canon s90, best p&s?

Discussion in 'Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto' started by mfais, Sep 24, 2009.

  1. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    501
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    GF1 is about to become outdated.

    NEX may actually be perfect for what ed is looking for, for the reasons TRINI stated. I'd really only recommend it over DSLR if the smaller size is a requirement, though.

    I'm probably going to hop on the m4/3 bandwagon when the updates to the GF1 and the EP series come out (next GF model is expected to be announced in a week or so, and for sure at Photokina in Sept.) But I want the manual controls and that pancake lens. NEX has a better sensor.
     


  2. Rambo

    Rambo Senior member

    Messages:
    27,312
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Location:
    I'M IN MIAMI, BITCH
    What's the point of the 4/3rds if you have to end up getting lenses? Sounds just like an SLR.
     


  3. TRINI

    TRINI Senior member

    Messages:
    9,027
    Likes Received:
    650
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    What's the point of the 4/3rds if you have to end up getting lenses? Sounds just like an SLR.
    SLR-sized sensor, smaller body.
     


  4. Rambo

    Rambo Senior member

    Messages:
    27,312
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Location:
    I'M IN MIAMI, BITCH
    SLR-sized sensor, smaller body.
    But they're essentially the same price. Just to save 6oz? Aren't the SLR's supposed to be better all around anyways?
     


  5. TRINI

    TRINI Senior member

    Messages:
    9,027
    Likes Received:
    650
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    But they're essentially the same price. Just to save 6oz? Aren't the SLR's supposed to be better all around anyways?
    Significant difference in size: [​IMG] SLRs are better (depending on the model) but obviously bigger.
     


  6. Rambo

    Rambo Senior member

    Messages:
    27,312
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Location:
    I'M IN MIAMI, BITCH
    I thought that they were bigger for some reason. I suppose I see the advantage then. If you're going to haul all that shit around anyways, why not opt for the best camera?
     


  7. TRINI

    TRINI Senior member

    Messages:
    9,027
    Likes Received:
    650
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    If you're going to haul all that shit around anyways, why not opt for the best camera?

    I'm not sure if I get your question.
     


  8. Rambo

    Rambo Senior member

    Messages:
    27,312
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Location:
    I'M IN MIAMI, BITCH
    I'm not sure if I get your question.
    Most SLR people I know have more than one lens and subsequently carry all their shit in a bag wherever they go. So if you're going to bag up with lenses and batteries and shit, why not just get the best camera? What's the few ounces mean at that point?
     


  9. TRINI

    TRINI Senior member

    Messages:
    9,027
    Likes Received:
    650
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Most SLR people I know have more than one lens and subsequently carry all their shit in a bag wherever they go. So if you're going to bag up with lenses and batteries and shit, why not just get the best camera? What's the few ounces mean at that point?

    Because with the smaller cameras, you don't NEED to bag up w/ lenses, batteries, etc.

    That's the point.
     


  10. Rambo

    Rambo Senior member

    Messages:
    27,312
    Likes Received:
    1,617
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Location:
    I'M IN MIAMI, BITCH
    I'm not trying to troll you here, I just don't really see it. Most, if not everyone I know carries around their SLR with more than one lens and carries it in some sort of bag/purse. So, even with a smaller body, the addition of the extra accessories would necessitate a carrying device of some sort wouldn't it?
     


  11. dcg

    dcg Senior member

    Messages:
    4,113
    Likes Received:
    501
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Philly
    In a lot of ways I agree with Rambo's thoughts. The larger m4/3 cameras (GH1, G1, etc.) and lenses don't make much sense to me.

    My interest is in the GF-1/E-Px/E-PL1 size cameras and the 20mm pancake. This combo is substantially smaller than any SLR, and provides near SLR quality photos - far better than any P&S, especially in low light situations. And I don't mind throwing it in my bag when I go to work for random city shots throughout the day, whereas there's no way I'm lugging my SLR around every day.

    I'll never buy the 45-200, or the macro. For long range action stuff, SLRs are going to be superior, especially in AF speed, and the size of the lens negates much of the m4/3 advantage. For macro, my Canon EF-S 60mm is a hell of a lot cheaper than the ~$900 m4/3 offering.

    The only other lens I have an interest in (which I actually own already, since I got a good deal on it) is the 7-14. Debated getting a wide angle for the SLR, but thought the 20mm pancake and the 7-14 would be a good vacation package, and since most UWA shots have a lot of DoF, didn't see much advantage to an SLR lens.

    Anyway, that's my reasoning.
     


  12. milosz

    milosz Senior member

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    6
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Carrying an E-PL1 or similar is as much a hassle to me as carrying my D700/50G - either one is going to be on a strap or in its own bag as I don't carry a manpurse on a regular basis.
     


  13. aizan

    aizan Senior member

    Messages:
    736
    Likes Received:
    6
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Location:
    LA
    a m4/3 or aps-c compact kit is smaller and lighter than an aps-c dslr kit, to say nothing of full frame, and will fit in a smaller camera bag.

    the best thing about these cameras, especially when fitted with a pancake lens, is that you can carry them around everywhere and people won't bat an eyelash.

    this kind of camera doesn't replace an slr in your camera kit, but rather complements it. which one gets the most use depends on your needs.
     


  14. TRINI

    TRINI Senior member

    Messages:
    9,027
    Likes Received:
    650
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Carrying an E-PL1 or similar is as much a hassle to me as carrying my D700/50G - either one is going to be on a strap or in its own bag as I don't carry a manpurse on a regular basis.

    How do you like your D700? I think that's going to be my next camera....whenever next $2500 appears in my lap, that is.
     


  15. otc

    otc Senior member

    Messages:
    14,475
    Likes Received:
    4,114
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    I would love to own a micro 4/3 camera for the reasons stated above (probably not a normal 4/3...those are getting too big). With a fixed lens it might not fit in my pants pocket but it will easily fit in my jacket pocket (fall is coming) and in the leather bag I carry every day to work.

    My SLR would do neither of these things even with a nifty-50 (which I don't own...my shortest lens is several inches long at the shortest zoom)...hell I wouldn't even want to carry my SLR body in the jacket pocket or bag (maybe if it was a Rebel or D40 body...but those aren't that much smaller).

    Of course, the micro 4/3 is slightly less interesting when you see the photos that come out of a canon G10 or even this little s90 the thread is about (lens isn't as big but its got the same sensor). For less money and smaller size, I could still capture some awesome pictures.

    Also, saw on slickdeals just now that dell has the S90 for $299...might have to look it up on slickdeals to see if that requires you to enter a coupon code or something. I would think about it but now I want to wait for S95 reviews...
     


Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by