News Photog considering F828, feedback wanted.

[Evil Eggplant]

Increased sensitivity in low light = faster shutter speed. Optical
viewfinder better in low light

Ah, you were thinking of ISO 3200. Got ya.

You would think so, wouldnt you. How many stops do you lose
shooting at ISO 64 which is closer to ISO 40. Don't let the f/2 -
2.8 fool you. Low sensitivity eats up this spec

Well, assuming that he'd be shooting at 200...

Doesn't matter. the f/2 - 2.8 is eye candy. The DSLR will do better in low light than the 828, 3ven with a mediocre lens

Yes, subjective sometimes. But what I said stands. A canon DSLR
with a 50mm f/1.8 prime, at ISO 1600, will do things impossible
with the 828.

Wait. We were sticking to the 28-200 range, weren't we? Where'd the
50mm f1.8 (metal mount Mark 1, I hope) come from? I could sneak in
IR/night shots and say the DSLR doesn't cut it there.

50mm is in between 28-200. The 50mm f/1.8 can be had new for about 65 bucks. This is a serious lens, as sharp as almost any, that will turn your DSLR into a bona-fide light bucket.

As for night shots and IR, you are correct. These are not features a photojournalist would crave, but extraordinary low light performance probably is.

In certain situations, yes, better. It shouldn't irk you, and I'm
not offended.

No, you don't irk me the "better images" statement people seem to
like to toss around irks me. Then, I don't equate an image's
quality on the fine grain/low noise aspect.

True, to a point. Again (back to the same thing) I would think a photojournalist would want a camera that is fast enough to stop action in indoor sports, that can be used without flash indoors. Noise is very important in situations like these.

sharing honest feelings about why a journalist would be better
suited with a DSLR.

I've been journalist, but not a sports shooter, so my
opinions/feelings differ. Rarely was it that dark or flash
restricted in what I did. I have set the f/stop, hyperfocal
distance focus and held cameras above my head shooting
semi-blindly. The LCD and preview of a prosumer camera suits my
needs better. Just sold my 10D and bag o' lenses.

Then you know more than me.

My uncle was a famous news photographer years ago. "Weegee" would carry his darkroom with him in the trunk of his car, processing film from his Speed Graphic. His was the first civilian automobile equipped with a police radio. He was a hardcore news photographer. He believed that being prepared was the most important thing a photographer could be. I agree with that. Because I agree with that I think the DSLR would be the camera of choice. Yeah, I know, the swivel LCD and all that, but when I see people struggling here to get decent low light action shots I kind of wonder how a professional news photographer would cope in that sure-to-happen situation

You may be correct, but again, low-light is one area where the DSLR
shines. The DSLR will simply do it better. I have seen 828 sports
shots, I have seen them from a DSLR. The DSLR images, captured
under these circumstances are simply better IMO, sorry

Define "better," please.

Better in low light? I think the jury is in on this one.

If this is the criteria of the photographer then I agree with you 100%

Again, going by what Tim said. A 28-200mm would handle his needs
99% of the time.

I reserve the right to disagree

Noted.

--
------------------------------------
Digital Cameras - Current: Canon G2, Minolta D7i
Previous: Apple Quicktake 100, Olympus C2000, C2020, Canon G1,
Canon EOS 10D
Film - 35mm - 8X10
Next: Sony 828 or Minolta A2?

--
rich
'beware the eggplant'
c-7oo, d-51O, DSC-F7O7, 3OOD
'Trying, the first step to failure'- Homer Simpson
http://www.iceninephotography.com

 

[Shay Stephens]

Thanks for the attempt at maligning me by trying to label me as Sony employee. Since I can't be trusted, what does it matter what my opinion on anything is?

Low noise obviously trumps any other benefit a camera could possibly offer, so you win, the DSLR should be the obvious choice to all.

Cheers

--
We are DSLR...resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.

