Panasonic FZ100, a funny little bridge camera (Photography papers) 2017-02-15 12:50:20

Hi-Res

In 2010, this little bridge camera was sold for $500. Now it's cheapper than a Nikon EN-EL4a battery for the Nikon D3...
Whatever, I have one and decided to have fun with it. Honestly, compared to the weight of my Nikon DSLR, that FZ100 feels like carrying a pack of cigarettes.

In summary, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ100 is a so called super-zoom camera featuring an almost wide-angle 24x zoom lens (25-600mm F/2.8/5.2 in 35mm), 14 megapixel and 5fps continuous shooting at full image resolution with AF tracking and a buffer of 11 photos. There is a small articulated lcd screen, a terrible electronic viewfinder, and it can record full HD 1080i movies at 30fps. There is even an integrated nowhere near powerful enough flash, and a shoe for an external flash. The anti shake does his job, there is a PASM mode and the FZ100 can record RAW.

At first glance, it does better than my samsung phone camera. It's not too slow, the AF works well, the tracking can do his job if the tracked subjet is not too fast or doesn't move too eratically. The EVF sucks, the lcd screen sucks a little less... No big deal actually. 

At least this camera supports RAW. I hate jpg, I hate in camera processing, and I hate even more in camera noise and sharpness processing. RAW is the way to go. Too bad, DXO doesn't support this Panasonic camera, so I can't benefit of the Prime Noise Reduction, but Lightroom can import and process the files, and the results are not too bad, especially if you convert in black and white. There, the processed noise from the sensor give the photo a film look that I tend to appreciate.


Hi-Res panasonic: dmc-fz100. 542mm, f/4.7, 1/40s, 100iso.
 

Speaking of noise, the FZ100 was (in)famous for its alleged noise at base ISO, even for a small 1/2.3" sensor.  And actually, this sensor is really noisy, but not that much if you compare it in raw with other sensors of the same size and resolution. These sensors are just bad with noise. Period. The Nikon D3 actually makes less noise at iso 6400 than the FZ100 at base 100 iso... and if you process the raws heavily (that you will do anyway), the D3 at Hi2 (iso 25.600) still produce better images than the FZ100 at iso 100... Of course, it's not the same class of cameras and it's quite unfair to compare a full frame pro DSLR (even from 2007) to a budget bridge camera...
Here are a few 100% crops, processed in DXO for the D3 at iso 25.600, and Lightroom for the FZ100 at iso 100 and 400. 

Hi-Res

Hi-Res

Hi-Res

Ok. Let's stop making fun of this brave little FZ100. I actually like it. It's not super sharp, it's noisy, the white balance is far from perfect and the EVF really sucks, BUT, it's a fun camera to shoot, it's light, easy to use, and you can take some pretty decent photos.

Hi-Res panasonic: dmc-fz100. 521mm, f/4.7, 1/125s, 100iso.

Hi-Res panasonic: dmc-fz100. 799mm, f/5.2, 1/320s, 100iso.

A full frame DSLR under CAD900? (Photography papers) 2017-02-15 12:43:49

We now know we can buy a GOOD pro used DSLR under $500.

What if you want a full frame DSLR under $900? There are actually 4 full frame DSLR corresponding: 3 Canon and 1 Nikon.

By order of price:

Hi-Res

The 2005 Canon 5D is a full frame semi-pro DSLR: 12MP, 1369 ISO rank on DXO, 9 AF points and 3FPS. You can buy it in really good condition with low shutter count for less than $600.

Hi-Res

The 2002 Canon 1Ds is a full frame pro DSLR: 12MP, 954 ISO rank on DXO, 45 AF points and 3FPS. You can buy it in average condition with low shutter count for less than $600. Let’s forget this one, the 5D is definitely better for about the same price.

Hi-Res nikon: e8400. 85mm, f/5.5, 10/600s, 200iso.

The 2008 Nikon D700 is a full frame semi-pro DSLR: 12 MP, 2303 ISO rank on DXO, 51 AF points and 5 FPS out of the box. You can buy it in good condition and low shutter count for less than $900.

Hi-Res

The 2004 Canon 1DS mkII is a full frame pro DSLR: 16MP, 1480 ISO rank on DXO, 45 AF points and 4.5 FPS. You can buy it in average condition and low shutter count for less than $900.

The choice is pretty easy here.

Do you need more pixels? Buy the Canon 1DS mkII.

Do you need less noise at high ISO? Buy the Nikon D700.

Do you need the cheapest camera? But the Canon 5D.

The mini waterfall at Andrew Haydon Park (Behind the lens) 2017-01-21 16:27:22

Hi-Res nikon corporation: nikon d7000. 33mm, f/25.0, 8/1s, 100iso.

Location:  That photo was taken at Andrew Haydon Park in Ottawa. It's a small man made waterfall surrounded by trees. Actually it's really pretty especially at dusk. That day the place was deserted, and I improvised a long exposure using rocks and trees as tripod.

Time:  mmmm... at dusk?

Lighting:  Not really... I was lucky, the sun position was just perfect and the light beautiful.

Equipment:  That day I only carried a D7000 with a Nikkor 18-105 lens... No tripod, no remote and no ND filter. I had to use what was available: smallest aperture available (F/25), longest exposure possible while using trees and rocks as tripods (more or less 8sec), and quiet mode to avoid any unwanted vibration.

Inspiration:  I'm rarely "inspired" to take a photo in the sense that I don't plan. I just carry a camera, and when I see something that catches my eye, I shoot it.

Editing:  Basic DXO treatment: levels, contrasts. For the records, the lens flare is totally natural. Lucky me.

In my camera bag:  Any of my DSLR that has a charged battery, and the first lens that I can reach before leaving home. I don't have a bag. Bags mean heavy stuff, too much stuff, and spending too much time worrying about that stuff; I don't really care about equipment: I just shoot what I see with what I have at that moment. When I (rarely) go specifically to shoot something special, I just carry the minimum things I think will be needed.

Feedback:  Always carry a camera, open your eyes...

Best 12MP Canikon used pro/semi-pro DSLR under $500 ? (Photography papers) 2017-01-21 16:18:22

As of today, for more or less $500 (canadian dollars), you can afford what was top notch pro DSLRs a few years ago, but there is not much choice: only 2 full frame cameras from Canon and 2 APS cameras from Nikon.
Why would you want a used camera when for the same price or a little more you can buy a brand new entry level DSLr with tons of pixels?
Actually, the 4 cameras I'll talk about here are still perefectly up to the job in 2017. Pixels don't really mater in the end if your brand new entry level camera can't focus fast enough, can't use some good old glass that requires a focusing engine in the body. Those 4 cameras are well built, their ergonomy is just perfect, they were the top of their class at the time and are still simply great cameras as of today especially for the price asked.

By order of price:

The 2002 Canon 1Ds is a full frame pro DSLR: 12MP, 50 to 1250 ISO, noise really good up to 1250 ISO, 45 AF points and 3FPS. You can buy it in not to bad condition and shutter count under 50.000 for less than $500. Yes, it's old, but it's still a very good camera.


Hi-Res

The 2007 Nikon D300 (and 2009 D300S that only adds video recording capabilities, $50 more expensive now) is an APS-C semi-pro DSLR: 12 MP, 200 to 3200 ISO, noise good up to 800 ISO, 51 AF points and 6 FPS out of the box (7 for the D300S, 8 with a battery grip and specific battery). You can buy it in good condition and shutter count under 10.000 for less than $500.


Hi-Res

The 2004 Nikon D2X (there is also a D2Xs, but it costs more than $500) is a pro APS-C DSLR:  12MP, 100 to 800 ISO, don't dare using more than 400 ISO because of the noise, but at base 100 ISO it's just a great camera,11 AF points and 5FPS. You can buy it in average condition and shutter count under 50.000 for $500.


Hi-Res
 

The 2005 Canon 5D is a full frame semi-pro DSLR: 12MP, 50 to 3200 ISO, low noise up to 1600 ISO, 9 AF points and 3FPS. You can buy it in average condition and shutter count under 50.00 for $500.


Hi-Res


So, which one is better?  Well, there no winner here, since it all depends on your needs, and those 4 DSLR are great cameras built like tanks capable of great pictures.
Actually, for the money, and from a purely technical point of view, the Nikon D300 is definitely better than the D2X, and the Canon 5D definitely better than the Canon 1Ds.

The choice is mainly will you buy the Nikon D300 or the Canon 5D? The answer is quite easy…
Do you need a full frame camera and less noise at high ISO?  Buy the Canon 5D.
Do you need an APS-C camera (that mean more reach), more FPS and better autofocus? Buy the Nikon D300. 

For under $500 you will actually never buy a better camera than these 4.