best slr camera for video recording 2011 image
Krazykid
Would you say the Canon EOS Digital Rebel or the Olympus E-PM1 is better? Reviews on either?
Answer
You can visit Digital Photography Review for a more in-depth answer to decipher which one of these cameras is better or if you're interested in just the specifications, then the second sourced link below should give you a points system value to make up your mind.
As with the previous poster, both of these cameras are different.
The E-PM1 was released in June 2011, whereas the Digital Rebel was in August 2003. First glance of this information, I'm sure a lot has happened in 8 years or so and the E-PM1 may well have some features that the Digital Rebel does not have based on the comparison chart.
The EOS Digital Rebel is an categorised as an Entry-Level DSLR, whereas the Olympus is a Hybrid SLR based upon the Interchangeable lens and it is also Mirrorless.
Cost-wise, the Olympus is cheaper, but the price may not be comparable due to the gap in time and depreciation.
The Nikon has a larger APS-C sensor than the Olympus despite it being 8 years old, with 162 lens available on the market as opposed to only 26 for Olympus and also a better battery life based on the Pentamirror where the Olympus does not have it.
In conclusion, the Olympus is a slightly better camera, as it can record video in full HD and at 60 fps, whereas the Digital Rebel does not have that capability. The camera also has built-in image stabilisation built into the body, almost double the Megapixel range. Although you can take really good images at around 5 to 7MP; so having extra MP is generally a marketing ploy and relies mostly upon the lens.
The Olympus has a higher ISO range, shoots faster shots, weighs almost one third of that of the Canon; and also smaller in size.
You can visit Digital Photography Review for a more in-depth answer to decipher which one of these cameras is better or if you're interested in just the specifications, then the second sourced link below should give you a points system value to make up your mind.
As with the previous poster, both of these cameras are different.
The E-PM1 was released in June 2011, whereas the Digital Rebel was in August 2003. First glance of this information, I'm sure a lot has happened in 8 years or so and the E-PM1 may well have some features that the Digital Rebel does not have based on the comparison chart.
The EOS Digital Rebel is an categorised as an Entry-Level DSLR, whereas the Olympus is a Hybrid SLR based upon the Interchangeable lens and it is also Mirrorless.
Cost-wise, the Olympus is cheaper, but the price may not be comparable due to the gap in time and depreciation.
The Nikon has a larger APS-C sensor than the Olympus despite it being 8 years old, with 162 lens available on the market as opposed to only 26 for Olympus and also a better battery life based on the Pentamirror where the Olympus does not have it.
In conclusion, the Olympus is a slightly better camera, as it can record video in full HD and at 60 fps, whereas the Digital Rebel does not have that capability. The camera also has built-in image stabilisation built into the body, almost double the Megapixel range. Although you can take really good images at around 5 to 7MP; so having extra MP is generally a marketing ploy and relies mostly upon the lens.
The Olympus has a higher ISO range, shoots faster shots, weighs almost one third of that of the Canon; and also smaller in size.
Bridge Camera vs. dSLR?
12345
I am deciding on whether to get the Panasonic DMC-FZ150 Bridge Camera or a budget entry-level dSLR. I'm more inclined to get the FZ150 because. while it doesn't have a huge enough sensor to be an SLR, it certainly is on a whole different level than a point and shoot camera (it has full control over PSAM, iso, and manual focus.) While an SLR would of course have these same (or better) options of manual control, what the FZ150 has over the SLR is it can shoot up to 60 pictures in one second at 5MP in its fastest burst shooting (which would be very helpful for shooting fast-paced action.) It also has the 24x zoom (expandable to 50x with a drop in resolution, while preserving quality.) This is something you can not have on an SLR unless you pay $9,000+ on a 600mm lens. Also, it can record 1080p video at 60 frames per second (in addition to a 220fps mode at QVGA res), which would be very hard to find on a budget SLR. On the other hand, an SLR would take better quality pictures in low light due to its larger sensor. However, I currently use my phone with it's tiny sensor as my primary camera and I can take amazingly sharp and professional-looking pictures with it (posted down below), so I can just imagine what I can do with something like a bridge camera with a relatively larger sensor. Like the saying goes, "it's not the camera, but the person who is holding it."
Tell me what you think. Do you think a bridge camera would be able to take good-looking pictures comparable to an SLR (in bright light)?
____________________________________
Pictures from my phone camera:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12361010/Phone%20pictures/2011-02-18-15-24-40-504.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12361010/Phone%20pictures/C360_2011-08-04%2011-39-48.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12361010/Phone%20pictures/C360_2011-08-05%2017-21-42-picsay.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12361010/Phone%20pictures/C360_2011-10-24%2017-46-04-picsay.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12361010/Phone%20pictures/HDR%20landscape.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12361010/Phone%20pictures/IMG_20110712_154931.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12361010/Phone%20pictures/picsay-1314933959.jpg
Answer
If you consider your phone pics "professional looking" and you prefer the spray and pray attitude of the 60fps then the FZ150 would suit you best
If you consider your phone pics "professional looking" and you prefer the spray and pray attitude of the 60fps then the FZ150 would suit you best
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment