You can spend hundreds of /$ on a VR lens, or just a few /$ on a tripod, that works with all your lens's,,,,Hmmm!Mike Rudge..

Rangor wrote:.

I'm off to kenya in a couple of weeks and want to but a new camera.I'll be there for 6 months.I've looked at quite a few cameras, e.g. the canon S3 IS, andfujifilm S6000/S6500fd. Due to fujifilm being cheaper I was going toget the S6000, but then I noticed the camera doesn't have imagestabilization. Will that cause me problems with when taking photos atfull zoom?.

As the focal length increases it gets harder and harder to hand hold a camera steady. It also gets harder and harder as the light gets worse. Image stabilisation helps considerably with this. What image stabilisation doesn't help with is photographing moving subjects, especially in low light. So it is not much use for sports (probably not a lot of this in Kenya), moving wildlife (difficult to photograph anyway), or people (especially fast moving children) in low light..

So it really depends on what you want to photograph. Image stabilisation will always be useful if you can afford it..

Whatever you buy, I would recommend taking a cheap minature table top tripod - check that it is sufficiently large to support the camera weight. This will work better than any image stabilisation if you are in a situation where you can use one..

The features I want out of a camera are:long zoomAA batteries.

With most cameras alkaline batteries have a very limited life. If you want AA sized batteries you need to use high capacity rechargeable NiMH batteries, and get a good quality charger. I assume that you are worried about being away from a power source for a significant time. If so, I would consider getting a camera with a Li-ion battery with a long life (check reviews) and buy 1-2 spares..

And for the camera to be SLR-like (i'm only a beginer photographer,but want to have the freedom of manual control with the camerasettings)I'm on a tight budget so idealy I would not want to spend more that200 pounds/400 dollars..

Anyone got any good ideas?Thanks.

Don't get seduced by long zoom cameras. Personally I take 90%+ of my photographs in the range normally covered by a 3x zoom camera, and I would trade a wider angle (28mm) for a longer zoom anyday..

This doesn't hold if you expect to be taking wildlife photos when you want the longest zoom that you can get..

These are my personal opinions and others may disagree.Chris R..

Rangor wrote:.

I'm off to kenya in a couple of weeks and want to but a new camera.I'll be there for 6 months.I've looked at quite a few cameras, e.g. the canon S3 IS, andfujifilm S6000/S6500fd. Due to fujifilm being cheaper I was going toget the S6000, but then I noticed the camera doesn't have imagestabilization. Will that cause me problems with when taking photos atfull zoom?The features I want out of a camera are:long zoomAA batteriesand for the camera to be SLR-like (i'm only a beginer photographer,but want to have the freedom of manual control with the camerasettings)I'm on a tight budget so idealy I would not want to spend more that200 pounds/400 dollars..

Anyone got any good ideas?Thanks.

You can certainly take great pictures without image stabilization. You can use a tripod or a monopod to steady the camera and reduce or eliminate shake. Image stabilization gives you the option to reduce camera shake without using a tripod or monopod or any other stabilization aid (bean bags, etc).

For some DSLRs, the question is more expensive since optically stabilized lenses cost a lot of money. Some DSLRs shift the sensor to do that, so they work with all the lenses..

For the cameras you are interested in, there is really no additional cost since it is included in the cameras that have it anyway..

As far as AA, depending on your usage, you may want to look into the rechargeables that retain charge over longer periods of time (eneloops, hybrios, etc, etc). Although if you are planning to deplete your batteries and recharge them on a daily basis, those won't provide an additonal benefit and cost more. In such a case the long lasting rechargeable could be your backup power source, along with AA lithium..

Comprehensive 2007 speculation and predictions: http://1001noisycameras.blogspot.com..

A) I.S. is akin to a cheap tripod. Worth every penny..

B) S3IS has larger reach than S6000fd, and has brighter lens (wider aperture) at full tele-photo. Good to have..

Rangor wrote:.

I'm off to kenya in a couple of weeks and want to but a new camera.I'll be there for 6 months.I've looked at quite a few cameras, e.g. the canon S3 IS, andfujifilm S6000/S6500fd. Due to fujifilm being cheaper I was going toget the S6000, but then I noticed the camera doesn't have imagestabilization. Will that cause me problems with when taking photos atfull zoom?The features I want out of a camera are:long zoomAA batteriesand for the camera to be SLR-like (i'm only a beginer photographer,but want to have the freedom of manual control with the camerasettings)I'm on a tight budget so idealy I would not want to spend more that200 pounds/400 dollars..

Anyone got any good ideas?Thanks.

Regards, Ajayhttp://picasaweb.google.com/ajay0612..

You will probably not be able to use a full sized tripod in most cases so the IS becomes more important especially at long focal legnths..

If you use rechargable batteries as recommended, you will also need a current conveter and adapter plugs to recharge..

: ) After you return tell us about the cigarette ads on the outside of the health clinics and what the ad phrase "Lets Talk" is attached to. : )..

If you are shooting hand-held and will never or rarely use a tripod, then IS will be important..

If you shoot in bright light most of the time or use a tripod frequently, IS will not be so important.Galleries: http://www.dheller.net/photo/..

I currently work for my local daily newspaper. I shoot all kinds of indoors and nighttime activities. I have a Nikon 70-200 with the VR (Vibration Reduction). I tried it out a year ago when I first got the lens and haven't used it since. I never use a tripod for news work although I do use a monopod with the longer lens while shooting football, etc..

Scott W. McClure.

Http://www.couriernews.comhttp://www.got-photos.com.

'You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn't waste either.'... The Late Galen Rowell..

Thanks for your advice everyone. I think I will opt for the fujifilm S6000 and get myself a tripod. Then I need to stock up on NiMHs and mem cards...

Scott W. McClure wrote:.

I currently work for my local daily newspaper. I shoot all kinds ofindoors and nighttime activities. I have a Nikon 70-200 with the VR(Vibration Reduction). I tried it out a year ago when I first got thelens and haven't used it since. I never use a tripod for news workalthough I do use a monopod with the longer lens while shootingfootball, etc.Scott W. McClure.

You might not need IS or VR, but you left out some important information as to your shooting conditions. I would never recommend a person forego stabilization if they might be shooting in a low light condition, at a distance, without a tripod..

In most cases, stabilization can be turned off when not needed..

1. Face it, it's unlikely that a beginner is going to be shooting a football game, with a fast 400mm lens (or greater) on a monopod like typical news folk do. .

2. If * you * are able to shoot at 200mm or greater consistantly steady at shutter speeds of less than 1/40th *without* IS or VR, then most on this forum will agree that you've a much steadier hand than most photographers (newby or pro)..

This shot was at 1/25th, VR on, holding a 70-200 lens in my hand, while leaning over railing. There is absolutely no way I (or most photographers for that matter) can routinely get a shot like this without VR or IS. You know that .

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

A person going out to shoot animals or scenics in the early am or late evening as part of a group usually won't have the luxury of dragging a mono or tripod around, especially if shooting from a vehicle..

I think most would agree that stabilization is definitely worth the cost when shooting in low light conditions without a mono/tripod..

One of the quickest ways I've gotten people to realize the value of stabilization, is to have them come to one of our local parks filled with oak trees during the middle of the day and photograph their children without a flash. Most wind up with horrible shots due to the amound of trees creating shade. I'm sure as a paid photographer, you know exactly where I'm coming from .

I can consistantly get grab shots even while in a low lit forest during the day.. this is where fast lenses without IS or VR fail the photograper unless their put on a mono or tripod. Below obviously isn't a great shot (we're both moving), but it speaks volumes about the reality of being able to quickly turn your lens and grab a shot at the spur of the moment...

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Stabilization all the way!.

(friendly poke in the ribs).

Cordially.

Teila K. Day..

...look for any solid surface to rest the camera on. I almost never carry a tripod, and with cameras that don't have IS (Fuji F31fd, Canon A620, S400) I'm often able to find a place to rest the camera. If the rest is really stable, then I use the 2-sec self-timer delay. This prevents shake caused by pressing the shutter release. If no horizontal surface is available, then you can look for a vertical surface (e.g., telephone pole) and hold the camera steady against it. Here's a shot taken that way, using the Canon S400, which was deemed good enough to be published in a magazine.



Bob.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

My previous camera was a Panasonic FZ1 superzoom (12x optical zoom), and it has OIS. My current camera (the FZ1 was moved to "backup" status) is an Olympus eVolt E-500 DSLR with three zooms (in 35mm equivilent: 28-90mm, 80-300mm, and 36-360mm). The new E-510 has in-body IS my older E-500 does not. It was an eye-opening experience for me when I first got my E-500 and tried taking pictures at the local zoo at the 300mm end of my zoom. I definitely missed the OIS of my Panasonic FZ1..

That being said, I have gotten used to it. With the E-500 being a DSLR, I can bump up the ISO to 200, 400, even 800, which is much higher than I could with my FZ1 (or any other point-n-shoot superzoom) without getting much (if any) additional noise. I learned to work with it, learned to hold the camera more steady, and now I'm getting nice and sharp shots again..

Now, again, that being said, on my recent trip to Europe, when I was on a smaller boat (like a ferry instead of a cruise ship) or when I was touring the city on a bus or taking a bus to an inland tourist attraction or something, I found it nearly impossible to use my E-500. However, my good ol' FZ1 took great tourist happy snaps while on the bus, boat, etc..

My personal recommendation for you would be to purchase either a Canon S3 (the S5 doesn't seem to be doing very well in the reviews) or as an alternative get the Panasonic FZ30 or FZ50 (with the FZ30 also seemingly the better choice over the FZ50). The FZ30 has a proprietary battery, but it will get you a lot of shots per charge, and it's relatively inexpensive to get non-OEM spares. The FZ30 has an internal zoom lens (meaning the lens doesn't go in/out when you turn the camera on/off or zoom), and it also has a manual focus ring and a zoom ring. This rings on the lens are significant design improvements over most (if not all) of the other superzooms on the market that are still stuck back in the zoom button design, and some have the manual focus buttons sharing functions with directional buttons, etc. The FZ30 is 8mp and takes VGA 30fps video that's only limited by the capacity of the storage card. Seems like the perfect safari camera to me..

I don't know how realistic your AA battery requirement is. Whether you like it or not, you're going to be using rechargeables (whether they are AA NiMH or proprietary Lithium Ion). Using Alkaline batteries in any superzoom just isn't practical because of how much power the zoom requires. You would have to carry a lot of extra alkaline sets with you, which is a lot increased weight as well as a personal worry for me with what you're going to do with them when they're depleted, as I suspect rural Africa doesn't offer much of a bettery recycling or proper disposal plan..

Personally, I will likely get a FZ30 to replace my FZ1 as my backup camera and for use as a video camera. But I will still keep my E-500 as my primary camera, and will likely upgrade it to the E-510 once the new factor (and the therefore the price) has gone down, so I will be back snug and happy with an IS camera again..

Good luck with your decision and have fun on your trip..

Chris.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Rangor wrote:.

Due to fujifilm being cheaper I was going toget the S6000, but then I noticed the camera doesn't have imagestabilization. Will that cause me problems with when taking photos atfull zoom?.

The full zoom on that camera is 300mm, correct? Not sure off the top of my head if that's actual, or 35mm equivalent. Let's be conservative and say it's 35mm equivalent..

Minimum handheld shutter speed at that length is 1/300 sec. Of course this varies enormously between photographers but that's the general guide..

With good IS you could bring this down to 1/3 to 1/4 of that - ie 1/100 or so..

