-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
D90vs S200EXR
- Thread starter painterdude
- Start date
Paul, thanks for that and everything else in your helpful post. The only place the Canon 18-200 comes close to the Nikon 18-200 is in the DPreview lens tests, so this truly is bad news about the travel zoom category.
I bought an S200EXR because I like the F200EXR so much. The S200EXR seems competitive with older low-end Nikon DSLRs such as the D40, but I can't imagine it would be better than the D90, so something seems amiss here.
Kim Letkeman
Forum Pro
So you are saying that it is silly to say that Nikon's 70-200VRII, a $2100 lens and one of the finest available at any price, is better than the lens on the S100fs.
A very low level of precision in that thought ...
That presumes very narrow parameters. And frankly, pretty low standards.
Clarity: Larger sensor gives higher clarity in the majority of lighting situations.
Depth: Larger sensor allows control of depth of field. Smaller sensor does not.
Precision matters ...
Vacation lens on APS-C -- it is sometimes about real versatility as defined by the ability to shoot in almost any light ... the range of APS-C cams (several shown here) and vacation lenses (two shown here) is covered ....
--
-- You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you.
So many people forget that basic truth ...
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
painterdude
Senior Member
If in doubt barge in and shout and flood .. ...our resident boor has proved a point ..he can't shoot and has a problem with seeing color ..what a mess some of those were!!! Kim ..please leave the thread as asked ..you are not helping .
http://skylightvistas.weebly.com/index.html
http://skylightvistas.weebly.com/index.html
painterdude
Senior Member
You have a very clearly defined perspective in how you shoot ..I think I could tell your shots from hundreds of other photogs .
I just messed around with my D90 and the S200exr in the house and the back yard ..shooting jpegs ..Once again..the shots from the D90 were great ..BUT ..too warm if you try and move beyond dead zero on the WB but if you leave it there or go even on point lower ..you get blued highlights in secondary reflections . Its like a blue light gets shone on all the highlight spots ..sheesh. If iun pp I try and chase down those blue highlights with what I have to use re pp, you wind up with a too warm everywhere situation by the time you have the highlights right .
Ya Color is a personal thing and I hate what my D90 does..but I love the nuance and depth it has as well..Love hate thing ..As to my highlight comments I made earlier - In what I just did I would say they only generally hold true. You can control the D90 in that area fairly well but dang those shadows get dark..
http://skylightvistas.weebly.com/index.html
I just messed around with my D90 and the S200exr in the house and the back yard ..shooting jpegs ..Once again..the shots from the D90 were great ..BUT ..too warm if you try and move beyond dead zero on the WB but if you leave it there or go even on point lower ..you get blued highlights in secondary reflections . Its like a blue light gets shone on all the highlight spots ..sheesh. If iun pp I try and chase down those blue highlights with what I have to use re pp, you wind up with a too warm everywhere situation by the time you have the highlights right .
Ya Color is a personal thing and I hate what my D90 does..but I love the nuance and depth it has as well..Love hate thing ..As to my highlight comments I made earlier - In what I just did I would say they only generally hold true. You can control the D90 in that area fairly well but dang those shadows get dark..
http://skylightvistas.weebly.com/index.html
PAUL TILL
Veteran Member
Kim either you have not noticed when taking pictures or you are forgetting to mention.
There is another point with travel zooms like the 18-200mm on DSLR's and that's when using them for close up work at full zoom like shooting flowers or when doing portraits they behave more like an 18-135mm lens.
Below is an image taken with a Nikon 18-200mm at 18mm, the green crop in the middle is the view at 200mm. Here you can see the lens behaves like a 11x zoom as it should.
Below here is a close up shot taken at 18mm, the green crop in the middle is the view at 200mm as you can see the lens is now behaving like a 5x zoom.
There's a name for this behaviour, zoom shrinkage and it happens to all zoom lenses that cover vast focal ranges but It is not as bad with bridge cameras.
Below is an image taken with the S100FS at 28mm, the crop in the middle is the view at 400mm. Here you can see the lens behaves like a 14x zoom as it should.
Below here is a close up shot taken at 28mm, the crop in the middle is the view at 400mm as you can see the lens is now behaving like a 10x zoom.
So as you can see if you go out with a DSLR and 18-200mm lens and want to shoot close ups you end up with only 5x zoom were as with a bridge camera like the S100 you still have 10x zoom.
So yet again you will need more than one lens with a DSLR because a vacation lens can't compete with the lens on something like the S100/200.
Paul.
