Samsung Pro 815

Discussion in 'Samsung' started by Me, Mar 26, 2006.

  1. Me

    Me Guest

    I don't see the Samsung Pro 815 discussed here. I was interested in
    buying one & am looking for feedback.

    Does anyone here have experience with one of these?
     
    Me, Mar 26, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Mar 26, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Me

    Me Guest

    The manual reports there is a Brightness setting in the setup menu
    controlled by EVF but that's the only mention of EVF in the document.
    The page you referred to is, so far, the only suggestion that the camera
    is not a dslr.
     
    Me, Mar 26, 2006
    #3
  4. The manual reports there is a Brightness setting in the setup menu
    One mention isn't enough? Is it not also mentioned on the
    specifications page?
    It *has* an EVF.
    It *doesn't have* interchangable lenses.

    2 strikes - it's out. It is NOT a dslr, no matter how much you might
    like it to be. If you are still interested, read this.

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsungpro815/page16.asp

    In particular note these words....
    "The Pro815 only has one or two serious flaws, and there is much to
    like. Unfortunately those flaws are significant, and for some users
    fatal - particularly the sluggish shutter lag and telephoto focus and
    lack of IS. The fact that you must shoot raw to get anything like the
    full potential out of the lens also limits the usefulness of the
    camera... "
     
    mark.thomas.7, Mar 26, 2006
    #4
  5. Me

    Paul Furman Guest

    The 2/3" CCD seems the most important distinction: It has a small P&S
    sensor with iso 50-400 and it makes movies.
     
    Paul Furman, Mar 27, 2006
    #5
  6. Me

    wayne Guest

    An SLR by definition has a mirror and an optical viewfinder that shows
    you what the lens is seeing. They are also interchangeable lens. The
    815 is a simulated SLR because of the electronic viewfinder.

    The 815 is not too shabby a camera. My review, if you are interested is
    here <http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=378>
    For instance it is a much better camera than Minolta's 7 series was,
    quite capable for infrared photography and the lens is pretty good.

    Cheers,

    Wayne

    Wayne J. Cosshall
    Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
    Blog and Podcast http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/
    Personal art site http://www.artinyourface.com/
     
    wayne, Mar 27, 2006
    #6
  7. Me

    Me Guest

    Okay, it's a psuedo SLR. Doesn't the lack of image stabilization
    somewhat negate the great lens? It's a very attractive package, but is
    it/is it not a giant and good step up from a Canon 2mg pixel p&s? The
    little Canon has done yeoman service, but it's time I moved along...
     
    Me, Mar 27, 2006
    #7
  8. Me

    wayne Guest

    Yes, it is a good stepup from a 2MP Canon. The question is whether it
    is the best step up for the money and for they type of photography you
    want to do?

    Personally I find the real dSLRs, like the Canon 350D, Nikon D50, etc
    much better than the cameras with electronic viewfinders. Couple one of
    them with a lens like the Tamron 18-200 that I am testing at the moment
    and you have a convenient package with a great viewfinder.

    That said, the 815 is a pretty good camera and is surely capable of
    excellent photography if you know how to use it. Image stabilization
    would help but then again you can always use a tripod.

    Cheers,

    Wayne

    Wayne J. Cosshall
    Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
    Blog and Podcast http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/
    Personal art site http://www.artinyourface.com/
     
    wayne, Mar 27, 2006
    #8
  9. Me

    Paul Furman Guest

    That's a good suggestion. A $500 Nikon D50 with $400 Tamron 17-200 would
    be only $100 more than this $800 camera. The 300-420 range (35mm equiv.)
    is probably not really useable unless you are planning to use a tripod
    anyways, what you would gain is low light performance (high ISO, less
    noise), instant startup & shooting, faster longer burst (for children &
    wildlife), longer battery life, etc. The problem I see is this lens is
    f/6.3 at the long end and that means no autofocus all the way out. I
    don't know if anyone makes an affordable 17-135, if so that'd be more
    realistic.

    And you'd have the option to get a 28mm f/2 for low light 'normal'
    shooting for some really nice stuff:
    <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=buyUsed&kw=used&Q=258036&O=productList>
    -that's a used manual focus but really it would be super useful for
    indoor people shots & sunsets & such.
     
    Paul Furman, Mar 27, 2006
    #9
  10. It's not a DSLR, but a ZLR, so off-topic for this newsgroup.

    Try:

    rec.photo.digital.zlr

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Mar 27, 2006
    #10
  11. Me

    wayne Guest

    wayne, Mar 27, 2006
    #11
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.