 

[David Martin]

I shoot for a small local newspaper, mostly b/w. I'm leaning toward
getting the F828 as my main camera. Here's the thinking:

No DSLR offers the zoom range in one lens.
Carrying one small, light, versatile camera is make for greater
versitility.
28 - 200mm covers 99% of news needs. Any single lens on a DSLR
covers maybe 70%. Changing lenses to get that other 30% would
likely loose more pictures than it gained.
Shutter lag on the 828 seems no longer to be a problem. Resolution
is more that needed.
Low and high angle shots are often needed in news work; the 828
shines here with its flex body.
I'm thinking that the 828 might be the ideal camera for newswork.

Comments please
--
Tim Baker

If the answer to this is yes then the 828 is not suitable for you.

Personally I do not believe in getting inventive - I find out what everyone else uses and buy the same, for any business use, if the business is just starting out.

When you are an expert yourself, get whatever you feel like, as you won't be asking anyone else anyway!

I'd guess the middle of the road choice for what you want would be the Nikon D70 with a couple of lenses
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment

 

[Olga Johnson]

You also don't need 8 megapixels for newsprint, but its a nice
feature to have. The fact I stated is indisputable, a DSLR with a
50mm f/1.8 will chew up and spit out any non-DSLR digicam, period.

...you need a 50mm shot (basically 80mm in 300D/10D terms) which is not what the original poster asked for. He specifically mentioned that changing lenses would cause him to miss 30% of the shots he wants.

There's no argument about that one lens being the best bang for the buck in the dSLR world, but the subject is more about the best single lens for the job. And we don't know if that job is in low light or not, or whether flash is used in low light.

To me it sounded more like versatility, shutter speed, and the flexibility of using the camera away from the face are more important to the poster than the quality of a low light shot.

Olga

 

[Evil Eggplant]

News photographers shoot with Nikon DSLR's with big buffers. They don't play games. This is their business.

If this fella is in Mayberry and is shooting Aunt Bea at the state fair, then the 828 will be fine.

If he is shooting for publication in the real world then he needs a fast DSLR.

Just my .02. I'm not 828 bashing here, I don't see the 828 as a news shooters camera. Too many things it cant do.

You also don't need 8 megapixels for newsprint, but its a nice
feature to have. The fact I stated is indisputable, a DSLR with a
50mm f/1.8 will chew up and spit out any non-DSLR digicam, period.

...you need a 50mm shot (basically 80mm in 300D/10D terms) which is
not what the original poster asked for. He specifically mentioned
that changing lenses would cause him to miss 30% of the shots he
wants.

There's no argument about that one lens being the best bang for the
buck in the dSLR world, but the subject is more about the best
single lens for the job. And we don't know if that job is in low
light or not, or whether flash is used in low light.

To me it sounded more like versatility, shutter speed, and the
flexibility of using the camera away from the face are more
important to the poster than the quality of a low light shot.

Olga

--
rich
'beware the eggplant'
c-7oo, d-51O, DSC-F7O7, 3OOD
'Trying, the first step to failure'- Homer Simpson
http://www.iceninephotography.com

 

[Olga Johnson]

News photographers shoot with Nikon DSLR's with big buffers. They
don't play games. This is their business.

Sports photographers do, but have you looked at some of the newspaper photos?

I would also venture to say that there are a lot of writers who merely need to supplement their writing with an occasional photo or two that does not necessarily require the expense of a dSLR. I know one specific writer who tried the 300D (at my recommendation, no less) and who turned it in for the 828 which he found better suited to his needs.

Don't assume that all newspaper writers/photographers are looking for the perfect image. They are looking for the right tool that would work for them.

Olga

 

[Evil Eggplant]

Shay

You were just a bit wishy-washy there.

Do me a favor, go back and read some of what you wrote in reply to me. Then come back here. I'll wait

I don't know why you're so sensitive about this, but if you're unwilling to make a small concession to the DSLR by giving it an edge in low light, and are unwilling to discuss a topic without making silly comments about ISO 800 being "gritty", and that this wonderful "grit" feature comes as a standard accessory with the 828 then excuuuuse me.

The potential was there for an interesting dialog, but you blew it with a bunch of simplistic, insulting comments, which is very unlike you.

I did not call you a sony employee (although you certainly sounded like one) I imagine you're sensitive to this right now. I didn't malign you.

So now you pout and go away.

I wasn't suspicious before, but I am now. Just how big was the check Sony gave you anyway? (I don't even want to know) This guy is looking for advice regarding a $1000 purchase and all you can do is blow smoke?

You're a good photographer, and I have much respect for your skill, but your comments to me were insulting. You must think I'm an idiot.

First you say ISO 800 is OK for newsprint

Then I say it may be too noisy to be good for much else.

Then you say that the "gritty" look is a good thing.

You did not address a single one of my observations with anything worthwhile, just the usual sony zealot type rhetoric. You used to be a straight shooter.

Sheesh, dude. If I maligned you, then you insulted my intelligence. There, we're even

Thanks for the attempt at maligning me by trying to label me as
Sony employee. Since I can't be trusted, what does it matter what
my opinion on anything is?

Low noise obviously trumps any other benefit a camera could
possibly offer, so you win, the DSLR should be the obvious choice
to all.

Cheers

--
We are DSLR...resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.

--
rich
'beware the eggplant'
c-7oo, d-51O, DSC-F7O7, 3OOD
'Trying, the first step to failure'- Homer Simpson
http://www.iceninephotography.com

 

[Shay Stephens]

What's there to talk about. You won't acknowledge any of the benefits I mentioned, so why should I yield to your argument? But, so as not to sound like a little pouty child to you, the DSLR has the advantage of lower noise at high ISO and can use focal lengths outside the 28mm-200mm range and can have faster shutter lag. That is not the end-all-be-all to photography. There are other factors that come into play for people when deciding on a camera, which you seem loath to acknowledge due to your infatuation with low noise images.

Which brings up another point. If you are so concerned about image quality, why is it you don't use a large format camera? Oh, what's that? You made a compromise on image quality in favor of other factors? How very odd. So it would seem that you can make those decision for yourself, but others are not allowed to do the same. Interesting.

And stop implying I work for Sony, it is very irritating, and is just a cheap attempt to marginalize what I say, and I don't appreciate it.

--
As long as the Lomo exists, it doesn't matter what camera you use.

 

[Evil Eggplant]

OK, I baited you with the "sony employee" comment. I apologize for that.

Now, for the meat of this:

You did not agree with anything I said, you disputed everything. Even the stuff that is pretty much agreed on, like the DSLR being superior in low light. You wouldn't even give me that. I wish you would address something I say with a direct reply. Trying to communicate with you is an excersise in frustration right now.

Jeezus Dude, try talking to me like an equal, lose the condescending bull$hit, then maybe we can talk.

As for the format I choose, it is at least as good as what you're shooting with. Many would say better.

As for my comments, they were relevant to what would be appropriate for a news shooter to carry. Considering 95% of news shooters carry nikons DSLR's with big, fast buffers I felt safe recommending a DSLR. I backed up my opinion with what I consider to be facts revelent to my comments. You addressed my comments with silly remarks.

I said it before, you must think I am an idiot.

"Gee whiz, Shay. I thought noise was bad, but its kinda "gritty", I never would have seen that"

Give me a break. What kind of cr@p is that? Noise is bad. If you shoot in situations where noise may present problems the 828 may not be the camera for you. Sometimes noise is good for art, but generally, starting with a clean image is better.

Why is it so hard for you to agree with that statement?

Are you a hypocrite or what?

That beautiful shot yuou took of the Twin Tower memorial with the lights in the sky. I remember you mentioning how many shots you layered on top of each other to get such a clean image. Yes, noise was a big deal for you when you processed that shot, wasn't it?

So you do care about noise. Quite a deal, in fact. The pristine nature of your work demonstrates just how hard you have worked to reduce noise.

So I tell a guy contemplating a $1000 purchase that there may be unacceptable noise at ISO 800, and instead of saying:

"You have a point there, Rich"

You comment that dowwnsizing the image for newsprint will hide the noise, then you say the noise is "gritty" when I question your comment.

So, noise is ok for this guy, but you'll keep on layering one image on top of another to reduce it for yourself. Yeah, fair and balanced.

I don't notice much "grit" in your images. They are all lovely, and noise free.

You are quite an enigma

And yes, I like clean images. Like I said before, noise is easier to add than it is to remove. You won't even agree with this.

What's there to talk about. You won't acknowledge any of the
benefits I mentioned, so why should I yield to your argument? But,
so as not to sound like a little pouty child to you, the DSLR has
the advantage of lower noise at high ISO and can use focal lengths
outside the 28mm-200mm range and can have faster shutter lag. That
is not the end-all-be-all to photography. There are other factors
that come into play for people when deciding on a camera, which you
seem loath to acknowledge due to your infatuation with low noise
images.

Which brings up another point. If you are so concerned about image
quality, why is it you don't use a large format camera? Oh, what's
that? You made a compromise on image quality in favor of other
factors? How very odd. So it would seem that you can make those
decision for yourself, but others are not allowed to do the same.
Interesting.

And stop implying I work for Sony, it is very irritating, and is
just a cheap attempt to marginalize what I say, and I don't
appreciate it.

--
As long as the Lomo exists, it doesn't matter what camera you use.

--
rich
'beware the eggplant'
c-7oo, d-51O, DSC-F7O7, 3OOD
'Trying, the first step to failure'- Homer Simpson
http://www.iceninephotography.com

 

[Shay Stephens]

OK, I baited you with the "sony employee" comment. I apologize for
that.

Thank you.

Now, for the meat of this:

You did not agree with anything I said, you disputed everything.

No I didn't.

Even the stuff that is pretty much agreed on, like the DSLR being
superior in low light. You wouldn't even give me that.

Yes I did. I said DSLR's do have lower noise at higher ISO. There is more to low light photography than cleaner high ISO however.

I wish you
would address something I say with a direct reply. Trying to
communicate with you is an excersise in frustration right now.

No it's not. You are the one fighting me here. In your original "I disagree" post, you said that the 828 will not cut it when 200mm is not enough. But the original poster mentioned that 99% of his work is within the 200mm range. You were not addressing his needs.

You said the 828 "will not stop motion in all but the brightest light" which is a gross over exaggeration.

You said that a DSLR would blow away a non DSLR in low light with a 50mm lens. Which also does not address the posters needs. Nor is fine art quality images necessary for newsprint.

In all the subsequent dialog after this post, you keep hounding points that are not directly relevant to the posters needs, but instead your own.

Jeezus Dude, try talking to me like an equal, lose the
condescending bull$hit, then maybe we can talk.

As for the format I choose, it is at least as good as what you're
shooting with. Many would say better.

That was not the question. Why don't you use Large format if image quality is your main concern? See, you are the one not answering questions.

As for my comments, they were relevant to what would be appropriate
for a news shooter to carry. Considering 95% of news shooters carry
nikons DSLR's with big, fast buffers I felt safe recommending a
DSLR. I backed up my opinion with what I consider to be facts
revelent to my comments. You addressed my comments with silly
remarks.

Of course suggesting a Nikon or Canon is a safe recommendation. That is not in question here. The question is what is going to work well for the original posters needs. The original poster, if you will remember, wants a camera with the 28mm-200mm range, wants to shoot over the head, does not want to change lenses, and wants high quality images. Just what DSLR do you think fits that bill?

I said it before, you must think I am an idiot.

You are the one saying this, not me.

"Gee whiz, Shay. I thought noise was bad, but its kinda "gritty", I
never would have seen that"

You misread what I said, again, I said

"Depends on the situation and the look I am going after. Let me ask you, would a silky smooth ISO 800 have the same gritty impact as a grainy ISO 800?"

See the difference here in what I wrote and what you are imagining I said? This makes it difficult to converse when the basic understanding of what is written is not shared between the two parties talking.

Give me a break. What kind of cr@p is that? Noise is bad. If you
shoot in situations where noise may present problems the 828 may
not be the camera for you. Sometimes noise is good for art, but
generally, starting with a clean image is better.

If you do not want noise then this would be true. But again remember the intended output. Newsprint. Noise is not going to show like it will on your screen, and that is not even taking into consideration any resizing downward which will also mask noise.

Why is it so hard for you to agree with that statement?

Are you a hypocrite or what?

Oh come now. But if it makes you think warm fuzzy thoughts about me to think of me as a hypocrite, then by all means, enjoy. Your premise is off due to misunderstanding what I am saying and the intended usage of the camera.

That beautiful shot yuou took of the Twin Tower memorial with the
lights in the sky. I remember you mentioning how many shots you
layered on top of each other to get such a clean image. Yes, noise
was a big deal for you when you processed that shot, wasn't it?

You do understand the difference between fine art photography and photojournalism don't you? That photo was intended for a 20 and 40 inch wide presentation. That is far different than a print destined for a 1/4 to full page newsprint photo.

So you do care about noise. Quite a deal, in fact. The pristine
nature of your work demonstrates just how hard you have worked to
reduce noise.

I have images that are quite noisy on purpose, but it is hard to see in resized web photos, so I don't blame you for missing them.

So I tell a guy contemplating a $1000 purchase that there may be
unacceptable noise at ISO 800, and instead of saying:

That is not what you said. You have greatly modified your original message here, had you said this, I would have agreed with you. In fact, nowhere in your first message do you even bring up noise. Just a lot of talk about the 828 not cutting it, not stopping motion, and being absolutely blown away by a DSLR equipped with nothing more than a 50mm lens. Those are not the calm measured words you just created above.

--
As long as the Lomo exists, it doesn't matter what camera you use.

 

[Evil Eggplant]

I don't know what happened here. I don't care anymore. You're one of the good guys. Hopefully you feel the same about me too.

I only wanted what was best for this fellow, so did you. That's what matters. I did not get into this with bad intentions. Neither did you.

End of story, at least for me. (At this point I would offer to shake hands)

I want to drop this, go to bed and dream about Norah Jones.
--
rich
'beware the eggplant'
c-7oo, d-51O, DSC-F7O7, 3OOD
'Trying, the first step to failure'- Homer Simpson
http://www.iceninephotography.com

 

[tim baker]

Tim Baker here, the original poster: Thanks all, for the very helpful discussion. I was inclined toward the f828 but figured I should listen to counter arguments just in case. I've been a news photographer for 40 years. Got into digital a year ago. Got fairly fluent in Photoshop. Lately have been using a f707 for some of my news work. Using a single, small camera is freeing and option-creating. And frankly, I'm blown away by the quality of the images, and the versatility of that camera matched with Photoshop. The zoom range, lens speed and flex body allow me to get more and better shots than with any previous camera/lens kit. The flex body alone is near enough enticement. Years of shooting Tri-X at 1600 has made me immune to grain, electronic or silver. And newsprint hides a thousand sins. I've yet to encounter a lighting/action situation the f2 lens, ISO 400 and Photoshop couldn't deliver to the paper... Photoshop pulls satisfactory newsi images even from apparently black frames. I've decided to get the f828 for newswork, and a Nikon D70 for 'quality' work.

Tim

I shoot for a small local newspaper, mostly b/w. I'm leaning toward
getting the F828 as my main camera. Here's the thinking:

No DSLR offers the zoom range in one lens.
Carrying one small, light, versatile camera is make for greater
versitility.
28 - 200mm covers 99% of news needs. Any single lens on a DSLR
covers maybe 70%. Changing lenses to get that other 30% would
likely loose more pictures than it gained.
Shutter lag on the 828 seems no longer to be a problem. Resolution
is more that needed.
Low and high angle shots are often needed in news work; the 828
shines here with its flex body.
I'm thinking that the 828 might be the ideal camera for newswork.

Comments please
--
Tim Baker

If the answer to this is yes then the 828 is not suitable for you.
Personally I do not believe in getting inventive - I find out what
everyone else uses and buy the same, for any business use, if the
business is just starting out.
When you are an expert yourself, get whatever you feel like, as you
won't be asking anyone else anyway!
I'd guess the middle of the road choice for what you want would be
the Nikon D70 with a couple of lenses
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment

--
Tim Baker

 

[Shay Stephens]

That sounds like an ideal combo Tim. You can't go wrong with that.

Tim

I shoot for a small local newspaper, mostly b/w. I'm leaning toward
getting the F828 as my main camera. Here's the thinking:

No DSLR offers the zoom range in one lens.
Carrying one small, light, versatile camera is make for greater
versitility.
28 - 200mm covers 99% of news needs. Any single lens on a DSLR
covers maybe 70%. Changing lenses to get that other 30% would
likely loose more pictures than it gained.
Shutter lag on the 828 seems no longer to be a problem. Resolution
is more that needed.
Low and high angle shots are often needed in news work; the 828
shines here with its flex body.
I'm thinking that the 828 might be the ideal camera for newswork.

Comments please
--
Tim Baker

If the answer to this is yes then the 828 is not suitable for you.
Personally I do not believe in getting inventive - I find out what
everyone else uses and buy the same, for any business use, if the
business is just starting out.
When you are an expert yourself, get whatever you feel like, as you
won't be asking anyone else anyway!
I'd guess the middle of the road choice for what you want would be
the Nikon D70 with a couple of lenses
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment

--
Tim Baker

--
As long as the Lomo exists, it doesn't matter what camera you use.

 

[Shay Stephens]

She has a new CD out you know. I am wanting to get that one bad.

And the original poster just weighed in, so the matter is over

Good night and happy dreams.

--
As long as the Lomo exists, it doesn't matter what camera you use.

 

[Mike Sumaquial]

I hoped my contribution here was of help to you. Although I think many cameras including Nikon's and canon's will suit the bill for newspaper photos, it's good to hear that you are serious about the 828. I must say that I'm a little confused about your comment regarding 'quality' work via the Nikon D70. I believe the sony f828 creates extremely high quality images, that would give you 'quality' work. This forum has and continuous to show endless amounts of high quality 828 images. You can also check individual websites like that of Andy Williams, Jeff Perkins, and if I may add, my own website-pacific sunsets. Kindly to a look at all these websites and I hope you'll agree.
Mike
http://pacificsunsets.smugmug.com/

 

[Moxie]

Wow... I sure hope the original thread poster got some value out of all this; but I sincerely have my doubts...

 

[Visor Blue]

50mm is in between 28-200. The 50mm f/1.8 can be had new for about
65 bucks. This is a serious lens, as sharp as almost any, that will
turn your DSLR into a bona-fide light bucket.

A 50/1.8 is not between any 28-200mm lens that I know of. Neither is a 50/1.4 or 50/1.2. Again, sticking to the topic of the thread.

As for night shots and IR, you are correct. These are not features
a photojournalist would crave, but extraordinary low light
performance probably is.

That really depends on what is being shot, doesn't it? A sports or combat shooter, you betcha, I'd agree. A features story shooter? Not really.

I think we are seeing different types of newspaper photography here. Knowing his needs and the basic specs of the 828 I don't think Tim would even consider the camera if his needs were for low light situations.

True, to a point. Again (back to the same thing) I would think a
photojournalist would want a camera that is fast enough to stop
action in indoor sports, that can be used without flash indoors.
Noise is very important in situations like these.

Well, again, a sports shooter was not the intention I got. I'd agree with you that a DLSR at a high ISO would be a better choice for indoor low light sports. Not just any DSLR though. We could get real specific with the needs there but, again, that's a different topic from this one.

I've been journalist, but not a sports shooter, so my
opinions/feelings differ. Rarely was it that dark or flash
restricted in what I did. I have set the f/stop, hyperfocal

Then you know more than me.

I don't know about that, I think I'm a bit more intune with the topic of this discussion though. Low light action shots was not even mentioned. Had it been your points would be well taken.

My uncle was a famous news photographer years ago. "Weegee" would
carry his darkroom with him in the trunk of his car, processing
film from his Speed Graphic.

Cool. I just sold my trusty Super Graphic. I've done field processing... Don't have to anymore...

He believed that being prepared was the most important thing a
photographer could be. I agree with that. Because I agree with that
I think the DSLR would be the camera of choice.

Hmm. Kind of a stretch, but I see where you're heading. Wrong path for this discussion though. Like I've said, I've done press work. Very different type than you're thinking of. When a sports event came up I wasn't the one assigned, a sports shooter was. He/she was the one with the understanding and preparation for those type of situations. That's who you're talking to and that's who your ideas would work for.

My prep was to have the equipment for the types of assignments I covered. Usually flash was allowed, so was a tripod. There was, 90% of the time, decent light, time to meter and focus (and bracket exposures). No one was running for a ball of any type. Didn't shoot inside the burning building, shot the aftermath, fired off a strobe or two when needed/desired. Shot portraits with someone holding a newspaper on the shadow side of the face to use as a fill...

Shot in dim dark places...FOOF! Flash and ISO 100, yeah. In the back of an ambulance, wide angle needed here, bounced the flash off the ceiling to keep the parametic's shoulder from blocking the light.

For the type of press work I did a 828 would have been a very welcome choice and made my job a LOT easier. The LCD preview so I can see the shop (or problems with it) before I pressed the shutter, extreme DOF for the f/stop, not needing to change lenses (usually carried two bodies back them to avoid needing to change lenses), a nice 28mm...a close focusing 28-105mm would have sufficed for my work the vast majority of the time.

I never shot over ISO 400. I usually shot Tri-X at 200 and developed it so as not to block the highlights. Rarely was anything I shot printed bigger than 5x7. Noise? At a 60-85 line screen?

--
------------------------------------
Digital Cameras - Current: Canon G2, Minolta D7i
Previous: Apple Quicktake 100, Olympus C2000, C2020, Canon G1,
Canon EOS 10D
Film - 35mm - 8X10
Next: Sony 828 or Minolta A2?

 

[David Gore]

I shoot for a small local newspaper, mostly b/w. I'm leaning toward
getting the F828 as my main camera. Here's the thinking:

No DSLR offers the zoom range in one lens.
Carrying one small, light, versatile camera is make for greater
versitility.
28 - 200mm covers 99% of news needs. Any single lens on a DSLR
covers maybe 70%. Changing lenses to get that other 30% would
likely loose more pictures than it gained.
Shutter lag on the 828 seems no longer to be a problem. Resolution
is more that needed.
Low and high angle shots are often needed in news work; the 828
shines here with its flex body.
I'm thinking that the 828 might be the ideal camera for newswork.

Comments please
--
Tim Baker

--
Dave

Tim,Sigma and Tamron make a 28-300 lens..Canon has a 35-350 and a newly released 28-300....your much better going with the D300 and getting an inexpensive 28-300

http://www.pbase.com/dsg2/daves_pictures
http://www.pbase.com/image/22632338/original.small jpg

 

[William Wright]

I love my 828, don't have any problems with it.

For your line of work, convience would be more important for you. The image quailty is awesome.

PF is not a factor for B&W prints...

Now, go buy one and report your impressions....

Bill

 

[tim baker]

Michael Sumaqu: The reason I'll also buy a D70, for 'quality' work: Yes, a straight or somewhat processed frame yields hige quality b/w or color prints. But if seriously tortured by contrast adjustment, channel mixing, brightness adjustment and such, the small pixel size of the 707/828 yields chunks-of-coal like e-grain. No problem for typical news-sized pix on newsprint, but as with Tri-X at 1600, not suitable for quality work, except in selected contexts.

Dave Gore: Yes, the 28 - 200 or 300 ihas a large zoom range, but most of it sits far outside the typical use range for news work. 28mm = about 45mm. That eliminates one-third or one-half of the most valuable zoom range for news work. An 828-armed news photog shooting beside a photog armed with the Tamron would have an enormous advantage. The flex body would help even more. No camera covers all bases, but for me, averaging all pros and cons, I've never felt more well-armed, tactically option-full, and nimble than with the flex Sony. Some day I hope a camera maker somehow combines the best of the 828 with the best of the DSLRs.

., Dave

I love my 828, don't have any problems with it.

For your line of work, convience would be more important for you.
The image quailty is awesome.

PF is not a factor for B&W prints...

Now, go buy one and report your impressions....

Bill

--
Tim Baker