--
Kim Letkeman
Forum Pro
They are simple snap shots of flowers and travel images. They show that all in one lenses can get quite close and can shoot for distance. They show that the lenses are plenty sharp at various focal lengths. They show that night or day, APS-C can capture useful images and stop motion.
Now, I was following the principle that has been stated by lloydy so many times recently: sample images rule. They apparently bequeath credibility according to some people.
Yet you characterize such a post as "shouting" and "flooding" ...
So ... you obviously disagree with lloydy on the value of the anecdote, even though I was quite precise in what I was trying to demonstrate.
Now, at this point, I would expect someone to clarify what he wants:
- you have ignored the technical response
- you have belittled the anecdotal response
Your further characterization of myself and my images with "can't shoot", "can't see color" and "what a mess some of those images were" is pretty much just your instinctive childishness bursting out yet one more time. And thus, are not worth processing by anyone with a functioning brain.
My bottom line for that response was to debunk the myth that you and others like to spread that the all in one lens is not enough for a dSLR user yet it is enough for the bridge cam user. B0llucks I say.
--
-- You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you.
So many people forget that basic truth ...
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
aig
Leading Member
OK Kim, you posed the question: If whatever pedantic points you wish to make have been ignored, ask yourself why.
Then try and make similar points, but this time with manners and politeness , and a little less aggression - the response will be a revelation to you, believe me...
Wellington100
Forum Pro
Surely this is not the case.
Take the Tamron 18-270 PZD. It has exactly the same reach as the S100/S200 and it comes in Canon, Nikon and Sony mounts so there are probably dozens of new and old DSLR's that it can be attached to.
For example, I have a Fuji S5 and a Nikon D40 at my disposal. Surely this lens on my S5 will blow the S200 out of the water?
On the other hand the Tamron PZD lens on my Nikon D40 would be no bigger or heavier than a S100/S200 so size wise these bridges have no advantage either.
What the PZD lens lets you do is customise a solution based on price, size or IQ.
I am not knocking the bridges as I use a S6500 but I just can't see a s100/s200 solution beating a PZD plus DSLR solution simply because the latter lets you customise your hardware and sensor setup.
When it comes to the HS-10/20, we are going beyond the envelope where comparisons based on hardware are meaningful because there is no DSLR lens solution for that range. Though if one used a PZD lens on a 16, 18 or 24 mp Nikon Canon or Sony DSLR, then cropped the image, even the HS-20 in DR mode could be directly compared to a DSLR one lens solution.
The DSLR with the PZD lens will be bigger as the Hs20 is very small but surely in every other metric the DSLR combo will outperform the HS20.
Kim Letkeman
Forum Pro
Internal focusing will shorten the focal length, this is true. However, I am more concerned with magnification when I go close, so I have never found it an issue. At 200mm at infinity, it acts like a 200mm. That's the behavior that I want.
Says you. And so what. When shooting portraits, you want a short-tele focal length to get nice bokeh and features that are not overly stretched or flattened. Ideal focal lengths are around 100mm ... which is pretty much perfect for the 18-200 lenses ... but with bridge cams, to get the background to blur you must rack it out to 300+mm ...
Again, so what. Magnification is what counts and the images I showed indicate magnifications in the 1:3 range. More than enough to shoot flowers and bees and such like.
That's just baloney ... you are intentionally (I hope) confusing focal range with magnification and trying to sell a pig in a poke ...
--
-- You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you.
So many people forget that basic truth ...
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
PAUL TILL
Veteran Member
Go buy one and show us proof then. I had the Tamron 18-270 VC and had to buy and return 4 copies before I got a "good" one. Now when I say "good" I don't mean good as compared to a decent lens but "good" for a vacation lens.
Any zoom lens covering these vast focal lengths is going to be a compromise and I can truly say the lens on my S100FS out performs either the Nikon 18-200mm VR II or Tamron 18-270mm VC that I owned.
Both the Nikon and Tamron had sweet spots and outside the sweet spot they are very mediocre, the lens on the S100/200 is sharp from 28-400mm, yes there is the dreaded CA/PF but that can be dealt with in PP.
Paul.
--
aig
Leading Member
You should know...
PAUL TILL
Veteran Member
Lens/sensor combination? I can't see the small sensor performing that well, or at least I haven't seen it. I haven't seen a situation where bridge out-performed a DSLR, even with a kit lens. I've seen some amazing stuff from the Nikon 18-200. The Tamron 18-270 seems on-par with the Canon kit lens, at least at wide angle.
Kim Letkeman
Forum Pro
Not really. That would be a sweeping generalization and of anecdotal interest only. You prefer the bridge cam. Well, your switch back to the S100fs has made that obvious. And you've posted some real beauties since you got it too.
However ...
I would wager (and surely win the bet) that the vast majority of "enthusiasts" would take a D3100 or D7000 and 18-200VR or 18-270VC any day of the week over a bridge cam. There is just that much more image quality available across the board.
There is little need to get really choosy over vacation lenses as they are all a compromise. I've owned several and they were very nice lenses for walking about. When I want the ultimate image quality, I change to a better lens. That is something you can actually do on a dSLR.
So the anecdotal comparisons between bridges and dSLRs always seem to focus on all the wrong things ... there is no head to head testing of the lenses by the major sites. This is because no one really cares to bother.
However, DPR has tested that magnficient lens on the S100fs and S200EXR and you know the results. Worst CA they had ever seen on any lens ... they had to recalibrate the scale for it.
And what is most interesting there is that we know that not every S100fs exhibits that issue. Which goes to sample variation ... which curiously is you whole point about the Tamron lens. Yet it has been established as a major issue with all Fuji cameras so far ...
Very mediocre versus sharp ... what does that even mean?
And since you have owned all of these, why do you not have the evidence to post? Real A:B comparisons with controlled variables would actually lend credence to your rather exaggerated statements ...
--
-- You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you.
So many people forget that basic truth ...
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
tdkd13
Veteran Member
Even though the original post is obvious flame bait, (I see that hasnt changed). Basically what your saying is that if you look at pics at 600x800 on a display and dont look close (pixel peep) you cant see any real difference between these two cameras. That seems fair, but then the same can be said for almost any camera made today. If you dont look close they look about the same. Wow, breaking new ground now are we?
Ted
Ted
PAUL TILL
Veteran Member
So which of the above have you used?
Let's take it as a given that the Nikon 18-200 out performs the Tamron 18-270mm for contrast, sharpness and corner softness.
If we accept the above statement as true there were no times when I would shoot the Nikon wide open at any focal length I found anything under f8 would give poor results and at 200mm you needed to be at f11. I generally shoot my S100FS wide open at all focal lengths and still have sharp crisp shots.
And let's not forget the OP is talking about JPEG's and viewed at 33% of there original size.
Paul.
--
PAUL TILL
Veteran Member
Thanks, but you know why I switched.
An S100/200 is not going to cost you any more than £150 today, how much is a D7000 & 18-200mm? £1400. In todays economic climate I'm not so sure you would win that bet.
Again we are talking about web sized images in this thread, I don't think you could shoot certain scenes with your D700 and Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 that I could not match at web size with my S100FS.
Yes I know, but some people don't want to have to haul around that bag full of lenses.
No, it's because they are all crap.
But CA/PF can be fixed in PP, soft/blurred images can't.
I don't shoot portraits so I delete any image that's not sharp.
As I said above I delete soft/blurred images. I test the lenses when I have them and compare different ones against each other for my own satisfaction.
You rave about the Nikon 18-200mm yet when ever you demonstrate how good you think it is you show the same old half a dozen images, Jesus how many times have we seen that Big Ben shot or your boys in the London Eye! If it was as good as you say I'm sure you would have a lot more images from it.
Paul.
--
I hear you about the color bugging you G, it's little issues like this that get in the way of enjoying your camera/pics, & if your not enjoying then your not going to be creative(at least thats how it works for me). I've had similiar color issues with cameras in the past. I either found a convenient work around in PP or...I moved on.
Have you tried DXO filmpack? There is a stand alone version that has tons of color presets that you can apply easily, might be worth a try.
Dan.
Kim Letkeman
Forum Pro
Which is all well and good, but you are starting to pound the drum at every opportunity, and like that other guy who pounds the drum you have no credible evidence. "Mine were crap" is repeated by every beginner who never handled a camera ad nauseum. I expect far more from experienced people like you.
There are many in those galleries ... follow the links here and look Till you puke for all I care ...
http://letkeman.net/Photos/chicagoapr07
http://letkeman.net/Photos/anaheimapril07
http://letkeman.net/Photos/londonukmay2007
http://letkeman.net/Photos/dublinlondon_july07
http://letkeman.net/Photos/londonuksep2007
http://letkeman.net/Photos/PhoenixMay08
http://letkeman.net/Photos/orlandojune2008
http://letkeman.net/Photos/londonsep08
http://letkeman.net/Photos/helsinki1
--
-- You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you.
So many people forget that basic truth ...
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum