Posts: 2
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
0
Hallo,
I would like to buy a Konica Minolta Z5 but I am stiil not sure if this is a good option.
Can I receive some more advices from you?
Is it really worth buying it?
I also like theNikon CoolPix 7900 for the good shots.
So? What shall I do?
Thanks.
Posts: 1,716
Threads: 125
Joined: Aug 2004
Reputation:
0
What type of photography do you plan to do with it?
_______________________________________
Everybody got to elevate from the norm!
Posts: 2
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
0
Well, I want to make photos of nature (plants, insects, birds - flying), only for myself (as good as possible but not to send them to magazines) but I would really appreciate to be able to have nice indoor photos. And I think that most of the Z5 users complain about the indoor results of the Z5
So???
Posts: 3,694
Threads: 243
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation:
11
If nature is going to be your primary use then I wouold suggest a camera with the longest equivalent length of lens you can afford. My biggest frustration with my point and shoot camera was a lack of range, though there are many P+S cameras with a long mm lens now.
Posts: 5,739
Threads: 264
Joined: Aug 2004
Reputation:
2
I have a Konica Minolta A2 that I think is a very good piece of hardware. It shares many features with the Z5 such as Anti-Shake (this is a GREAT feature) and 2 macro modes (wide and tele). The Z5 has a good zoom range (35-420 equiv) which I think you will find adequate for almost all of your nature work - it is a bit slim on the wide angle side - to really get a shot of a whole room - you need about 24mm equivalent or at least 28mm.
Hope that helps.
[edit] you should check out some of the new Panasonic cameras as well in this range. They are reviewed very well, are similarly priced and have Leica lenses.
(This post was last modified: Apr 26, 2005, 10:08 by
paskelius.)
Posts: 1,716
Threads: 125
Joined: Aug 2004
Reputation:
0
For the macro side of things (plants, insects) that camera should do very well.
But for birds flying, I'd personally find the electronic viewfinder frustrating and would much prefer the speed of a DSLR.
_______________________________________
Everybody got to elevate from the norm!
Posts: 931
Threads: 150
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation:
0
slejhamer Wrote:For the macro side of things (plants, insects) that camera should do very well.
But for birds flying, I'd personally find the electronic viewfinder frustrating and would much prefer the speed of a DSLR.
Sometimes you just have to spend more or you may have to reduce your expectations.
Sometimes we have to ask, just how much are you willing to spend?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm
not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein
(This post was last modified: Apr 27, 2005, 16:45 by
shootit.)
