Best camera for DHing shots?

dan-0

Likes Dirt
Hello

I searched the web and forum but did not reallt find what I was looking for.

Here is a photo taken on my Canon Ixus 80IS. Its an mid level digital camera. Takes fantastic still shots but shit moving shots.


Just wondering what cameras you guys have found that work well with mountain biking?


************************************** 16/11/09*****************************
Thanks for all the great replies. I took another shot with the same camera but on the 'Hi ISO' setting. Less blur this time but was less light
 
Last edited:

SideFX

Likes Bikes and Dirt
Mate im waiting for the new canon G 11 . Its not as compact as the Ixus , but its got all the features < most > of the SLR . The g11 superseeds the g10 which performs badly in low light .
Have you thought about getting a new helmet cam /the new go pro HD hero . Its got a decent camera on it and for around $400 could be the go for ridding ...
 

scud

Likes Bikes
Hey Dan-0

Looking at the photo you just posted I have a few ideas that might help however I normally work with video content. Anyway there are a few factors:

Shutter - is the reason its getting so blured it looks to be taking the pic at the default 1/50 to compensate for the low light conditions. It needs to be at least 125 or higher to get clear shots of fast moving objects.

Iris - If your iris is sitting on about f4 or above then you can certainly speed up the shutter and open the iris to f1.6.

I'll make the stabing guess there is no neutral density filters on the camera as well..

The key is in the glass, good optics will allow for a lot more light to be captured and will help to get that shutter speed up.

The body always comes into effect but that's of image processing, its preferable to have a camera with a true 35mm chip to help get the most of what light you have.

The limit is the $ but having no still experience I can't advise much but I do like the cannon EOS 7D if you have a spare 3-4 k to spend....... Not a bad camera that can also record 1920 X 1080i footage as well...:rolleyes:

Scud
 

SouthYarraSage

Likes Dirt
I assume since you mention compact cameras there are some budget constraints here, i.e. we're not really talking about the absolute 'best' so...

...almost any current-generation DSLR will give better image quality, more control of photographic settings, and better responsiveness (delay between pressing the button and taking the picture) than almost any compact camera, as well as a choice of lenses. And an entry-level DSLR is not significantly more expensive than a high-end compact.

For something a bit more pocket-able you could of course go for one of the new micro-four-thirds interchangeable lens cameras.

Check out www.dpreview.com.
 

24alpha

mtbpicsonline.com
Hey Dan-0

Looking at the photo you just posted I have a few ideas that might help however I normally work with video content. Anyway there are a few factors:

Shutter - is the reason its getting so blured it looks to be taking the pic at the default 1/50 to compensate for the low light conditions. It needs to be at least 125 or higher to get clear shots of fast moving objects.

Iris - If your iris is sitting on about f4 or above then you can certainly speed up the shutter and open the iris to f1.6.

I'll make the stabing guess there is no neutral density filters on the camera as well..

The key is in the glass, good optics will allow for a lot more light to be captured and will help to get that shutter speed up.

The body always comes into effect but that's of image processing, its preferable to have a camera with a true 35mm chip to help get the most of what light you have.

The limit is the $ but having no still experience I can't advise much but I do like the cannon EOS 7D if you have a spare 3-4 k to spend....... Not a bad camera that can also record 1920 X 1080i footage as well...:rolleyes:

Scud
Geez Scud, ND filters on a P&S? Seriously.
 

maxwolfie

under-the-radar comedian
Mate im waiting for the new canon G 11 . Its not as compact as the Ixus , but its got all the features < most > of the SLR . The g11 superseeds the g10 which performs badly in low light .
Have you thought about getting a new helmet cam /the new go pro HD hero . Its got a decent camera on it and for around $400 could be the go for ridding ...
Yeah,

Canon G9 / 10 / 11

EDIT: Why would you want an ND filter? That wouldn't help at all.
 

Le Matelot

Canberra Off-Road Cyclists
I'm lumping a Canon EOS 5 D II around the country.

The 40D and 50D also have a very good "sports" mode if you want more of a point and shoot approach, and also a higher frame rate.

But, apart from the other DSLR advantages, it means you can invest in some good glass (which will last lotza years) and then upgrade the bodies later on if you want to. You won't find a really good lens on a small camera and the larger, fast, lenses will give you more flexibility with DH photography.

The other thing with DSLRs is that you will get more precise control over focusing and exposure points.
 

dan-0

Likes Dirt
Hey everyone, thanks heaps for your replies, especially scud. I whipped out the manual and will try different options with ISO etc, and post another picture up.
 

willsy01

Eats Squid
Iris - If your iris is sitting on about f4 or above then you can certainly speed up the shutter and open the iris to f1.6.
Iris? Aperture you mean?

I don't mean any offence when I say this, but i'd say there is nothing wrong with the camera ;)

Looking at the EXIF data, the shutter was at 1/60 which is too slow.....i'm guessing the camera was set to full auto and has adjusted for the slightly low light. I don't know how much manual control the 80IS has, but if you bump it up a bit you should start seeing some results.
 

mattSTI02

Likes Dirt
Gold

Nikon D3 man these are the shit...
Dad and I use the latest model to shoot weddings in Canberra, out on the track they absolutely come into there own...kinda pricey though
But seriously man good optics will make the biggest difference, invest in a mid level DSLR and spend the extra on good lenses. Buy an DSLR and optics that shoots well in low light and good light gathering & you will usually find that they pick up the fast stuff pretty well.

