of up to 3, then everything else.

 

 

 

 

Oh, that is just camera purist bolloks. I've got the a pretty decent (although I'm sure a camera snob would never be happy) SLR setup with prime and zoom lenses, but most of the time I don't carry it around with me. Having an ultra-zoom compact in my pocket most of the time allows me to capture a significant number of properly framed photo's and video's that would not be possible in any other way. If you have not used an ultra-zoom compact don't knock it, give one a try and you will find it liberating (I did). Saying "if you need things bigger just stand closer", really? So you can always just stand closer exactly when you need it? The OP is after good quality photo's, not $10k SLR quality (and if you try it you might just be shocked how good the quality of the pictures and videos these modern ultra-zoom compacts produce). What's the famous quote, "the best camera to use is the one you have on you?, well these new generation camera's allow you to have a camera that will do 90% of what an SLR will do in your pocket all the time.

 

 

 

 


14138 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2544

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1618606 28-Aug-2016 09:16
One person supports this post
Send private message

Not sure anyone needs an ultra zoom for a family holiday. I find wide lenses much much more useful. I don't take a DSLR on holiday any more, just the RX100. Did great all over the UK, wildlife, stonehenge, family stuff.





AWS Certified Solution Architect Professional, Sysop Administrator Associate, and Developer Associate
TOGAF certified enterprise architect
Professional photographer


385 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 208

Trusted

  Reply # 1618609 28-Aug-2016 09:20
Send private message

timmmay:

 

Not sure anyone needs an ultra zoom for a family holiday. I find wide lenses much much more useful. I don't take a DSLR on holiday any more, just the RX100. Did great all over the UK, wildlife, stonehenge, family stuff.

 

 

 

 

Oh, you don't "need" it, but once you have it you'll take some awesome shots you just did not have an option to do before.


14138 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2544

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1618614 28-Aug-2016 09:40
Send private message

I guess I have a different perspective from most, as a professional. I've taken hundreds of thousands of photos at weddings, maybe approaching a million photos, when I'm on holiday I take a few photos of the local highlights and the family. I've never needed to get a close up photo of something a really long way away. I used to take DSLR kit with me, I found I only used a standard zoom. Photos these days pretty much just go on Facebook, almost none get printed, so what's the point of taking hundreds?

 

What can you get with a superzoom? A well cropped bird, animal, detail of a building? Maybe someone a long way away if you're standing in the wrong spot?

 

Anyone wants a superzoom or has a use, sure get one, but if you have to balance priorities in a camera I would put it down the list, behind OIS, large sensor, small size, etc.





AWS Certified Solution Architect Professional, Sysop Administrator Associate, and Developer Associate
TOGAF certified enterprise architect
Professional photographer


385 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 208

Trusted

  Reply # 1618624 28-Aug-2016 10:37
Send private message

timmmay:

 

Anyone wants a superzoom or has a use, sure get one, but if you have to balance priorities in a camera I would put it down the list, behind OIS, large sensor, small size, etc.

 

 

 

 

Sure, I absolutely agree and its hard to believe a compromise between cost, size, sensor, battery is possible. But after using one of these for quite a while I am still amazed at the quality of the output for something that fits in a pocket. Have a look at the review below and remember this is half the cost of one half decent SLR lens and it fits in the pocket. For me, it means I can take good photo's without the, well I don't have my SLR so its the cellphone camera only problem. Hey, modern phones have comparatively excellent camera's, but the lack of a large sensor and optical zoom means I would never rely solely on that if I was going on holiday when this option is so cheap and effective.

 

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_cybershot_dsc_wx500_review/

 

 


2782 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 120


  Reply # 1618626 28-Aug-2016 10:44
Send private message

A micro 4/3 is a good travel camera (ala Olympus PEN series), the functionality of a DSLR with the (mostly) compact size of a point & shoot.

 

 





14138 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2544

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1618632 28-Aug-2016 10:48
Send private message

stevenz:

 

A micro 4/3 is a good travel camera (ala Olympus PEN series), the functionality of a DSLR with the (mostly) compact size of a point & shoot.

 

 

I looked at them. For me, they were a little smaller and lighter than a DSLR, but were still large enough to need their own bag or space in a larger bag. Smaller cameras like the RX100 fit in a pocket, or into my regular backpack.





AWS Certified Solution Architect Professional, Sysop Administrator Associate, and Developer Associate
TOGAF certified enterprise architect
Professional photographer


385 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 208

Trusted

  Reply # 1618634 28-Aug-2016 10:51
Send private message

timmmay:

 

stevenz:

 

A micro 4/3 is a good travel camera (ala Olympus PEN series), the functionality of a DSLR with the (mostly) compact size of a point & shoot.

 

 

I looked at them. For me, they were a little smaller and lighter than a DSLR, but were still large enough to need their own bag or space in a larger bag. Smaller cameras like the RX100 fit in a pocket, or into my regular backpack.

 

 

 

 

I must agree with this one, If I'm having to carry a separate camera bag it might as well be the SLR with a travel lens (or the full backpack). Otherwise the camera should be "in-pocket".


