help with a new Camera

[Michigan_tinkerbell]

Okay i left my camara in a park and now its gone so i need ot upgrade/get a new one. I take alot of pixs. I took 1000 in one day at Disney but my big passion is taking them t the NASCAR race. If your a fan you know the cars go about 200 mph so i need a good camara but i cant spend a ton of money.

I am looking at the Fuji s700 what are your thoughts on it?


Thanks for your help

Dianna

If that is not a good pick what wuld be a good pick under 300?

[YEKCIM]

I am looking at the Fuji s700 what are your thoughts on it?


Thanks for your help

Dianna

If that is not a good pick what wuld be a good pick under 300?

Fuji's are good cameras; I have one and it has served me very well. The S700 has a maximum shutter speed of 1/1000 second. The S6000fd has a top shutter speed of 1/4000 second, so you might want to consider it. It's about a hundred bucks more, though.

~YEKCIM

[DueyDooDah]

I like the specs on the S6000fd, specifically the sensor size and that it shoots RAW images. But, it's $100 more than the $300 you are looking at. If it does not fit you pocketbook, then I'd suggest looking to the Canon S3 IS. It is a wonderful camera (lots of people on this board will agree) and fits your budget. Although the s700 looks pretty nice, I think the specs on the S3 look a bit better.

[YEKCIM]

I like the specs on the S6000fd, specifically the sensor size and that it shoots RAW images. But, it's $100 more than the $300 you are looking at.

The S6000fd can be purchased online for slightly more than $300, shipped. The S700 runs a little more than $200 online.

~YEKCIM

[Groucho]

There is a $50 rebate on the S6000fd at the moment, bringing the final cost to $252 at Beach currently. Not a bad deal whatsoever.

For NASCAR photography, though, image stabilization might win out, I must admit... you're likely to have bright sunlight and want all the zoom you can get and something to steady your hands at that long zoom. Perhaps a "last year's" 12x IS camera might be a good fit.

[Michigan_tinkerbell]

okay we went ot Adray today and well i ended up ordering the Fujifilm FinePix S6000 Digital Camera
i really like the manual zoom on it and the ract you can make it manual if you wanted to. I endup getting it for 343 then the rebate of 50 then i have 5.5 gigs of SD memory cards i am going to try to sell for 50 bucks and then soem lins for my Kodak i am going ot sell for another 50 bucks so if i can get all that sold and the rebate i can get 150 back so it would make the camara 200 bucks.

So if you want some memory cards let me know i have a total of 5.5 gigs i am giong to sell for 50 bucks.

[boBQuincy]

NASCAR photography is not easy. Some cameras like to focus on the fence, some are too slow to lock focus on the cars in time. It sounds like your Fuji can be set to manual so you should be in good shape there.
Have fun!

http://www.mindspring.com/~edwardteach/Images/martin_0416.jpg

Here's one from the recent test day at Virginia International Raceway (taken with a Canon 30D and 70-200 f/4).

[LPZ_Stitch!]

For NASCAR photography, though, image stabilization might win out, I must admit... you're likely to have bright sunlight and want all the zoom you can get and something to steady your hands at that long zoom. Perhaps a "last year's" 12x IS camera might be a good fit.

You just can't bring yourself to say it ... can you? ;) :lmao:

[MarkBarbieri]

Why would image stabilization be useful for Nascar? I've never shot Nascar, but I would assume that you would need high shutter speeds to freeze the action. In those cases, IS would be superfluous.

I can also see the use for IS with longer exposure panning shots, but that would require a single-axis IS system, which I don't think any P&S cameras offer.

What am I missing?

[Groucho]

My image of the typical person taking a photo at a NASCAR event is someone sitting in the grandstands. In order to get a shot of the cars, you'll want a long zoom, and the IS will help steady the shot at that long zoom. Yes, you want a reasonably fast shutter, but from the grandstands, they're not moving all that quickly relative to the fan, and I can see IS being a benefit. Remember, Nascar is pretty much designed to be easy to watch on TV and easy to follow while sitting in one particular seat - taking pictures there is not like "normal" racing photography.

Of course, this is different if you're on the ground or the rare occasions when they tackle a road course, at which point it becomes more like shooting sports car racing, where you're closer to the cars and zoom is not as important. I've done a lot of photography at the Watkins Glen racetrack, and that's very different from shooting at a big oval surrounded by grandstands. (Though I've only ever been to one Nascar race, when we bought weekend tickets to see an sports car race on Saturday, and I don't think I even bothered bringing my camera with me. ;) )

[Michigan_tinkerbell]

Iwant to thank everyone for there help. Not sure if you know MIs or not (Michigan International Speedway) but we are between turns one and two. We get a good shot of them coming into Turn one and out of two and ohh in themiddle. Last year with the Kodak easy share I used alot of xoom (i had an attached zoom lens) and they were all shaky so i am going to really like the IS. I just hope i have enough time to play with it before the race. I am going to go to the Arca race on friday and play around taking pixs and then dump them on the lap top to see how they look.

Wish me luck.....

Thak you everyone for all the help i might need ore in the next week and a half.

[YEKCIM]

...so i am going to really like the IS.

Just to be clear, the Finepix S6000fd does NOT have IS; however, it will allow you to shoot at higher shutter speeds (up to 1/4000 second), and you will be able to boost your ISO, if needed, to accommodate that shutter speed. IMO, higher shutter speed trumps IS big time, with moving subjects, especially REALLY FAST moving subjects like race cars.

~YEKCIM

[Michigan_tinkerbell]

Just to be clear, the Finepix S6000fd does NOT have IS; however, it will allow you to shoot at higher shutter speeds (up to 1/4000 second), and you will be able to boost your ISO, if needed, to accommodate that shutter speed. IMO, higher shutter speed trumps IS big time, with moving subjects, especially REALLY FAST moving subjects like race cars.

~YEKCIM

OKay You are right nad i was wrong. It does not have IS but it does have

Picture Stabilization

Fast moving subject? No problem. Fujifilm's Picture Stabilization technology utilizes the heightened sensitivity of the FinePix S6000fd at ISO3200 and high-speed shutter settings to prevent camera shake or freeze subject movement, keeping blur to a minimum. This easy to access feature (selectable on the mode dial) lets the FinePix S6000fd choose the correct light sensitivity and best-matching shutter speed automatically, for the highest quality digital pictures.



I called it the wong thing. Sorry
I still want to take everyone for all the help

[MarkBarbieri]

Picture Stabilization? That reminds me of an amusing rant on DPreview (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0701/07010501notimagestabilization.asp)on the subject of misleading 'Image Stabilization' terms.

[YEKCIM]

Picture Stabilization? That reminds me of an amusing rant on DPreview (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0701/07010501notimagestabilization.asp)on the subject of misleading 'Image Stabilization' terms.

I agree, Mark. It's obviously marketing hype. My S5200 calls it "Anti-Blur" and I've never used it. I guess it is a useful feature, especially for a novice, since it ratchets the ISO up, in order to achieve a faster shutter speed, but I prefer to retain control over ISO myself.

Fuji does have an advantage over the PnS competition in that their larger sensors do allow cleaner high ISO images, which in turn allows faster shutter speeds, when necessary and addresses both subject movement *and* camera movement. IMO, they would do better to differentiate themselves from the competition, based on their strengths, rather than to promote the "bump up the ISO" feature as "image stabilization", which it is not.

As I believe Groucho said in a post some weeks ago, if Fuji would add *true* IS to their class-leading high ISO performance and quality optics, they could really clean up at the cash register (Groucho, forgive me if I mischaracterized what you wrote; I'm going from 52 year old memory, which ain't what it used to be, and was never really all that good anyway!).

At any rate, I think the S6000fd will be a fine camera for the OP's needs.

~YEKCIM

[LPZ_Stitch!]

I can also see the use for IS with longer exposure panning shots, but that would require a single-axis IS system, which I don't think any P&S cameras offer.

Just for the record (and, because I love talking abou it! ;) ), the Canon S3 does have Panning IS, which turns of the IS for horizontal movement but not vertical. It also works in the video mode for following a parade more smoothly.