This means you can (a) take handheld photos under more extreme conditions, (b) user a lower ISO setting for better IQ, (c) use a narrower aperture..

No, IS is not "necessary". But a lack of ISO is a very real constraint. It's up to you to judge how much of a constraint it is, I can only say I have fallen in love with the VR in my Nikon lens and in future I would think very hard before buying a non-IS/VR camera or lens..

For what it's worth..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

I find IS very useful, although I also own a tripod & "Gorillapod"..

Sometimes it's just not convenient to setup a tripod & IS certainly can make the difference between getting a shot or not..

As well as a "full-size" tripod I find the "gorrillapod" a fantasticly versatile piece of kit, can be used on virtually any surface etc, I have this one:.

Http://www.joby.com/products/gorillapod/slr/.

Simon.

Http://www.landscapephotographyuk.com/.

North Wales photographs - Snowdonia & Anglesey..

In-lens stabilization (like Canons IS and Nikons VR) make for a much steadier viewfinder which can aid composition with longer focal lengths, and reduce eye strain etc. I understand that in-body stabilization (i.e. Sony A100) does not affect the viewfinder..

A tripod is not a realistic tool for everyday photography. Their size and weight make them difficult to carry, they take far too long to set up, and you look like a dick-head using them for anything other than a landscape type shot..

A monopod, on the other hand, weighs next to nothing, slips through your belt, or camera bag strap, when not in use, can be instantly deployed, and makes almost as good a camera platform as a tripod. I always carry a monopod with me, and use it for anything from street candids to full on night shots, (by wedging it into a corner or similar)..

13 second exposure with camera and monopod leant on a window..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Trevorhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/trevor-dennis/..

Simon, nice pictures. Are you, or did you used to be, a poster on uk.rec.walking?.

If yes then it's a good few years since I posted there, but I believe I still have a mug-shot on Paul Saunder's site. http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/index.html.

NZ is a lovely country but I really miss Snowdonia..

Trevorhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/trevor-dennis/..

TLD wrote:.

In-lens stabilization (like Canons IS and Nikons VR) make for amuch steadier viewfinder which can aid composition with longer focallengths, and reduce eye strain etc. I understand that in-bodystabilization (i.e. Sony A100) does not affect the viewfinder..

I agree, I like the visual feedback of the in-lens IS/VR. I have heard it said that it's a good "bio feedback" mechanism in that the amount of movement in the viewfinder gives you feedback on how much your camera is shaking, and therefore possibly help you to improve your technique..

Nikon claim that in-lens VR is superior to in-camera because the mechanism is matched to the lens and not a "one-size fits all". I suppose that's true although I wonder how much you'd notice it in practice..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

When a hammer is your only tool, all problems begin to look like nails...

Arrowman wrote:.

TLD wrote:.

In-lens stabilization (like Canons IS and Nikons VR) make for amuch steadier viewfinder which can aid composition with longer focallengths, and reduce eye strain etc. I understand that in-bodystabilization (i.e. Sony A100) does not affect the viewfinder..

I agree, I like the visual feedback of the in-lens IS/VR. I haveheard it said that it's a good "bio feedback" mechanism in that theamount of movement in the viewfinder gives you feedback on how muchyour camera is shaking, and therefore possibly help you to improveyour technique..

Nikon claim that in-lens VR is superior to in-camera because themechanism is matched to the lens and not a "one-size fits all". Isuppose that's true although I wonder how much you'd notice it inpractice..

Ideally having both options would be more flexible and efficient. Most people cannot afford to buy every IS/VR lens out there, but perhaps they can get 1-2. So for the rest of their lenses (whether prehistorical manual, or newer) they would have the option of turning the in-body IS on..

A few steps further would be thoughts of having both systems interoperating. But that goes further into the hypothetical....

Comprehensive 2007 speculation and predictions: http://1001noisycameras.blogspot.com..