Ricky Sanford Note Email was Chevy55sc@aol
Active member
Terry truth is a $100 Point & shoot 35mm film camera would have photographed the hair better in the 1st pic I looked at. That hair leaves alot to be desired.
Rick
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Is the Sony R1 for me? (please help)
- Thread starter lllZ3R0lll
- Start date
Rick
Ricky Sanford Note Email was Chevy55sc@aol
Active member
Terry,
Compare the hair in your pic taken with the Nikon D70 to one taken with the Sony R1.
D70 http://www.dpexpert.com.au/gallery/SP02/Belinda
R1 http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=17794540
R1 wins hands down
Rick
Compare the hair in your pic taken with the Nikon D70 to one taken with the Sony R1.
D70 http://www.dpexpert.com.au/gallery/SP02/Belinda
R1 http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=17794540
R1 wins hands down
Rick
Jort
Forum Enthusiast
Using smartzoom on the R1 to a 5MP equivalent picture in combination with full optical zoom, will give you the (35mm) equivalent of 180 mm. Coming from the 24mm wide end of the camera that equals 7.5X magnification. But, since your Canon starts at 36mm, that would compare to 5X magnification on your Canon S2 IS.
Smartzoom shows the result directly on your LCD so you don't have to worry about the output, framing or losing the idea behind the picture.
The picture below shows the difference in optical magnification between the H1 and R1, but since the H1 and S2 have the same amount of pixels and magnification, you can replace "H1" with "S2" too. The R1's output shows the maximum magnification of the yellow circle (object) using smartzoom to a 5MP equivalent (180mm). The difference in size between the 2 circles is what you lose in detail using maximum zoom at 5MP size.
But this is what you gain at the wide end using the full 10MP resolution. The total frame is much much bigger, while keeping the main object the same size. (again replace "H1" with "S2"):
As for macro shooting, I think all of your examples can be done with the R1. Yes, from a greater distance, but the result is what counts. So don't be fooled by people warning you for the greater distance. The R1 can shoot a minimum frame with a with a width of approx. 5 inches at 10 MP. Cropping to a 5MP equivalent would take figure that below 4 inches. Adding a close up lens would again improve this figure, to lets say... the width of a butterfly
Hope this helps,
Jort
Jort
Forum Enthusiast
I think the R1 will give you a good improvement for your type of photography (excellent shots in your album).
PPS: Cropping for macroshots can again be done through smartzoom (but I stand corrected here).
PPS: Cropping for macroshots can again be done through smartzoom (but I stand corrected here).
Greg Gebhardt
Forum Pro
You need to stick with photography, you got talent. You have good eyes for making great images. We will all see you and your images in the future if you keep up the work!
--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
D Two X and a spare.
Leica Digilux Two
FZee 30 & Sony R-One
--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
D Two X and a spare.
Leica Digilux Two
FZee 30 & Sony R-One
busch
Forum Pro
oVan
Senior Member
nice indeed! This proves once again that people (incl. myself) should throw away more pictures and only keep te very best to show!
--
oVan
--
oVan
Greg Gebhardt
Forum Pro
that some can "see" way better than others. Practice and study can and will help you "see", but some have vision that I will never have.
Blind in Jacksonville
--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
D Two X and a spare.
Leica Digilux Two
FZee 30 & Sony R-One
Blind in Jacksonville
--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
D Two X and a spare.
Leica Digilux Two
FZee 30 & Sony R-One
Greg Henry
Senior Member
Ok, let's simplify this, as it's becoming a very everyday thread where people say to get this and this or that and that, and the "I want one tos" and all this is creeping in.
You are a teenager, who is obviously talented. Your pics with the S2 are very good, and superior to some from people twice your age or older that we've seen on here. Regardless, let's not lose touch with the fact you are a teen who works part-time, and who is on a much more limited budget than most folks in these forums.
The Good: The R1 is a superior camera to what you are using now. It takes better, more detailed, and less noisy images at higher isos than your S2. You will be able to make much larger prints that retain more detail than you can now. Online postings (around 800x600 pixels or so) will look about the same as the benefit you get from higher res images are for printing. If you decide to start printing and framing your images to sell, or, sell them to stock libraries online, you will most likely be able to go further with the R1 than S2. Stop worrying about the LCD on the R1 - it's just in a different place, and it will grow on you.