Mad Scientist
19004 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2469

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1618635 28-Aug-2016 10:54
Send private message

noroad:

timmmay:


Not sure anyone needs an ultra zoom for a family holiday. I find wide lenses much much more useful. I don't take a DSLR on holiday any more, just the RX100. Did great all over the UK, wildlife, stonehenge, family stuff.



 


Oh, you don't "need" it, but once you have it you'll take some awesome shots you just did not have an option to do before.



In decent bright day light.

87 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 36


  Reply # 1618671 28-Aug-2016 13:25
Send private message

joker97:

surfisup1000:


danza: Personally I'd save money and buy a smartphone with a decent camera. As a lot of the higher end smartphone cameras are comparable to point and shoot nowadays especially in daylight/general use.


In optimal conditions and subjects, phone cameras do a good job and may be considered comparable.


I wouldn't agree they are as good in 'general' use , as that includes fast moving subjects, cloudy days, and low light conditions -- all situations where camera phones fail in my view. 



Point and shoot is no better than phone cameras here. Micro 4/3rds may be better though I have no experience or intention of trying those out.



Yep thats kinda what I was getting at. Its mostly about the convenience of having a smartphone with a decent camera on you all the time vs another thing to bring around. Definitely better to have a dedicated camera on you if you want quality but most of the time people would rather just pull out their phone to take a photo instead of having to haul another piece of equipment around.

I mean if you feel like they will remember to bring the extra camera every time they go out then a dedicated camera will most likely be better (that wx500 looks awesome for the size). Otherwise I feel like the money can be better spent elsewhere.


5069 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2062


  Reply # 1618976 29-Aug-2016 09:51
Send private message

I have the predecessor to this

 

http://www.panasonic.com/nz/consumer/cameras-camcorders/lumix-digital-cameras/tough/dmc-ft6gn.html

 

Takes great photos in any conditions I have tried.  E.g. long distance focus on small objects from a bobbing kayak, indoor graduation photos from up the back, macro shots of small parts, underwater footage





Mike

1068 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 262


  Reply # 1618983 29-Aug-2016 10:03
Send private message

nzjez:

 

The TZ80 is the ideal travel camera, TZ stands for travel zoom and it will zoom up to 40X optical.It also has 4K Video, Post Focus options, and a touch screen.However its not ideal in low light as it has a tiny sensor compared to the Sony RX100 , which would be my second choice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Graham Houghton who has a Youtube channel has had issues with several of the Panasonics getting dust on the sensor.    He thinks it is due to the big zoom lens sucking in dust as it extends and retracts.    He made the comment about the TZ70 that he will not be buying any more from that range.     This guy knows what he is talking about & even pulls these cameras apart to clean sensors!

 

 

 

What about one of the waterproof cameras?     Maybe the FT6 from Panasonic.     Much shorter zoom range & takes photos that are good enough.      All the zooming is internal.

 

Tough,   Waterproof.


370 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 36


  Reply # 1619102 29-Aug-2016 13:26
Send private message

noroad:

 

timmmay:

 

stevenz:

 

A micro 4/3 is a good travel camera (ala Olympus PEN series), the functionality of a DSLR with the (mostly) compact size of a point & shoot.

 

 

I looked at them. For me, they were a little smaller and lighter than a DSLR, but were still large enough to need their own bag or space in a larger bag. Smaller cameras like the RX100 fit in a pocket, or into my regular backpack.

 

 

 

 

I must agree with this one, If I'm having to carry a separate camera bag it might as well be the SLR with a travel lens (or the full backpack). Otherwise the camera should be "in-pocket".

 

 

I have bought into micro four thirds, and I'm loving it.  As I see it compacts have been sort of killed off by good phone cameras, and SLR's are really great but TOO LARGE for me for traveling. The quality of photos I'm getting from my OM-D is amazing to me anyway, optical image stabilized night shots that are sharp at insanely slow shutter speeds and handheld. 

 

Some examples below all the shots are handheld 

 

Some night shots in Christchurch during a resent light festival 

 

https://goo.gl/photos/tTbsKt7YX4gkevdZ9 f/3.5 0.625 s 14 mm ISO1600

 

https://goo.gl/photos/vXQSZUiSWwcKxVZP9  f/3.5 1/4 14 mm ISO1600

 

https://goo.gl/photos/uZgjWoVKyMdp4iHu6 f/5.6 1/3 42 mm ISO1600

 

Photo of bee

 

https://goo.gl/photos/daDpfTDS4upvZwwT7 f/6.3 1/320 150 mm ISO200

 

 

 

 


939 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 26


  Reply # 1642944 29-Sep-2016 21:16
Send private message

PANiCnz:

 

I have intentionally excluded the Sony CyberShot DSC-RX100 from consideration as it doesn't seem to offer as good value for money as the options above

 

 

 

There are four versions (mk1/mk2/mk3/mk4) of the RX100, and each time they've basically been the trend setter in their class (that only very recently has the competition been starting to try and catch up with). Undoubtedly great value for money (you can find the older versions quite cheaply on eBay now) if it has what you're looking for. 





1 | 2 
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.