However, you can't have "horizontal-only" IS; if there is such a thing on more expensive cameras...

I really love the long zoom of my S3 and find that most of my pictures are taken "out there." The IS has been indespensable.

What I don't like about Juji's "stabilization" is that although their cameras have definitely got a better high ISO than any other P&S, it's STILL noisier at ISO1600 or ISO3200 than at ISO100 or ISO200. I've seen lots of comparison pics between Fuji and Canon/Sony (NOT low-light pics; the Fuji's rule, there) where the Canon/Sony were less noisy simply because the ISO remained low thanks to good IS....

[MarkBarbieri]

he Canon S3 does have Panning IS,

I didn't know that. With the lens-based IS systems of Nikon and newer Canon lenses, there is a switch that allows the camera to pan. It senses the direction of motion and shuts off IS in that direction. If you pan horizontally, it stabilizes vertically. If you pan vertically, it stabilizes horizontally. If you pan diagonally, it just turns off.

[boBQuincy]

Stay away from the "picture stabilization" and keep the ISO down to 400 if possible. It's likely to be bright daylight and you shouldn't need a shutter speed faster than 1/500 or 1/1000.
Pre-focus the camera on a piece of asphalt and press the shutter when the car gets there. Pan if you feel you are good at it, or at least try a few panning shots at a slower shutter speed (like 1/125 or 1/250) to see if you like the effect.

And if the photos really don't come out that well let me know. A co-worker is going to MIS and she gets really good photos, I bet she won't mind sharing some.

[Groucho]

YEKCIM, that's absolutely right - I think that if Fuji added true IS, along with their recent switch to SD and xD memory card slot, I think their big-sensor cameras would pretty much become the de facto recommendation for anyone looking for a PnS. There's be little reason to even consider anything else.

I've seen lots of comparison pics between Fuji and Canon/Sony (NOT low-light pics; the Fuji's rule, there) where the Canon/Sony were less noisy simply because the ISO remained low thanks to good IS....
I'd like to see such a comparison - say, between an S3/H5 and a S6000fd. (Same megapixels, and the big-sensor Fuji.) Frankly, I don't buy it.

[LPZ_Stitch!]

I'd like to see such a comparison - say, between an S3/H5 and a S6000fd. (Same megapixels, and the big-sensor Fuji.) Frankly, I don't buy it.

Of course, I can't find it now ... but, regardless of how good a Fuji's ISO1600 is ... it's still noisier than an ISO200 on other cameras (just about any other camera).

I realize it's not an apples to apples comparison, but that's also my point. The stabilization of the Fuji forces higher ISO to get higher shutter speed. The lower the ISO, the better the pics from any camera looks....

[LPZ_Stitch!]

I didn't know that. With the lens-based IS systems of Nikon and newer Canon lenses, there is a switch that allows the camera to pan. It senses the direction of motion and shuts off IS in that direction. If you pan horizontally, it stabilizes vertically. If you pan vertically, it stabilizes horizontally. If you pan diagonally, it just turns off.

With the S3 it *just* allows horizontal panning, and you specifically have to turn it on in the menu. Having the camera sense what direction it's panning is probably something that's out of reach (cost-wise) for a P&S.

[Anewman]

What I don't like about Juji's "stabilization" is that although their cameras have definitely got a better high ISO than any other P&S, it's STILL noisier at ISO1600 or ISO3200 than at ISO100 or ISO200. I've seen lots of comparison pics between Fuji and Canon/Sony (NOT low-light pics; the Fuji's rule, there) where the Canon/Sony were less noisy simply because the ISO remained low thanks to good IS....

I'd like to see such a comparison - say, between an S3/H5 and a S6000fd. (Same megapixels, and the big-sensor Fuji.) Frankly, I don't buy it.

1600ISO FUJI S6000fd ---------------400ISO Canon S3 IS----------------400ISO Sony H5
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/FujifilmS6000fd/Samples/crops/S6500_ISO1600-crops.jpg http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonS3IS/Samples/crops/Canon_S3_ISO400-crops.jpghttp://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/SonyH5/Samples/crops/Sony_H5_ISO400-crops.jpg

[Groucho]

The Sony actually looks the best to my tired eyes in that comparison.

