Re: 5 Digital Camera Questions

From: Tom Ferguson ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 06/12/04-09:55:30 AM Z
Message-id: <>

Hello Judy, what I was pointing out with the "7-29mm zoom" comment was
that because of the small sensor, a 7-29mm lens is needed to give you a
normal visual range that would match a Nikon 28-110 zoom on a film
camera (number very approximate). Because the physical lens is so much
shorter, you get FAR more DOF than you are use to in 35mm film.

EVF is geek speak for "Electronic View Finder". Most consumer dig
cameras don't have an "optical" system when you look in the "peep
hole", they have a TINY TV screen (I'm assuming the G5 has this).

Manuals are an odd thing. I've never understood why so many are so bad.
Try reading the review at DPreview, he actually goes through each
setting and button:

You also may want to try an after market manual. I know the after
market manual for my Fuji S2 is FAR better than the original. See here:

Most folks, once they learn it, love digital. Some folks will miss the
film curve compression, although that can be easily faked in PhotoShop.
Some folks will miss film grain, much harder to do a good fake of. Some
will miss the focus plane moves and detail of large format, digital is
just arriving there and still a very big $$$ item. Some will simply
hate changing habits. For the rest of us, it is great day and a fun new

Well, it is fun once the learning curve is behind you ;-)

P.S. I think I forgot to answer an earlier question of yours. The Sony
battery I use with the digital electronics built in for a good battery
use meter is only for Sony cameras.

On Saturday, June 12, 2004, at 01:08 AM, Judy Seigel wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, Tom Ferguson wrote:
> That cat disappears as soon as I get out there... but one of these days
> I'll get it (it's keeping the whole neighborhood awake howling after
> the
> she-cat next door which HATES him) Meanwhile,
>> F/5.6 on a consumer digital has a LOT of DOF. I'm not sure if all of
>> the consumer dig cameras have exactly the same sized sensor (I think
>> they do), so I'll use my Sony F707 as an example. The sensor (film
>> area) in these little jewels is TINY (about 7x5mm, about 1/4 inch).
>> That makes the lenses needed very wide. Often the manufacturers label
>> them in "35mm equivalents", but in truth your G5 lens is a 7-29mm
>> zoom.
> OK, I start to see the light -- but am puzzled by that "7-to 29mm zoom"
> -- if you mean the zoom would be equal to a 29mm lens in analog? I
> compared it to the framing of the 105 mm lens on the Nikon. The G5
> claims
> the equivalent of 140 mm zoom, and it seemed about that -- certainly
> much
> more than the Nikon "telephoto" 105 mm.
>> All of that makes for a huge DOF.
> Maybe that's what the "portrait" setting is for. I'll try it as soon as
> I'm ready for another adventure.
>> With my F707 (and I think it is identical in this regards to your G5)
>> I
>> have 3.9 stops DOF difference (call it 4 stops). That means your F/5.6
>> on your G5 has the same DOF (for the same pic taken from the same spot
>> with a 35mm film camera) as F/22. Try it, it is true. Or see here:
> thanks, I will...
>>>> get 200 shots if using EVF and no flash (and my batteries are
>>>> getting
>>>> old). Limited experience guesstimate, after 500 charge and discharge
>>>> cycles, it wouldn't be surprising to lose 1/2 of my battery
>>>> capacity.
> Now that you mention EVF -- that's another mystery meat in the manual,
> which I don't recall elsewhere or previously. Or I'm assuming that's
> the
> "EV" it shows in a diagram & never mentions again: My inner dictionary
> interprets it as Exposure Value,the manual suggests plus or minus 2,
> but
> it's not in the index, or any other page that I can find.
>> Third party batteries can be every bit as good as the originals, or
>> terrible. But the fact that both your original and third party battery
>> are acting the same make me worry about your camera. One limit to our
>> alt photo group is there may not be another G5 user here. Try asking
>> at
>> the DPreview Canon group:
>>> <SNIP>
>> Remember that shooting Jpgs is like shooting slide film. Your exposure
>> needs to be ^$%# close to perfect. For "street shooting" you may want
>> to play with shooting RAW. Much more like shooting neg film (room for
>> error). It does take a lot more memory space, and requires computer
>> time to convert.
> I need to get more comfortable with the cooked before I try the raw --
> but
> will in due course. I note though that for my purposes the color
> covers a
> multitude of sins... You'd probably destroy the lot of it, but it may
> work
> in the planned medium and size. (I didn't see REAL trouble until the
> sun
> came out.)
>> Your camera can be set to 50, which DPreview says is closer to ISO 80.
>> That would give you the possibility of using F/4 at 1/1250 in full
>> sun.
>> I think your camera will reach that speed at all lens settings. That
> The manual says 1/1250 and 1/2000 depending on the setting. (Also, by
> the
> way, no "aperture" smaller than f.8)
>> would give you the same DOF as a F/16 on a 35mm film camera. That will
>> give you a "slightly" more blurred background and far less chance of
>> blown-out images. About the best you can do with a G5, without using
>> density filters!
> But there is a "neutral density" setting which it says decreases
> "brightness approximately 1/8... for example if the appropriate
> aperture
> value is 5.6, it becomes 2 when the ND filter is on." That might still
> not give the fuzz I want... but if it's not too tricky to dial up in a
> hurry, I'll try it.
> Anyway, strangely perhaps, I like digital... I'd like it a lot better
> if
> it were presented better... but I don't think I could go back to not
> seeing the print immediately -- and even the clunky G5 weighs half of
> the
> Nikon...
> Meanwhile and again thanks for all your help (I wish there were a
> potion
> to take to know it right away instead of by the stumble method... that
> could be the IQ model !)....
> Oh drat, there goes the cat again -- 4:04 AM...
> good night,
> Judy
>> Tom Ferguson
Tom Ferguson
Received on Sat Jun 12 10:31:46 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 07/02/04-09:40:14 AM Z CST