LNT Canada is a national non-profit organization dedicated to promoting responsible outdoor recreation through education, research and partnerships.

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

3/29/2017 8:15 am  #18


Re: To SLR or not to SLR?

ATVenture wrote:

I'm not 100% sure but wouldn't using a different lens help with your auto focusing issues?

Maybe a bit but probably not enough. For Canon, it is the addition of "Dual Pixel CMOS AF" sensors in the autofocus system in the camera body that improve the ability to handle video focusing. In terms of timing, the updated autofocus system started showing up in the T5i which was released in 2013 compared to the 60D which was released in 2010. Nikon trailed a bit but I think is mostly caught up on the video autofocus now. Mirrorless cameras were ahead on the video front and I know some fairly serious photographers who have moved to the latest Sony mirrorless bodies for photos as well (Although those top end Sony bodies are about 3X the price of the 80D so more comparable to at least a Canon 5dx Mk...). 

You are correct that there are newer lenses that are preferred for video. For Canon those include the "STM" lenses in particular and now some of the newer USM lenses. From most of what I've seen the biggest difference with the lenses is that they are quieter when focusing so you get less unwanted noise in the audio being recorded with the video. 

(No, I'm not always quite this much of a geek, Just been dreaming of an upgraded camera lately and doing a bunch of looking.)

 

3/29/2017 8:27 am  #19


Re: To SLR or not to SLR?

Uppa, since you're not taking the SLR, and going with the P&S (the Sony DSC-RX100 III... or is the smart phone??), it turns out that the P&S has decent image resolution (ie. it's sharp), at least according to PCMag's Imatest evaluation... it resolved 2494 line per image height, with 1800 being defined as the threshold, above which images are "sharp".

(edit... you might have to paste this URL into your browser, it's not linking for me after clicking)

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2460983,00.asp?tab=Specs

The images shown above from the Olympus TG-820 waterproof P&S were rated at 2019, and not bad for a waterproof pocket camera... I'm not looking for much more than that.

I don't know anything about smart phone image quality but a quick google at 2017 models at PCMag shows image resolution numbers ranging from 2000 to 2700, so smart phone image quality must have improved quite a bit. There are other image and camera quality issues to consider like autofocus, dynamic range, image stabilization, HDR, water resistance, durability and more which are covered in reviews... good luck.
 

Last edited by frozentripper (3/29/2017 8:31 am)

 

3/29/2017 8:29 am  #20


Re: To SLR or not to SLR?

Rob already answered far better than I could have, but that lens of mine is (or at least was) around $800, so replacing it for the sake of improved video focus would be a hard pill to swallow regardless. 

But yeah, it's the body that's the problem (fortunately!). Eventually I'll buy a new SLR. Probably. Maybe. We'll see how this point and shoot does on my spring camping trip. 

     Thread Starter
 

3/29/2017 8:34 am  #21


Re: To SLR or not to SLR?

@frozentripper thanks for the link and the info. Yes, I'm definitely taking the Sony. I'm not a real photographer by any stretch of the imagination, but I do use manual options regularly, and it offers most of the same features of my SLR (although I'm having to relearn how to access them all).

Smartphone cameras should perhaps be considered the "real" point and shoot in that it's just about all you can do with most of them. 

     Thread Starter
 

3/29/2017 8:39 am  #22


Re: To SLR or not to SLR?

Just an added comment in addition to the PCMag Imatest evaluation above... they don't seem to provide SLR image resolution numbers, maybe because lenses are interchangeable. Spending far too much time on this, maybe an email to PCMag would help.

PS.... YW, Uppa!

Last edited by frozentripper (3/29/2017 8:39 am)

 

3/29/2017 12:15 pm  #23


Re: To SLR or not to SLR?

Uppa wrote:

... but that lens of mine is (or at least was) around $800,...

Don't worry, that lens is still about $850 new. If I ever do get into the price range of a full frame DSLR then that lens or whatever updated version might be available would be on my dream list. :-) (If I stay with Canon that is. Nikon is beating the pants off of them in sensor quality right now albeit courtesy of Sony and Toshiba sensors)
 

 

3/30/2017 1:52 pm  #24


Re: To SLR or not to SLR?

I used to love my Nikon AW110 before I lost it at Little Carcajou lake last year. It had a strap and I wore it around my neck, great for quick shots when fishing and it was tough as nails. I just bought a pelican case for my Canon Rebel SLR so will give it a go this year, although I am pretty nervous to bring it. Hopefully it's big enough that I won't lose it! Funny how trips have a way of costing us more than we expect! 
 

 

Board footera