File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
hey what does /p/ think
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeEASTMAN KODAK COMPANYCamera ModelKODAK EASYSHARE C433 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERAMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)36 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution480 dpiVertical Resolution480 dpiExposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/2.7Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating80Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length6.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2304Image Height1728Exposure Index80RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
/p/ thinks that the photographer, not the camera, makes the picture a work of art
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
/p/ thinks that Canon makes the best point & shoot digital cameras right now.
>> Anonymous
>>66770
Actually, /p/ thinks that Ricoh, Panasonic, Sigma, and Canon all have the best offerings in different areas.

Ricoh's line-up is unique.
Panasonic's FZ8 is better than the S5IS, and the LX2 is unique.
Sigma offers a point and shoot with the same sensor as its DSLR, but it's only got a 28mm prime.
And Canon is best in all other areas.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>66818
>Sigma offers a point and shoot with the same sensor as its DSLR, but it's only got a 28mm prime.
Maaan. You got me all excited.

Fine print:
1. The Sigma DP1 was announced at Photokina 2007 but isn't actually available yet.
2. That's 28mm *equivalent*. Not actually 28mm. If it were 28mm, it would be a nice slightly-wide-normal lens. It's actually 16.6mm, which is obnoxiously wide for something that's the only lens that'll ever be on the camera.
3. As if that weren't bad enough, that 16mm lens is f/4.0. M-M-M-M-MONSTER fail, especially combined with the Foveon sensor's craptacular high-ISO performance.

Give me a compact point & shoot with a fast-normal prime (i.e., at least f/2.8 and preferably f/1.8, and nothing wider than 35mm-equiv) and a sensor like you find in one of Canon or Nikon's SLRs and I'll be all over it. Basically, I want a digital Canonet GL17.

(Bonus points if you actually give me rangefinder focusing on it instead of just autofocus)
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>66821
Heh. And I love the ad copy on http://www.sigma-dp1.com:
>A photo is only as good as the lens it was taken with. This is Sigma's firm belief, and having spent years developing optical lenses, we should know.
(Translation: We should know better)
> The DP1 is the culmination of years of lens-related R&D
(Translation: This is what we came up with after we were just completely and totally burnt out)
> And because the DP1 has a large, full-color sensor, we had to develop a special lens to do justice to this extra power.
(Translation: You know, Special. Like the Special Olympics)
> This is the integral 16.6mm F4 lens (28mm equivalent), designed to give the photographer full scope for artistic expression
(Translation: Assuming that the photographer only wants to shoot wide angles in full daylight)
>> Anonymous
Does it matter what the lenses focal length is, if the result is exactly same perspective & crop as with 28mm film.
>> Anonymous
>>66821
>The Sigma DP1 was announced at Photokina 2007 but isn't actually available yet.
Didn't know that.
>That's 28mm *equivalent*. Not actually 28mm. If it were 28mm, it would be a nice slightly-wide-normal lens. It's actually 16.6mm, which is obnoxiously wide for something that's the only lens that'll ever be on the camera.

Good for street shooting, though I very much like the slightly-wide-normal look myself.

I agree it should be longer, but it's still a good camera, and, I assume, a good lens.

>. As if that weren't bad enough, that 16mm lens is f/4.0. M-M-M-M-MONSTER fail, especially combined with the Foveon sensor's craptacular high-ISO performance.

f/4 isn't that slow. Not what I'd like, again, but acceptable for most situations.

>Basically, I want a digital Canonet GL17.
>(Bonus points if you actually give me rangefinder focusing on it instead of just autofocus)

That would indeed be splendid.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>66825
No, but that's not the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is that a full-on wideangle lens isn't a good choice for a fixed prime on a point & shoot. Something moderately wide like a 35mm-equiv, maybe. But 28mm is wide enough to make your perspective start to get wacky in a lot of common situations.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>66827
>Good for street shooting, though I very much like the slightly-wide-normal look myself.
I like the slightly-wide-normal look, too, but 28 gives you a wide look. Slightly-wide-normal is around 40mm, slightly-wide is around 35, and by 28 you're just flat out, no hedging wide.

28mm is one of my absolute favorite focal lengths, but I wouldn't want to use a camera where that was my only choice in most situations.

A quick google search tells me I was wrong about the ISO, though. Looks like the foveon has... different problems at higher ISO than conventional sensors, but not really worse. But still, my crappy kit lens on my Rebel XTi can do f/3.5 at the equivalent focal length. Seems like the Sigma, which doesn't need to do wacky retrofocus things since there's no mirror box to contend with, should be able to get f/2.8 without a lot of expense.
>> Anonymous
>>66833
Right, I know 28 is wide. I was saying that I like the ~40mm focal length, too, and would prefer it have that.

The lens could be faster, definately, but where else are you going to go if you need a quiet, large-sensor camera? The RD-1 or the M8?
>> JL
damn, get ur stuff right and realize that it's a fantastic pic