Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Used SLR Cameras for 2011: Cheaply moving up from the $150 pocket camera category
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Used SLR Cameras for 2011: Cheaply moving up from the $150 pocket camera category - Page 3

post #31 of 44
1/1/11 at 4:17am
^ Here are some I took recently with the 35mm AF-S.
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 44
1/1/11 at 5:54am
Ur not gonna get shots like this from a P&S
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 44
1/1/11 at 10:28am
Wow! Thanks guys!
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 44
1/1/11 at 1:52pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool The Kid View Post
Fancy P&Ss like the S90 etc are good... really good actually... but limited, and even w/ f/2 lenses will never get the same bokeh as a DSLR

f/1.8 vs. f/2.0 lenses have that much of a bokeh difference?
Or is it something else that's affecting amount of bokeh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudonym View Post
^ Here are some I took recently with the 35mm AF-S.

You're using an f/1.8 lens to get those shots?
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 44
1/1/11 at 2:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reevolving View Post
f/1.8 vs. f/2.0 lenses have that much of a bokeh difference?
Or is it something else that's affecting amount of bokeh?



You're using an f/1.8 lens to get those shots?

What affects bokeh is a combo of focal length (the mm number) and aperture (the f/number)

Basically, the higher the focal length + the lower the number after the f/, the more bokeh you have, because the depth of field is shallower.

But its also affected by sensor size. The bigger the sensor, the wider the angle of view. So say you have a professional DSLR with a full size sensor 50mm 2.8 lens. That will get a lot of bokeh + be very fast. For similar bokeh on a consumer DSLR on a cropped sensor, you would need a 35mm 1.8 lens. And you cannot even get a P&S to give that kind of shallow DoF.

So for the effect you want, it def makes the most sense to get a DSLR. 5 or so years ago, I foolishly spent about $450 on a really fancy 11x zoom P&S. It's worth about $100 now, and gets handily outperformed by my $250 D40 body + assortment of cheapish lenses. Had I just bought the D40 5 years ago, I'd have all kinds of crazy glass by now. Def make the investment
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 44
1/1/11 at 2:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool The Kid View Post
Ur not gonna get shots like this from a P&S
Without the EXIF data and distance to subject I can't say yay or nay. Bokeh is a complex subject. "Good" bokeh is the result of good glass. BTW there is no such thing as good or bad bokeh. In the real world of photography what's good is defined by the photographer and not lens engineers. Anyway many high end P&S cameras have good glass. As far as DOF is concerned that can be manipulated by using different focal length lenses, distance from subject and so on to achieve the exact depth of field obtained by fast glass. Low light is where fast glass really shines. You can use a lower ISO setting which generally means higher quality images. Combine fast glass and reasonable ISO settings and you can take ambient night photos without having to use a tripod. Any of the cameras Re is looking at will cover his needs more than adequately for his stated purpose.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 44
1/1/11 at 3:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane's View Post
Without the EXIF data and distance to subject I can't say yay or nay. Bokeh is a complex subject. "Good" bokeh is the result of good glass. BTW there is no such thing as good or bad bokeh. In the real world of photography what's good is defined by the photographer and not lens engineers. Anyway many high end P&S cameras have good glass. As far as DOF is concerned that can be manipulated by using different focal length lenses, distance from subject and so on to achieve the exact depth of field obtained by fast glass. Low light is where fast glass really shines. You can use a lower ISO setting which generally means higher quality images. Combine fast glass and reasonable ISO settings and you can take ambient night photos without having to use a tripod. Any of the cameras Re is looking at will cover his needs more than adequately for his stated purpose.
I have played with the S90 for work in low light conditions and admittedly I was pretty impressed. And yes since small P&S sensors are more forgiving WRT distortion & vignetting they can be equipped with "better glass" than something like a 5D for much less money. But physically there are big limitations to what they can do in low light and for shallow DoF. IMO it would be better for dude to spend the same money on an upgradeable DSLR than a really good P&S, at least from what he says he wants.
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 44
1/1/11 at 3:45pm
Thread Starter 
First....CoolKid, Crane, Adam, Pseudonym...... thanks for the help on this topic Ok, I'm back to the drawing board. The thing driving all of this: I want bokeh in portrait mode. (Not just macro) 1) I ruled out DSLRs b/c they're bulky, and will probably stay at home. 2) I ruled out S90/LX3 b/c the sensor is too small for non-macro bokeh (despite the f/2.0 lens) I am now thinking of the micro 4/3 cameras with detachable lenses. (or a DSLR after all) micro 4/3 = Real SLR capabilities, but with much less space. (pancake lens, etc) Also, I can go down to f/1.8 or f/1.4 lenses. This seems to be the true middle ground.
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 44
1/1/11 at 4:00pm
Panasonic DMC-GF1. Best camera evar. Here's the review that pushed me over the edge: http://craigmod.com/journal/gf1-fieldtest/ It's really that great.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 44
1/1/11 at 4:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane's View Post
"Good" bokeh is the result of good glass. BTW there is no such thing as good or bad bokeh.



There's some confusion over terms in some posts. A shallow depth-of-field is what gives you those out-of-focus areas, and as many have explained that's affected by sensor size, focal length, and aperture settings as well as shooting distance.

Bokeh is the quality of those out-of-focus areas. For example, this is terrible bokeh due to the highly-defined rings around the highlights:


_DSC4241 by DYSong Photography, on Flickr

This is better bokeh:



This is really nice bokeh:



Notice how much smoother the background gets.

Worrying about bokeh is not where starting photographers should be. Develop your sense of light and composition --- those things will affect the qualities of your pictures more than anything else. You don't need a fancy DSLR. A P&S, like the S95, with manual controls is good enough.

But if you want to get all technical, here's a pretty good explanation of bokeh:

http://diglloyd.com/articles/Subject...es/bokeh1.html

--Andre
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 44
1/1/11 at 4:09pm
4/3rds cameras are a pretty good compromise. And there is no such thing as the "best camera ever" for every body. Maybe the best camera in a given class. But different camera classes address different needs. For me personally, if they put a full size sensor into an entry level sized body, I'd be first in line.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 44
1/1/11 at 9:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reevolving View Post
f
You're using an f/1.8 lens to get those shots?

Yep.

If you don't already know, the 35mm doesn't produce as sexy bokeh as a 50mm f/1.8 does.

I'm thinking of getting a 50mm f/1.8, anyways, but I'm not sure if I'm ready to transition into manual focusing on my D40.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 44
4/6/11 at 1:27am
ricoh gr1s or contax g2?
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 44
4/6/11 at 3:18am
some of those first responses are classic Internet shit

"I want a digital SLR that improves on my digital compact in <x> ways."

"You should totally get a pseudo-rangefinder 35mm film camera that was kinda wonky and unpopular when it was new, pay for film and developing, learn to scan film well and figure in a two-three day minimum turnaround on your Ebay photos."
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Used SLR Cameras for 2011: Cheaply moving up from the $150 pocket camera category