The Notes: Fixed lens cameras are NOT immune to dust on the sensors. It's just a lot harder for dust to get to the sensor since the lens is fixed. The lens barrel on the R1 like most cameras, extends and retracts as you use the zoom. It's a plastic
barrel, and can attract dust and pull it back into the camera body. It's not an everyday thing, and if you take care when using it in dusty environments it shouldn't be a problem. Just as a FYI, be aware that consumer cameras are LESS likely to get dust on their sensors when compared to DSLRs, but not immune.
The Bad: The R1 is the size and weight of a DSLR. You won't be lugging lenses and stuff around, but it's still not a small camera, so be aware of this. It's not S2 sized. The two weaknesses - if you want to aim toward taking lots of wildlife pics, then the zoom won't cut it for you, and, the macro ability is pretty weak compared to the Canon. There is no "super macro" mode on the R1, and you will not be able to get right up on top of a subject with it. For that, you need a consumer camera that has a macro/super macro capability, or, a DSLR with a dedicated macro lens.
So if you can live with those limitations, the R1 should carry you through until the time you are out of school, working full time, and can afford whatever is out there then. If those limitations will cut into the type of stuff you like to shoot - you need to save more for a DSLR or different speced consumer model.
You are a teenager, who is obviously talented. Your pics with the S2 are very good, and superior to some from people twice your age or older that we've seen on here. Regardless, let's not lose touch with the fact you are a teen who works part-time, and who is on a much more limited budget than most folks in these forums.
The Good: The R1 is a superior camera to what you are using now. It takes better, more detailed, and less noisy images at higher isos than your S2. You will be able to make much larger prints that retain more detail than you can now. Online postings (around 800x600 pixels or so) will look about the same as the benefit you get from higher res images are for printing. If you decide to start printing and framing your images to sell, or, sell them to stock libraries online, you will most likely be able to go further with the R1 than S2. Stop worrying about the LCD on the R1 - it's just in a different place, and it will grow on you.
The Notes: Fixed lens cameras are NOT immune to dust on the sensors. It's just a lot harder for dust to get to the sensor since the lens is fixed. The lens barrel on the R1 like most cameras, extends and retracts as you use the zoom. It's a plastic
barrel, and can attract dust and pull it back into the camera body. It's not an everyday thing, and if you take care when using it in dusty environments it shouldn't be a problem. Just as a FYI, be aware that consumer cameras are LESS likely to get dust on their sensors when compared to DSLRs, but not immune.The Bad: The R1 is the size and weight of a DSLR. You won't be lugging lenses and stuff around, but it's still not a small camera, so be aware of this. It's not S2 sized. The two weaknesses - if you want to aim toward taking lots of wildlife pics, then the zoom won't cut it for you, and, the macro ability is pretty weak compared to the Canon. There is no "super macro" mode on the R1, and you will not be able to get right up on top of a subject with it. For that, you need a consumer camera that has a macro/super macro capability, or, a DSLR with a dedicated macro lens.
So if you can live with those limitations, the R1 should carry you through until the time you are out of school, working full time, and can afford whatever is out there then. If those limitations will cut into the type of stuff you like to shoot - you need to save more for a DSLR or different speced consumer model.
lllZ3R0lll
Forum Enthusiast
Wow thanks a lot for all these great comments.
Today I went on a school field trip to downtown houston and now I know I want an R1 for sure. We went underground.. and to dim lighted areas... and I had a lot of picture opportunities, but since anything over 100ISO looks really bad on the S2 I missed the shots.
Also, My teacher has a Rebel XT, and I borrowed it for a while. Not to see if I wanted it, just because it had a similar zoom to the R1(exepct not as good quality). It was a 30something-112mm zoom and I thought it wasn't that bad at all(the range taht is). ALso, I noticed that when I go past 7x on my S2, I rarely get good pictures. I also noticed that on my gallery(and when I look at my better pictures) none are made with a lot of zoom. The better ones are usually below 5x! Also, a mistake I make is rellying too much on zoom and I end up getting blurry and bad picture, sometimes totally missing teh subject. So the zoom on the R1 I feel, is really not that big of a problem anymore and I know I could get used to it.
I also noticed that many times I wished I had a wider lens because sometimes I wnat to take a picture of things I see but the camera(even in widest setting) is not wide enugh! I know the R1 has a great wide zoom range. This will sure open a lot of great picture opportunies taht I'm not even aware of now.
So out of the three cons I had about the R1, zoom range and weird lens placement aren't a real issue to me anymore thanks to my experiences and you guys helping me out. The only thing now is teh macro... I love taking that ocasional macro shot! Things liek this-
Oh and keeping the S2 for macro and protability reasons isn't really an option because I'm thinking of selling it to a friend who said would pay $300 for it. The thing is that I'd have to buy the R1($800) plus a CF or those Sony Memory cards and that's another $100 or so.
