Tim240z Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 Looking at this one. I think i'm sold on it. It's right about the price range I want to spend and has some impressive features for the price. Any opinions from you photography guys who know what you are talking about: FujiFilm FinePix S5000 This neat, SLR-style camera will satisfy the most ambitious photography enthusiast's appetite by enabling them to capture close-up, pin-sharp distant subjects. Unlike the multitude of silver-bodied compacts on the market, the designers of this camera did not focus their thoughts on the interior of a handbag or shirt pocket when they conceived the FinePix S5000 Zoom. Nothing has been compromised in the pursuit of optical and imaging excellence - in fact, despite its ultra-compact dimensions, the FinePix S5000 Zoom will spend little time in any bag. http://electricsam.com/shop/product.aspx?ref=pricegrabber&sku=ESS5000 Thanks, Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
80LS1T Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 Well if price is not a concern then I like the new Canon EOS Digital Rebel 6.3-megapixel digital SLR camera. Its brand new so the price is kinda up there...$1000!!!!! But a 6.3-megapixel digital camera....can you say "SWEEEEEEEEEET!!!" Here's a write-up on it... Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auxilary Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 iso is listed as 200-800, which means it'll be good for low light situations and some motion, but expect not so great pictures when you're taking pics in direct sunlight (ie. car shows). 3.1 mp is kind of weak by todays standards, and 10x optical zoom lens means there might be some barrel distortion at full zoom in. Overall, I'd be intested in that camera myself if: 1. it did NOT have the electronic view finder (you'll find out it's completely useless in low light conditions) 2. if it was more than 3.1 mp. Pardon the pessimistic review on my part (I have an old fuji cam myself), but here's an unbiast review from dpreview.com: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms5000/ and conclusion of pros and cons if you don't want to read everything: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms5000/page15.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dayz Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 Hi Tim I would have to agree with aux with this one. Let's say that it would make a good basic camera, but I don't know what you want to do with it. Another hobby I have is photography and I know a lot about it. From what I've understand, there are two company in digital camera that are good: Canon and Olympus. I've had an hold on a 4mp from olympus and that is awsome. Don't just look at MP, but zoom quality, the "back" of the camera ( where it takes the pic.) My friends told me to go with those two brand if I want a digital, ( they are professional photographer). Sorry if I wasn't so cheerful, but I think you could continue the research. My friend got a really good one on ebay for pretty cheap. Good luck!! Dayz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silicone boy Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 I am drooling over those. I do they have removable lenses? I take a ton of photographs every day (sorry, not allowed to show them on this family oriented forum) and I use an "ancient" Sony Mavica that uses floppy disks. The good part about it though is that I don't have to spend a lot of time cataloging them in a computer (you see one set of perfect boobs, you've seen them all, right?). My resolution is only 640x480 and it seems to be fine. I'm not state of the art in the megapixel wars. It seems to work well for me though. All the photos in my personal gallery were taken at this resolution, and they are pretty clear. Still, those new digital sure are nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim240z Posted December 1, 2003 Author Share Posted December 1, 2003 Well, first let me state my purposes: General still camera for taking pics of the car, family etc. I also want the moving image option, which this one has (I want to be able to mount in the car for track runs etc). While I understand that I will not get the perfect camera, unless I spend around $1000+, this one seems like a good alternative for the price. So far all the reviews seem very favorable. Perfect...no, but are they ever? You can't please everyone, all the time. So my basic question....is this one worth the money, or is there another camera, within ~$100 of that price that is substantially better? As I said above, I'm not looking for a professional camera, and I don't want to spend a lot of $$$ on this....it's only for hobby use anyways. So....what is the recommended camera (Still/movie) for under $500? Thanks. Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nic-Rebel450CA Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 Most digital cameras do have the "movie" mode option, but I dont think that any of them are going to deliver any quality for fast motion such as track runs. If you are leaning more towards use for video and less for stills, you might look at a digital video camera with the ability to take stills. Most of them have very low resolution, but are excellent at recording video. The low resolution is easily offset by the fact that they have superior optical zoom, so you can just zoom in on the photo subject and have a nice clear picture of whatever you are photographing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nic-Rebel450CA Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 I am drooling over those. I do they have removable lenses? I think it was Canon who just released a new digital camera that has removable lenses and can use the same lenses as their film cameras. I dont remember the specifics though, but it was an impressive article in the magazine I was reading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim240z Posted December 1, 2003 Author Share Posted December 1, 2003 Most digital cameras do have the "movie" mode option, but I dont think that any of them are going to deliver any quality for fast motion such as track runs. If you are leaning more towards use for video and less for stills, you might look at a digital video camera with the ability to take stills. Most of them have very low resolution, but are excellent at recording video. The low resolution is easily offset by the fact that they have superior optical zoom, so you can just zoom in on the photo subject and have a nice clear picture of whatever you are photographing. Hmmmm....I already have a decent still camera (5 mp) that takes pretty good stills, so maybe the digital video camera is the answer. Any recommendations? I have seen a few advertised for around $400 or so... Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nic-Rebel450CA Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 I have seen a few advertised for around $400 or so... This Canon one is pretty good. I have checked it out in person, and seen a few infomercials for it. http://shop1.outpost.com/product/3569604/ This Panasonic one is one I have been wanting to check out because it says it can do decent resolution stills. http://shop1.outpost.com/product/3600325/ There is another Panasonic one that I dream about that is about $1300 that actually has separate digital receptors (or whatever they are called) for each of the R-G-B channels! Those are MiniDV camcorders Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim240z Posted December 1, 2003 Author Share Posted December 1, 2003 In some of the documentation and reviews that I have been reading online, there seems to be a problem with creating computer video files from these cameras? What feature should I be lloking for if I want to be able to drop the videos from the camera to my PC for eventual online hosting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nic-Rebel450CA Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 What feature .. Firewire makes this very easy as you can actually record realtime like it is a video input. USB is kind of iffy either way, but has been known to work nearly as well. My preference would be firewire, but I wouldnt pass up a USB out camcorder without checking it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeeboost Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 I have a Sony Handycam (I think that's what it's called -- I'll get the model # when I get off of work) that is a digital video recorder and has the ability to take stills -- I'm very pleased with it. The only thing I don't like about it is that the nightshot feature only works best if you're about 15 feet away -- other than that, if I'm in my garage and it's completely pitch black and I look under the hood of my 77 280 with the nightshot on, I can see EVERY wire and hose under there -- works very accurate. As far as quality -- I'm impressed with the video quality, but the stills could be better. Here's one shot from it: . That may not be the best example in the world, but it gives you a good idea of what the still shots would look like. Also, the camera comes with a USB port, so there's no problem transporting information from the camera to the cpu (as long as the bus is up to date). The cost of this camera was $415 including tax. I'm the same way as you -- I wasn't looking for a professional camera at the time, just something for a decent price and good quality. I'm not sure how well Sony cameras hold up, but I think it's a pretty decent one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drax240z Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 Tim, take the time to look up whatever camera you want on dpreview.com. I've been reading there for years, and comparing their reviews to my own reviews of digital cameras I have used. (~20 now) I really put camera's through their paces, and I've always found the dpreview site to be bang on in their reviews. They say the S5000 is an "average" value for your money, then don't get it. Look for something "recommended" or "highly recommended".... Yeah the feature set is relatively nice on the S5000, but there are some big drawbacks... ISO 800 isn't even available at high resolution. The CCD sensors aren't truely doubling the resolution... more like adding 33% or so in my experience. So this 3.1 sensor, while a CCD is equivalent quality to ~4.0MPix sensor from anyone else. Also don't concern yourself with a huge zoom. Considering 90% of your photography will be cars, family, etc. you won't need the zoom. Look for a bright lens with a reasonable zoom. (I'd try to find a lens that did at least 5X zoom, and had a F3.2 or less at full zoom) The S5000 accomplishes that, but so do many others. For your price range, I would highly recommend looking at a DSC-F717 by Sony. The DSC-F828 is on its way, and while it has a boatload more features, the F717 has a very complete feature set, is an incredible camera, and will be cheap since it is being discontinued. The low light autofocus and nightvision is exceptional, and this is something that I've found is really lacking on 95% of the digital cameras out there. (fast autofocus in low light) I'd imagine you could pick up a F717 for around $600 in the US. A not about the EOS Rebel 300D... I had one in my hands yesterday for a while, and all I can say is CHEEP! Well the plastic body of the camera didn't feel too bad actually, but that lens felt like garbage. I suppose you can't expect quality lenses for the price though. All in all I think the EOS 300D is a sweet camera and really changes the industry, but if you pick one up I'd look into getting a higher quality lens with it as well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dot Posted December 2, 2003 Share Posted December 2, 2003 I have been looking at the Canon EOS line as well. I have an AT-1 I bought in the 80's with all the lenses. It would be nice if they worked with the new EOS. http://www.canoneos.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaparral2f Posted December 2, 2003 Share Posted December 2, 2003 I have a cheap little olympus D-100 still camera, that I paid about $100 for. It works for whatever I want to shoot that isn't moving. However my camcorder is a Panasonic DVC Pro AJ-D700A with a Fujinon 14:1 zoom lens and AJ-VF15 high grade viewfinder. It cost about the same as a new midsized car. I am only telling you this to show that what you spend fora camera should reflect interests, and that a good piece of equipment, even if it is more expensive, will pay off in the long run. BTW, I still owe $2500 on that damn camcorder, and now I hardly use it. I mostly rent it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moridin Posted December 2, 2003 Share Posted December 2, 2003 I've heard Canon underates their CCDs, just like Ford underates the horsepower on their new Cobras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPMS Posted December 2, 2003 Share Posted December 2, 2003 I'm a big fan of the DPReview website as well, but they tend to only rate the higher cost cameras. I'm often intrigued by stuff like the 5mp Argus camera, and want to see what it's all about. For that kind of JUNK, I look at stevesdigicams.com. They seem to review just about everything, from printers to battery packs to pro SLR's. They also measure something that's very important to me - shutter lag. The time it takes to snap the picture after you've pressed the button is a critical feature that not many reviewers quantify. Myself, I just bought a Minolta S414. For a little over $200, you get a 4mp camera that has a real lens on it, uses readily available batteries and inexpensive Compact Flash cards. Every review I've seen on it praises the quality of the lens and the resulting pictures. It offers creative control of your exposure the way NO other camera in the price range does. I was going to get an Olympus E10, but I couldn't justify paying four times the price for a 10% improvement in image quality. I was also interested in the Fuji you mentioned, but when I found that they get their 6mp resolution by doubling the output of a 3mp sensor, I lost interest. Do a lot of research, and you'll be astounded at how much camera you can buy these days! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.