Reading mode: Light Dark

Would like opinions from STF veterans

Go to last post
D

D. Bentley

Well-known member
Messages
211
Reaction score
0
Location
US
After reading some of the reviews here on STF from people who have received their F828s, the CA issue is beginning to worry me. The camera sounds like its a great camera all around, but it sounds as if the lens is inconsistant from camera to camera.

Anyway, what is the "expert opinion" on how such CA would effect wedding photography where you have the stark black and white contrast? I'm considering cancelling my order in favor of the Nikon 5700 another great camera for a novice hobbyist like myself.

(please understand, I have a price cap of $1000 that must include all the accessories, thus the reason I CANNOT go DSLR, so D-Rebel folk, sorry F828 is better in my situation)
 
D. Bentley said:
After reading some of the reviews here on STF from people who have
received their F828s, the CA issue is beginning to worry me. The
camera sounds like its a great camera all around, but it sounds as
if the lens is inconsistant from camera to camera.

Anyway, what is the "expert opinion" on how such CA would effect
wedding photography where you have the stark black and white
contrast? I'm considering cancelling my order in favor of the
Nikon 5700 another great camera for a novice hobbyist like myself.

(please understand, I have a price cap of $1000 that must include
all the accessories, thus the reason I CANNOT go DSLR, so D-Rebel
folk, sorry F828 is better in my situation)
Click to expand...
I think you would be a lot happier with the fast lens and fast focus of the 828 cf the 5700. You might need to deal with PF occasionally, but I think you will get significantly better results with the 828.

I still think a rebel + 50/1.8 + kit lens would be functionally better for wedding photography due to a large advantage in available-light shooting, and it's in your price range if you get a cheap CF card. However I do think the 828 will probably look more professional, very important in wedding photography.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/featured_art&page=1
 
The Sony , IMO, will be a much better choice than the Nikon. The Canon with a portrait lens might be a better choice, and is probaly in your price range.
 
Matthew Cromer said:
D. Bentley said:
After reading some of the reviews here on STF from people who have
received their F828s, the CA issue is beginning to worry me. The
camera sounds like its a great camera all around, but it sounds as
if the lens is inconsistant from camera to camera.

Anyway, what is the "expert opinion" on how such CA would effect
wedding photography where you have the stark black and white
contrast? I'm considering cancelling my order in favor of the
Nikon 5700 another great camera for a novice hobbyist like myself.

(please understand, I have a price cap of $1000 that must include
all the accessories, thus the reason I CANNOT go DSLR, so D-Rebel
folk, sorry F828 is better in my situation)
Click to expand...
I think you would be a lot happier with the fast lens and fast
focus of the 828 cf the 5700. You might need to deal with PF
occasionally, but I think you will get significantly better results
with the 828.
Click to expand...
I havge to agree with Matt, here. If it's between the 5700 and the 828, the 828 might be the best option. I shot 200 shots, yesterday, and had 5 with severe PF. 4 of those shots were of one scene. Unfortunately, it was inside of a church :-( Blown out stained glass windows. It was a scene where my 717 would also have had PF. But not the magnitude/intensity of what the 828 produced.
Matthew Cromer said:
I still think a rebel + 50/1.8 + kit lens would be functionally
better for wedding photography due to a large advantage in
available-light shooting, and it's in your price range if you get a
cheap CF card. However I do think the 828 will probably look more
professional, very important in wedding photography.
Click to expand...
For the above reason, I'd agree that the 300D body and the 50mm F1.8 (an under $1000 package) would do a more consistent job of it. Especially for weddings (lots of flash, high contrast and DR).

Good luck,
Steve

--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k
'The question is not what you look at, but what you see' - Thoreau
 
the wedding photos aren't all I will use the camera for (of course) I'm much more interested in landscape photography, but around town, in order to make money, I'll have to take wedding photos, vehicle photos (another place CA/PF seems most apparent) and other misc jobs

Does it seem accurate to say the most problems are occuring in the 132# serial batches and other batches are experiencing fewer problems? If so, maybe I should take that into consideration as well?
 
I'll be brief. :-)

The F828 is a wonderfully enjoyable camera to use.

Does it have an issue with PF? Yep, it does. Other cameras have it, too. The characteristic and color of this one reminds me a lot of the Canon G5. Some users had a hard time getting over it in the CTF, but now you're seeing lots of beautiful pics from it.

The reason this is such an issue is that while all digital cameras (ALL of them from digicams to dSLR) produce PF/CA to one extent or another, it was hoped by many that the F828 would have minimized this problem. The lens was expected to help here. But here we are.

There are techniques you can use to minimize it at shot time, if those are acceptable to the shooting needs. And there are software workarounds. If you can deal with that, then the F828 will continue to please. If you cannot tolerate it at all, then you'll want another camera that you can tolerate with its own idiosyncracies.

My recommendation: Get an F828 from a source that you can return for full refund if need be. Get it in your hands and try it out. It's a no lose proposition. And then at least you'll be doing a lot less hand-wringing over it. :-)
D. Bentley said:
(please understand, I have a price cap of $1000 that must include
all the accessories, thus the reason I CANNOT go DSLR, so D-Rebel
folk, sorry F828 is better in my situation)
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
 
I've seen no evidence YET that this is a batch-specific problem.

It could happen. But I simply haven't seen any evidence. At this time, it would appear to simply be an F828 "thing", as a model. Can Sony fix it? Who knows.
D. Bentley said:
the wedding photos aren't all I will use the camera for (of course)
I'm much more interested in landscape photography, but around town,
in order to make money, I'll have to take wedding photos, vehicle
photos (another place CA/PF seems most apparent) and other misc jobs

Does it seem accurate to say the most problems are occuring in the
132# serial batches and other batches are experiencing fewer
problems? If so, maybe I should take that into consideration as
well?
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
 
everyone has a different experience so try and get one with a good return policy. I think Dell or Sears have 30 day return periods.
D. Bentley said:
After reading some of the reviews here on STF from people who have
received their F828s, the CA issue is beginning to worry me. The
camera sounds like its a great camera all around, but it sounds as
if the lens is inconsistant from camera to camera.

Anyway, what is the "expert opinion" on how such CA would effect
wedding photography where you have the stark black and white
contrast? I'm considering cancelling my order in favor of the
Nikon 5700 another great camera for a novice hobbyist like myself.

(please understand, I have a price cap of $1000 that must include
all the accessories, thus the reason I CANNOT go DSLR, so D-Rebel
folk, sorry F828 is better in my situation)
Click to expand...
 
I don't mind post processing in the least, however I would like to minimize it so I can spend more time shooting. One of the reasons I prefer the F828 over DSLR, is its ability to shoot from the hip. I suppose a skilled DSLR user could as well, but I'm sure its not nearly as easy, especially when you want to jump from landscape to macro because you spot an interesting creature sitting next to you ;)

There is some loss, with my low income, returns become difficult due to shipping cost. I guess my next step then in deciding will be to contact Harmony to see what their return policy is like, and UPS to see what the shipping cost is like.

Thanks Ulysses, and everyone else as well
Ulysses said:
The F828 is a wonderfully enjoyable camera to use.

Does it have an issue with PF? Yep, it does. Other cameras have it,
too. The characteristic and color of this one reminds me a lot of
the Canon G5. Some users had a hard time getting over it in the
CTF, but now you're seeing lots of beautiful pics from it.

The reason this is such an issue is that while all digital cameras
(ALL of them from digicams to dSLR) produce PF/CA to one extent or
another, it was hoped by many that the F828 would have minimized
this problem. The lens was expected to help here. But here we are.

There are techniques you can use to minimize it at shot time, if
those are acceptable to the shooting needs. And there are software
workarounds. If you can deal with that, then the F828 will continue
to please. If you cannot tolerate it at all, then you'll want
another camera that you can tolerate with its own idiosyncracies.

My recommendation: Get an F828 from a source that you can return
for full refund if need be. Get it in your hands and try it out.
It's a no lose proposition. And then at least you'll be doing a lot
less hand-wringing over it. :-)
D. Bentley said:
(please understand, I have a price cap of $1000 that must include
all the accessories, thus the reason I CANNOT go DSLR, so D-Rebel
folk, sorry F828 is better in my situation)
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
Click to expand...
 
unfortunately, I live out in the boonies, the nearest city that MIGHT have one is 4 hours away, the nearest city that WOULD have one, is 8 hours away... so I have to go by feedback from owners and order online. Returns is also an issue, because its hard to afford shipping costs if it comes to it. But, I will look around and see what companies are offering.
Gerrit Pang said:
everyone has a different experience so try and get one with a good
return policy. I think Dell or Sears have 30 day return periods.
Click to expand...
 
Hi There,

This probably isn't going to help, but I think almost any "prosumer" digital camera you get these days is really going to do quite a good job. It's more about how you use it :-)

Having said that, I am no veteran on the STF, but I've seen them at work, as well as many others that have produced GREAT wedding pics with 707's, 717's, V1's and even P-series.

I don't recall the link anymore, but I do remember some great wedding pics by Shay & Uly recently (using F717's I think - maybe Uly was using somthing else!) and also, I think CindyD and SarahD did a wedding-shoot using a 707, with some great results (despite the problems they experienced). So, I think the most important thing is that you're comfortable with the camera and therefore, I second Uly's advice! I'm sure that whatever you decide in the end will get you the results you want as long as you take the time to learn how to use it well.

Good luck.

Cheers,
Shwen
Ulysses said:
The F828 is a wonderfully enjoyable camera to use.

Does it have an issue with PF? Yep, it does. Other cameras have it,
too. The characteristic and color of this one reminds me a lot of
the Canon G5. Some users had a hard time getting over it in the
CTF, but now you're seeing lots of beautiful pics from it.

The reason this is such an issue is that while all digital cameras
(ALL of them from digicams to dSLR) produce PF/CA to one extent or
another, it was hoped by many that the F828 would have minimized
this problem. The lens was expected to help here. But here we are.

There are techniques you can use to minimize it at shot time, if
those are acceptable to the shooting needs. And there are software
workarounds. If you can deal with that, then the F828 will continue
to please. If you cannot tolerate it at all, then you'll want
another camera that you can tolerate with its own idiosyncracies.

My recommendation: Get an F828 from a source that you can return
for full refund if need be. Get it in your hands and try it out.
It's a no lose proposition. And then at least you'll be doing a lot
less hand-wringing over it. :-)
D. Bentley said:
(please understand, I have a price cap of $1000 that must include
all the accessories, thus the reason I CANNOT go DSLR, so D-Rebel
folk, sorry F828 is better in my situation)
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
Click to expand...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shwen
Member said:
P1 u/w pics: http://www.pbase.com/shwen/ses_2002
Click to expand...
 
shwen said:
Hi There,

This probably isn't going to help, but I think almost any
"prosumer" digital camera you get these days is really going to do
quite a good job. It's more about how you use it :-)
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
 
there's 2 threads suggesting that Sony themselves admit to it. One thread suggests Sony's delays are because they're fixing it.

That's of course only heresay, but I don't see any reason to distrust it anymore than to trust it.
Ulysses said:
I've seen no evidence YET that this is a batch-specific problem.

It could happen. But I simply haven't seen any evidence. At this
time, it would appear to simply be an F828 "thing", as a model. Can
Sony fix it? Who knows.
Click to expand...
 
Forgive me for the confusion, I was under the false impression that CA and PF refered to the same things. After finding differently, I realize now that I should have said PF in my original post.

I wondered all this time why the CA pictures I always see where people are complaining, weren't bad at all (truthfully I see as much with my bare eyes, and I have no astigmatism)
 
Hi,

As an ex 5700 user I would strongly recommend going for the 828.

I have shot with the 5700 in studio lighting (amateur) and the shutter lag is a huge minus. The 828 is great (fast as hell, compared to 5700) and has better lens and flash IMO.

Please see my earlier post for reviewing 5700 and 828 photos (although not portraits or studio light there)

A second thing to consider is the 828 manual zoom ring (fast as the hand) compared to button pressing ultra slow and inaccurate 5700 zoom.

Hope this helps
-Dimitris
D. Bentley said:
Forgive me for the confusion, I was under the false impression that
CA and PF refered to the same things. After finding differently, I
realize now that I should have said PF in my original post.

I wondered all this time why the CA pictures I always see where
people are complaining, weren't bad at all (truthfully I see as
much with my bare eyes, and I have no astigmatism)
Click to expand...
 
Are you sure you are taking EVERYthing into account with that $1000 budget, Mr. Bentley?

For example: you buy.....

These are estimates and, can vary greatly by YOUR needs and your ability to shop price so, a grain of salt to my pricing, K?

F828 1000.00
extra battery 60.00
extra membory (?) another say $200
tripod( if you don't have one) say $100

I'm not at approx. 1300.00 to 1400.00 and, I don't know what other "stuff" you have or don't have??? Studio lighting (portable) etc ???

I have never done a wedding in my life.... only twice was I the victem LOL
not the photographer. So I can't answer your technical question, sorry.

Mark J
D. Bentley said:
After reading some of the reviews here on STF from people who have
received their F828s, the CA issue is beginning to worry me. The
camera sounds like its a great camera all around, but it sounds as
if the lens is inconsistant from camera to camera.

Anyway, what is the "expert opinion" on how such CA would effect
wedding photography where you have the stark black and white
contrast? I'm considering cancelling my order in favor of the
Nikon 5700 another great camera for a novice hobbyist like myself.

(please understand, I have a price cap of $1000 that must include
all the accessories, thus the reason I CANNOT go DSLR, so D-Rebel
folk, sorry F828 is better in my situation)
Click to expand...
 
D. Bentley said:
That's of course only heresay, but I don't see any reason to
distrust it anymore than to trust it.
Click to expand...
Well, you asked the question. :-)

I tend not to lean in the direction of speculation until there is either real evidence or official word from Sony.

What I am seeing is that some photographers are dealing better with it either because their more tolerant or else they're shooting in conditions that are not as conducive to the PF issue.

--

Ulysses
 
...cancel it in favor of an F717.

Personally, I'm leaning toward the 828, but if I choose not to go there yet, I'm going to remain VERY happy with my 707 till spring.

dave
D. Bentley said:
After reading some of the reviews here on STF from people who have
received their F828s, the CA issue is beginning to worry me. The
camera sounds like its a great camera all around, but it sounds as
if the lens is inconsistant from camera to camera.

Anyway, what is the "expert opinion" on how such CA would effect
wedding photography where you have the stark black and white
contrast? I'm considering cancelling my order in favor of the
Nikon 5700 another great camera for a novice hobbyist like myself.

(please understand, I have a price cap of $1000 that must include
all the accessories, thus the reason I CANNOT go DSLR, so D-Rebel
folk, sorry F828 is better in my situation)
Click to expand...
--
Amazing what we can do with just three crayons, red green and blue!
http://yourbattlecreek.com/dave/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top