Can someone tell me how good the macro would be on the R1 if I were to buy the macro lens for it?
And thanks everyone for being so helpful and awesome! Oha nd also thanks for the nice comments about my pictures.
--
Check Out My Picture Gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/htamez/
Today I went on a school field trip to downtown houston and now I know I want an R1 for sure. We went underground.. and to dim lighted areas... and I had a lot of picture opportunities, but since anything over 100ISO looks really bad on the S2 I missed the shots.
Also, My teacher has a Rebel XT, and I borrowed it for a while. Not to see if I wanted it, just because it had a similar zoom to the R1(exepct not as good quality). It was a 30something-112mm zoom and I thought it wasn't that bad at all(the range taht is). ALso, I noticed that when I go past 7x on my S2, I rarely get good pictures. I also noticed that on my gallery(and when I look at my better pictures) none are made with a lot of zoom. The better ones are usually below 5x! Also, a mistake I make is rellying too much on zoom and I end up getting blurry and bad picture, sometimes totally missing teh subject. So the zoom on the R1 I feel, is really not that big of a problem anymore and I know I could get used to it.
I also noticed that many times I wished I had a wider lens because sometimes I wnat to take a picture of things I see but the camera(even in widest setting) is not wide enugh! I know the R1 has a great wide zoom range. This will sure open a lot of great picture opportunies taht I'm not even aware of now.
So out of the three cons I had about the R1, zoom range and weird lens placement aren't a real issue to me anymore thanks to my experiences and you guys helping me out. The only thing now is teh macro... I love taking that ocasional macro shot! Things liek this-
Oh and keeping the S2 for macro and protability reasons isn't really an option because I'm thinking of selling it to a friend who said would pay $300 for it. The thing is that I'd have to buy the R1($800) plus a CF or those Sony Memory cards and that's another $100 or so.
Can someone tell me how good the macro would be on the R1 if I were to buy the macro lens for it?
And thanks everyone for being so helpful and awesome! Oha nd also thanks for the nice comments about my pictures.
--
Check Out My Picture Gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/htamez/
JJDiniz
Senior Member
.
Hi lllZ3R0lll (wow!), I had the same hard time deciding.
During three weeks (about a month ago) I gathered 27 items of information (like image size, zoom range, price, etc) about 41 camera models, and arranged them in a work-sheet-like document to help me choose the camera that would best suit my needs.
The data came from http://www.dpreview.com and http://www.imaging-resource.com
Like you (but for a different reason) I left out all the dSLRs, so that my list was made up of "prosumer" cameras only (although ALL advanced models were on the list).
After many hours of navigation inside my list, I discoverd somethng I was unaware of before I started the research:
I should give up trying to select THE best camera, and should instead, pick TWO cameras to fill my needs.
The reasons soon became obvious:
1- No one camera had everything I wanted.
2- With two cameras, I can zoom all the way from 24mm (19mm with WA converter) to 432mm (734mm with 1.7x tele converter).
3- With two cameras, one of them can have all the pro features (manual mode, dedicated flash, bracketing, etc) while the other can be simpler (which means less expensive).
With that in mind, the difficult job became very easy.
I decided to buy the Sony DSC-R1 AND the Panasonic TZ1.
You are aware of the qualities of the R1, but you also know that it does not have Image Stabilization, it has a poor zoom range, and it does not do movies.
Ok, I don´t mind. The TZ1 has all that, and wiith the new "Folded Optics" design, it is small enough to fit in a shirt pocket. On top of that, its movie is 16:9 wide screen format, larger than VGA!
The decison was made. I received the R1 eight days ago, and I will get the TZ1 on my next trip to America, in June.
I hope my strategy makes you a little happier.
...
By the way, the reasons I left out the dSLRs are:
1- I want to have LIVE LCDs.
2- I don´t want to commit myself to a brand.
(If I were to buy a dSLR with three or four lenses, two or three years from now, I would be looking for upgrades only from the same manufacturer, in order to re-use those lenses)
3- The two cameras I selected cost less than one of the three or four SLR lenses needed to cover the same zoom range.
JJDiniz, from Brazil
.
Hi lllZ3R0lll (wow!), I had the same hard time deciding.
During three weeks (about a month ago) I gathered 27 items of information (like image size, zoom range, price, etc) about 41 camera models, and arranged them in a work-sheet-like document to help me choose the camera that would best suit my needs.