Anyway, my point was, going from ISO 200 to ISO 1600 (as LPZ said in his message) is a full three stops. That's "best-case scenario" for IS, probably most of the time it'll be more like 1 or 2.

And the specific point I questioned was "I've seen lots of comparison pics between Fuji and Canon/Sony (NOT low-light pics; the Fuji's rule, there) where the Canon/Sony were less noisy simply because the ISO remained low thanks to good IS...."

I'm not sure that I'm convinced that the Fujis are guaranteed to dip into high noise territory any time the competition needs IS. I think that most photos, daytime or night, close or long zoom, will always come out better on the Fuji.

[Anewman]

The Sony actually looks the best to my tired eyes in that comparison.

Anyway, my point was, going from ISO 200 to ISO 1600 (as LPZ said in his message) is a full three stops. That's "best-case scenario" for IS, probably most of the time it'll be more like 1 or 2.


Well as you can see I was unable to find ISO 200 samples so I used ISO 400 for the IS capable models, which is a 2 stops difference.

I'm not sure that I'm convinced that the Fujis are guaranteed to dip into high noise territory any time the competition needs IS. I think that most photos, daytime or night, close or long zoom, will always come out better on the Fuji.

I think that is simple exposure math. If 2 stops are required for proper exposure, the camera needs to adjust in what ever means is still available. If the Fuji does not dip into higher ISO when shutter speeds get slow enough to require IS on the other models, you would obviously run into camera shake issues.
Plus the Canon S3 already gives you a more light since it has F3.5 max aperture at full zoom while the Fuji is F4.9(sony is f4.5), so you may find that the FUJI actually needs to dip to a higher ISO before the S3 needs IS.

[Groucho]

But that's only valid when it's dark enough that the ISO is already at danger levels. I don't think that average daytime photography will require getting into "noisy" ISO levels on the Fuji even at the shutter speeds necessary to keep the camera steady at long zoom.

If one were really picking nits, one could also point out that the S6000fd encourages proper SLR holding, ie right hand on the body, left on the lens, which gives a more stable and steady hold than the grip you'd get one the "fat PnS" style of most long-zoom PnS cameras.

[YEKCIM]

I may be wrong, but I think the Fuji supports in-camera watermarking...

~YEKCIM

[Anewman]

But that's only valid when it's dark enough that the ISO is already at danger levels. I don't think that average daytime photography will require getting into "noisy" ISO levels on the Fuji even at the shutter speeds necessary to keep the camera steady at long zoom.


Agreed, I just don't know what what constitutes "dark enough" or "average", I do not own one of those ultra zooms or IS lenses. I know with my non-IS lenses I move to ISO 800 on cloudy days, but it is mostly for sports which I prefer to have higher shutter speeds for anyways.

I guess I just did not agree with your previous post where you say that photos will "always" be better on the Fuji, I always felt the consensus was that ultra zooms really needed IS.

Maybe I am not missing out on anything since my camera lacks in-body IS:thumbsup2

[handicap18]

Of course, I can't find it now ... but, regardless of how good a Fuji's ISO1600 is ... it's still noisier than an ISO200 on other cameras (just about any other camera).

I realize it's not an apples to apples comparison, but that's also my point. The stabilization of the Fuji forces higher ISO to get higher shutter speed. The lower the ISO, the better the pics from any camera looks....

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think that it is a fair arguement to be making. Just about any camera's highest ISO is going to have more noise than any other camera's ISO 200. Thats more than not comparing apples to apples.

Would you make an arguement that Nikon dSLR's ISO1600 have more noise than the Canon or Pentax dSLR's ISO 200? :confused3

How does the Fuji compare at 200 to the other camera's at 200.

[Anewman]

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think that it is a fair arguement to be making. Just about any camera's highest ISO is going to have more noise than any other camera's ISO 200. Thats more than not comparing apples to apples.

Would you make an arguement that Nikon dSLR's ISO1600 have more noise than the Canon or Pentax dSLR's ISO 200? :confused3

How does the Fuji compare at 200 to the other camera's at 200.

If one camera has IS and the other does not...

Depending on available light, the camera with lower noise at ISO 200 might also be the one with the blurry pictures.

Nobody can honestly argue that any other PnS camera can compete with FUJIs noise levels, but it is a fact that it lacks IS. Which in some maybe rare cases would be preferred.

[LPZ_Stitch!]

How does the Fuji compare at 200 to the other camera's at 200.

Based on everything I've ever seen, they're about the same. Most P&S's are just fine at ISO200 and below, and most can stretch to ISO400 and still get a good pic. It's after ISO400 that the Fuji's really shine.

However, that's not my point.

My point is that with the IS of other brand cameras (either Sony or Canon as seen in Anewman's comparison pics), I'll be able to keep my camera at a lower ISO and get a stabilized image while the Fuji (probably) needs to shift to a higher ISO to speed up the shutter.

On the same overcast day or indoors, I can keep shooting at ISO200 while the Fuji might be shifting to ISO400 or ISO800 to get fast enough shutter speeds. My ISO200 is cleaner than Fuji's ISO400/800, even if my ISO800 is crap compared to theirs.

The issue is IS vs. clean high ISO, not ISO vs. ISO.

If the Fuji cameras had IS, they'd certainly be the 'king of the hill' as far as P&S cameras go; luckily for Canon and Sony they don't.

[Master Mason]

That only works until you subject starts moving, then your theory goes a little south...

[boBQuincy]

That only works until you subject starts moving, then your theory goes a little south...

Down here, when things don't go right we call it "going North". ;)

[Master Mason]

Down here, when things don't go right we call it "going North". ;)

lol... well when south is LA you can understand why that would be synonomus with FUBAR

[Groucho]

I'm not sure if I said that the Fuji will always have better photos, but I think it will almost all the time, and I'm quite confident that even daylight low-ISO photos will be sharper. (It's rare to ever get a really sharp photo out of my wife's Canon SD600 with 6mp 1/2.5" lens, exactly what the S3 is packing.)

This page (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms6000fd/page9.asp) has side-by-side shots of the S6000fd vs the Sony H2 at low ISOs.

Although the S6000fd's output has a little of the classic 'Super CCD' artefacts look to it and is a touch over-sharpened, there's no denying that it is outperforming the Sony - which is fairly representative of the other 6MP super zooms on the market - by a considerable margin. Edge-to-edge detail is excellent, colors bright but natural and contrast excellent.

The next page compares ISO 400:

Again, the S6000fd's output at ISO 400 isn't that 'clean' - there are visible artefacts, but it is significantly better than the conventional CCD-based H2, which has visible noise and has lost a lot of fine detail to noise reduction.

Also...
...at ISO 200-800 the S6000fd retains far more detail (than the other superzooms).

The DCRP review (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fuji/finepix_s6000fd-review/) also shows the difference between an ISO 1600 JPG from the S6000fd and the same image taken in RAW mode and put through a third-party noise filter - which produced very nice results indeed.

[LPZ_Stitch!]

I'm not sure if I said that the Fuji will always have better photos, but I think it will almost all the time, and I'm quite confident that even daylight low-ISO photos will be sharper. (It's rare to ever get a really sharp photo out of my wife's Canon SD600 with 6mp 1/2.5" lens, exactly what the S3 is packing.)

I guess this is the point at which we're just going to have to agree to disagree on the issue of what makes a "better" picture. But, I also disagree with the reviewer's comment, "there's no denying that it is outperforming the Sony."

Looking at the comparison, I prefer the H2 in every picture except the wine label and the film canister. The H2's colors look smoother and more natural, and the transitions between colors are smoother, too (to my eyes, especially in the playing card and the Bailey's label).

The Fuji looks *too* sharp to me, to the point where the edges are "jumping out" and seeming unnatural. I'm sure the effect is muted when you're not looking at a 100% crop, but it's still going to be there. It works to the Fuji's advantage when there's a lot of fine lettering, but I think it works against it in the other instances.

[Groucho]

Well, ultimately, the Fuji has a sensor that is, I believe, more than 50% larger than the ones in other superzooms. That extra space can only translate into pulling down more detail no matter the circumstance.