Cheers
 
Last edited:

CP

Likes Bikes and Dirt
If you're shooting in areas under heavy canopy, and don't have access to a fast lens, then a flash might be an idea. It will enable you to get the shutter speed up to the 1/125s speed, and is feasible even for compacts like the G9-11s.
 

fairy1

Banned
I am biased because I own one but I think if you want a camera in your Camelbak you can't go past a Panasonic DMC-LX3, I have had a mid level Ixus and it lives in the bin the Panasonic is better in every way.
 

scratchy

Farkin Activist
ANY DSLR will cream any P&S. Especially if you put some money aside for a decent lens (the kit lens are rubbish).

Go for a constant aperture Zoom (f2.8)

2nd hand 20D (I'm selling mine soon- should get around 400-500 for the body). Allow $400-500 for a good lens (Tamron 28-75 2.8) and that is a pretty kick arse camera set-up for under $1000 (5 frames per second shooting).

Money is no option but still being sensible? Canon 7D for $2300 (body only) Canon 70-200 2.8f L series lens (from memory around $1700) 8 frames a second.

Money really is no option? Nikon D3 or Canon 1D IV for $4000ish upwards and the imaged stabilised 70-200 which is around $2000.

After using a bunch of DSLRs and a bunch of P&S I don't think there is such a thing as a good P&S for MTBing especially once you consider how the focus systems work on a P&S. Some are OK, but you want good photos you need to spend some cash.

Oh and the IXUS is good for what it is. A $200 P&S camera.
 

JSPhoto

Likes Bikes and Dirt
I'll chuck in a vote for an IXUS as a P&S camera, mum has one and I wanted to see just how good it was so I took it for a bit of a spin, was pretty impressed by its abilities, the manual mode isn't too bad at all. I also used to get alright shots with my Olympus waterproof camera, I got a Canon 450D about 3 months ago now and... well lets just say that there is an epic difference in shot sharpness and quality, like someone has already said a slr will in general kill any p&s. I'm really liking my 450D the only whinge I have is the ISO could go higher, bit it only goes to 1600, thats really my only bitch, but thats not overly important for mtb photography really, personally i've never gone up to 1600, usually its between 200-800, depends on if using a flash etc etc.

Anyway to answer that initial questions 450D 18mm-55mm, 50mm-250mm, 50mm f/1.8, the kit lense goes alright for DH shots really.
 

scud

Likes Bikes
EDIT: Why would you want an ND filter? That wouldn't help at all.
Geez Scud, ND filters on a P&S? Seriously.[/QUOTE

Hahaha sorry didn't realise that it was a P&S, funny! ND wouldn't help for the posted shot (in fact the opposite) but worlds of difference at the brighter end of the spectrum. Do DSLRs even come with in build ND filters?

Iris? Aperture you mean?
Same thing different part of mechanism (iris is the diaphragm, aperture is the opening) , but yeah I'm used to everyone calling it iris... like I said I'm film/TV not stills. Hell it takes me a while to get my bearings every time I pick up an SLR..... and I still feel lost!

Hey everyone, thanks heaps for your replies, especially scud. I whipped out the manual and will try different options with ISO etc, and post another picture up.
Coolies hope it helps!:rolleyes: Just a bit of trivia, digital cameras don't truly have ISO (hear me out) they have a digital ISO simulation which is just like gain you would find on video cameras. Traditionally ISO refers to the frequency and sensitivity of the light sensitive dots in old school film. When everything went digital they kept the ISO name for user friendliness... Otherwise photographers would be screaming where's my ISO and what does 9db gain mean...
 

68deluxe

Likes Bikes
If you end up getting a dSLR, get something with decent continuous shooting frames per second... 4 - 5 frames per second would be great for catching some action sequences.

Problem with your little Ixus 80 is that if you crank the ISO up over 400 your pics are going to be noisy as hell.

Want a cheap, low light capable, good frames per second dSLR? Maybe look at the new Pentax K-x. It's tiny, class leading (actually out performs many more expensive cameras) hi-iso low noise image quality, good frames per second, and only $750.
 

MJS

Likes Bikes and Dirt
A lot of misleading and incorrect information posted in this thread... most important thing to remember is a better camera does not automatically mean you will take better photos. A better camera will make it easier for you to take great photos, but you need to know how to take good photos first.

Practice, practise practise, experiment with different settings, and if you know someone good at photography get them to teach you. It is amazing the quality of photos some P&S cameras will take these days.
 

dan-0

Likes Dirt
If you end up getting a dSLR, get something with decent continuous shooting frames per second... 4 - 5 frames per second would be great for catching some action sequences.

Problem with your little Ixus 80 is that if you crank the ISO up over 400 your pics are going to be noisy as hell.

Want a cheap, low light capable, good frames per second dSLR? Maybe look at the new Pentax K-x. It's tiny, class leading (actually out performs many more expensive cameras) hi-iso low noise image quality, good frames per second, and only $750.
I checked out the Pentax K-x, looks like a great DSLR but its $750, body only. I have never owned a DSLR but from what I researched its another
$300+ for the lens.

What do you think of a Canon 450D? There is one on ebay...
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Canon-450d-5...emQQptZAU_Digital_Cameras?hash=item1e5907aa5f
 
Last edited:
Top