The data came from http://www.dpreview.com and http://www.imaging-resource.com
Like you (but for a different reason) I left out all the dSLRs, so that my list was made up of "prosumer" cameras only (although ALL advanced models were on the list).
After many hours of navigation inside my list, I discoverd somethng I was unaware of before I started the research:
I should give up trying to select THE best camera, and should instead, pick TWO cameras to fill my needs.
The reasons soon became obvious:
1- No one camera had everything I wanted.
2- With two cameras, I can zoom all the way from 24mm (19mm with WA converter) to 432mm (734mm with 1.7x tele converter).
3- With two cameras, one of them can have all the pro features (manual mode, dedicated flash, bracketing, etc) while the other can be simpler (which means less expensive).
With that in mind, the difficult job became very easy.
I decided to buy the Sony DSC-R1 AND the Panasonic TZ1.
You are aware of the qualities of the R1, but you also know that it does not have Image Stabilization, it has a poor zoom range, and it does not do movies.
Ok, I don´t mind. The TZ1 has all that, and wiith the new "Folded Optics" design, it is small enough to fit in a shirt pocket. On top of that, its movie is 16:9 wide screen format, larger than VGA!
The decison was made. I received the R1 eight days ago, and I will get the TZ1 on my next trip to America, in June.
I hope my strategy makes you a little happier.
...
By the way, the reasons I left out the dSLRs are:
1- I want to have LIVE LCDs.
2- I don´t want to commit myself to a brand.
(If I were to buy a dSLR with three or four lenses, two or three years from now, I would be looking for upgrades only from the same manufacturer, in order to re-use those lenses)
3- The two cameras I selected cost less than one of the three or four SLR lenses needed to cover the same zoom range.
JJDiniz, from Brazil
.
Jort
Forum Enthusiast
I love that shot...
But take a look at this R1 example:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=17628298
Taken without any extra lenses and I'm a 100% sure that the camera can get closer than that since the frame (boy's head) is way over 5 inches wide
But take a look at this R1 example:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=17628298
Taken without any extra lenses and I'm a 100% sure that the camera can get closer than that since the frame (boy's head) is way over 5 inches wide
Greg Gebhardt
Forum Pro
--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
D Two X and a spare.
Leica Digilux Two
Panny TeeZeeOne & Sony R-One
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
D Two X and a spare.
Leica Digilux Two
Panny TeeZeeOne & Sony R-One
fishcatcher
Senior Member
Not much, given that you can't get any closer than 30 cm, if my memory serves me, or therabouts, and that is about 12 inches. However, as your crop shows, you can get closer virtually by cropping to get an image that appears to have been taken from a smaller distance, but at smaller image size of course.
I love that shot...
But take a look at this R1 example:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=17628298
Taken without any extra lenses and I'm a 100% sure that the camera
can get closer than that since the frame (boy's head) is way over 5
inches wide
Jort
Forum Enthusiast
It should be able to get closer. Dpreview states a minimum object coverage of 97x64mm at 120mm. To me it looks like we're looking at atleast double the size still.
This what R1 smart zoom can do. The smaller image size results from cropping in the camera.
5X ... 10.3M ..... no crop ........... 120mm
10X ... 2.6M ..... half-size crop .... equal to 240mm
15X ... 1.1M ..... third-size crop ... equal to 360mm
Jort
Forum Enthusiast
When it comes to comparing the macro capabilities, this is the only thing you need to look at:
R1
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscr1/page18.asp
S2
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons2is/page5.asp
In normal macro mode the R1 has the clear edge with 40px/mm (and NO distortion) against 30 px/mm for the Canon (low distortion).
Ofcourse the S2 has a Super Macro mode with 124px/mm, but given the high distortion and soft corners that come with it, the usability is limited.
R1
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscr1/page18.asp
S2
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons2is/page5.asp
In normal macro mode the R1 has the clear edge with 40px/mm (and NO distortion) against 30 px/mm for the Canon (low distortion).
Ofcourse the S2 has a Super Macro mode with 124px/mm, but given the high distortion and soft corners that come with it, the usability is limited.
lllZ3R0lll
Forum Enthusiast
FOr some reason I looked a bit into the D50 and it doesn't look that bad either. It's only about $500, and many have told me I can get a decent pair of lenses for less than $500 that almost cover the whole zoom of the R1.
Reasons why I am considering the D50 over the R1-
-FAST response.
-better macro and zoom when I have the money for lenses(which won't be in a whiiile anyways though.)
-Not as big as R1
Resons why I would get the R1 instead-
-I love the "all around" aspect
-LIVE LCD preview which is really important for me.
-Swivel LCD which would allow me to get some shots I wouldn't have otherwise.
-GREAT lens quality.
-No dust and changing lenses.
So it really does come down to these two for me... At teh beggining of me decing to upgrade my S2 I had about 6 cameras in mind but now I am SURE I will get either the R1 or the D50...
The thing is... I don't know which - -
omg I've been thinkign about this whole buying a camera deal for weeks and have spent at least 25 hours researching online and on the forum. lol ikinda crazy. But you guys are really helping out and I'm sure I'd be spending even ore time if it wern't for you guys!
--
Check Out My Picture Gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/htamez/
Reasons why I am considering the D50 over the R1-
-FAST response.
-better macro and zoom when I have the money for lenses(which won't be in a whiiile anyways though.)
-Not as big as R1
Resons why I would get the R1 instead-
-I love the "all around" aspect
-LIVE LCD preview which is really important for me.
-Swivel LCD which would allow me to get some shots I wouldn't have otherwise.
-GREAT lens quality.
-No dust and changing lenses.
So it really does come down to these two for me... At teh beggining of me decing to upgrade my S2 I had about 6 cameras in mind but now I am SURE I will get either the R1 or the D50...
The thing is... I don't know which - -
omg I've been thinkign about this whole buying a camera deal for weeks and have spent at least 25 hours researching online and on the forum. lol ikinda crazy. But you guys are really helping out and I'm sure I'd be spending even ore time if it wern't for you guys!
--
Check Out My Picture Gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/htamez/
lllZ3R0lll
Forum Enthusiast
I've been thinkign of something... This is crazy... but it just might work... a devious plan, I must say, one of epic proportions... dunno if I could handle it, but I'm sure it would be great...
But seriously, I've been thinking of getting the D50 body only + the amazing Nikon 18-200mm VR I've heard nothing but great things about this lens from everyone! And I mean wow... compared to the R1s 24 - 120mm zoom, the VR is just in a whole nother league. PLUS the VR technology is amazing, I've read.
I feel that if I get that(Nikon D50 + 24-120mm V lens) I would be set for years! I mean what more could I want? Sure, this would come to about $1250(D50 = $480 + lens=$780, am I correct?). But I feel that if I spend taht much money I would eb set for many years... am I correct?
The thing is, and I don't know if I'm correst, is that I've heard that the D50 doesn't have Depth of Field preview... I've used my S2 and my teachers Rebe; XT and they all have "DoF preview)... I mean isnt DoF preview where you can tell exactly whats in focus on your picture...? If the D50 doesn't have this... gow in the world am I supposed to tell whats in focus?!?! And when I take macro photography or portraits, ect... how am I supposed to know when my subject is isolated?????
Or am I getting this whole Depth of Fielf preview wrong...? If I am correct, and you can't tell exactly what areas are in focus in you photograph, taht throws the D50 out of the picture for me...(pun - -)
So what is it guys?
--
Check Out My Picture Gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/htamez/
But seriously, I've been thinking of getting the D50 body only + the amazing Nikon 18-200mm VR I've heard nothing but great things about this lens from everyone! And I mean wow... compared to the R1s 24 - 120mm zoom, the VR is just in a whole nother league. PLUS the VR technology is amazing, I've read.
I feel that if I get that(Nikon D50 + 24-120mm V lens) I would be set for years! I mean what more could I want? Sure, this would come to about $1250(D50 = $480 + lens=$780, am I correct?). But I feel that if I spend taht much money I would eb set for many years... am I correct?
The thing is, and I don't know if I'm correst, is that I've heard that the D50 doesn't have Depth of Field preview... I've used my S2 and my teachers Rebe; XT and they all have "DoF preview)... I mean isnt DoF preview where you can tell exactly whats in focus on your picture...? If the D50 doesn't have this... gow in the world am I supposed to tell whats in focus?!?! And when I take macro photography or portraits, ect... how am I supposed to know when my subject is isolated?????
Or am I getting this whole Depth of Fielf preview wrong...? If I am correct, and you can't tell exactly what areas are in focus in you photograph, taht throws the D50 out of the picture for me...(pun - -)
So what is it guys?
--
Check Out My Picture Gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/htamez/
oVan
Senior Member
Well that is one of the advantages of the R1, the live preview really shows how DOF is in your picture...while you turn the aperture wheel you see it change in the screen.
I have no idea about the D50, but I couldn't live without this function!
--
oVan
I have no idea about the D50, but I couldn't live without this function!
--
oVan
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum