Camera to Take with on Marathon

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Over Achiever, Oct 1, 2007.

  1. Over Achiever macrumors 68000

    Over Achiever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Toledo, OH, formerly Twin Cities, MN
    #1
    Hey, it's not recommended practice to bring stuff with when running a marathon. Well, this weekend I'm going to be running in the Chicago Marathon, and as a photographer, I would love to capture the runner's perspective.

    I currently take pictures with a Fuji S6000 which is a bit too big to carry obviously. Anybody have any suggestions? I might take some self "video updates" that I would piece together after the race.
     
  2. mduser63 macrumors 68040

    mduser63

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, UT
    #2
    I'm far from a marathon runner, so I'm not sure how big is too big, but I'd probably just go for a small, thin, light point and shoot. My (now old) Sony DSC-T1 would fit the bill I imagine. Something like that? You obviously won't get the quality you'd get from an SLR, but it seems that that's the whole balancing act: size/weight versus potential image quality.
     
  3. robbieduncan Moderator emeritus

    robbieduncan

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    London
    #3
    Are you going to be carrying a phone? If so can you not just use it? Mine has a 3.2Mp camera which is OK in decent light and can take videos. Yes an SLR takes much better pictures, but it's small, light and you might want to carry it anyway...
     
  4. samh004 macrumors 68020

    samh004

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Location:
    Australia
    #4
    Any compact point-and-shoot would be appropriate. They're relatively cheap these days and you don't need huge MP, just something small and light weight, and a decent memory card to safely record everything.
     
  5. Over Achiever thread starter macrumors 68000

    Over Achiever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Toledo, OH, formerly Twin Cities, MN
    #5
    Unfortunately I have an SDA which takes 1.3 MP images, and the quality is quite poor.

    That's what I was thinking too, but there are so many on the market nowadays that I don't know where to look at or what to look for in a compact.
     
  6. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #6
    People who said a DSLR would take much better photos than a small point-and-shoot camera.........I doubt it. In the situation you're in, you're not going to be taking in any artistic shots. Just pick a small camera and rely on "AUTO", because even if you were to run a marathon with a DSLR (which would be stupid), you'd have to do use AUTO anyway, and you'd get less depth of field with a DSLR than with a P&S.

    If you want small, light, and good photo quality, get a Fuji F40 fd. Otherwise, I'm sure a small Sony or Canon would be perfect.

    How do you plan on carrying it? In your hand? If you're just carrying it in your hand, bring a little pouch so that you don't make it too sweaty.
     
  7. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #7
    Have you run a marathon before? I think nearly any way you carry the camera, no matter how small it is, there are going to be chafing issues. Maybe an armband would work.
     
  8. gwuMACaddict macrumors 68040

    gwuMACaddict

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    washington dc
    #8
    Is it even allowed

    I know there are limits for electronic devices in marathons- no mp3 players, etc. Are you allowed to carry a camera?
     
  9. Over Achiever thread starter macrumors 68000

    Over Achiever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Toledo, OH, formerly Twin Cities, MN
    #9
    I have run them before, and if the camera is light enough, my pocket is fine. Otherwise I do happen to have a belt on my running shorts that I can clip the camera to.

    I had the Fuji F50 for a couple weeks, but I was disappointed as to the quality of the pictures ... but I am seemingly picky. I wonder if the F-series is small enough?

    I should be fine, as I won't be competing for prize money. I'm there to enjoy the environment, not shooting for a personal best this time.
     
  10. Squonk macrumors 65816

    Squonk

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    #10
    First of all, congratulations on running the Chicago Marathon! I hope you have a great time doing it!

    I echo the other poster who said to take a large memory card and then shoot 3-4 shots for each picture you want. Since you will be running, who knows what the autofocus is going to grab for you!

    As for a camera, I'm partial to Canon, but regardless, be prepared that you might drop it and be sure you won't be upset over potentially killing a camera and loosing the money AND that it won't ruin your race either! I have been contemplating my "sweat camera" for running for a couple of years and have still not jumped.

    Something like this Fuji from Dell would fit the bill quite well I would think. But from what I hear about Dell, they are not always the speediest of shippers.

    Good Luck!!!
     
  11. Butthead macrumors 6502

    Butthead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #11
    So other than picture quality, did you try running with the F50? The F50 is just over an inch thick (25mm) and it has real (not digital) image stabilization. I'm not sure you can get any better picture quality than the F50 in that size range, the quality of the lens on the F50 is tops for PnS, the sensor (if hasn't degraded from F30/F31fd 6MP) is also tops for PnS.

    I am not knowledgeable about any PnS that are smaller/lighter/thinner than the F50, that have all important IS, which you'd need if you are shooting while running a marathon...unless of course you're stooting all of the shots with wide open aperture and faster shutter speeds.

    I think you are SOL if the F50 can't do what you want.
     
  12. Over Achiever thread starter macrumors 68000

    Over Achiever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Toledo, OH, formerly Twin Cities, MN
    #12
    Well, the sensor I think is noticeably worse than the F30/F31 across all ISO, the movie mode is quite a bit grainier, and I did not see any difference with the OIS on or off, which was a dealbreaker for me. I've had the Panasonic and Ricoh, and with them I can tell that OIS works, but unfortunately with the Fuji, I could not get IS to improve my pictures at all. Shots taken slower than 1/20s consistently showed camera shake. It was very disappointing.

    As for running with the F50, yes I have run with it, but only up to 5 miles. I didn't take it with me for any long runs, and I returned it before I did my 20. So I'm not sure if it will work for the marathon, but you're right, it definately is doable. I'll reconsider the F50 if I happened to have a lemon, but I've talked to other disappointed F50 users as well.
     
  13. Squonk macrumors 65816

    Squonk

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    #13
    I have a Canon SD800IS which is very small and takes great pictures. One of the cool things is that it has a much wider angle lens then most of the P&S's. At it's widest, it is 28mm equivalent. Depending on if you are wanting any running self portraits, this might come in handy. I have no idea how it's size compares to the F40/F50's that you've been discussing.
     
  14. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #14
    The F50 is the newest version....and is crap (in comparison to previous F-series cameras).

    The F30 and F31fd are fantastic, but have lots of manual controls, and are also a lot bigger. The F40 has less controls, but is much smaller. The photo quality is still better than what you'll get from a new Canon, Sony, Panasonic, etc.

    Most cameras, even the smallest cameras, are around 20-23 mm thick. The Fuji F40 is 23 mm thick.
     
  15. Butthead macrumors 6502

    Butthead

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    #15
    F30/F31 have their flaws in bright lighting like you'd find in a marathon, I wouldn't go so far as stating that they are 'fantastic'. Photo quality maybe of marginal signifance at ISO speeds <400, might not make any difference at all to a marathon runner, whereas the IS could make a huge difference...blurry shots vs. sharp images, ever try to hold a lightweight digicam steady while your heart is racing from vigorous exercise (of any kind :) )?

    No manual focus on the F30/F31, only aperture & shutter speed priority of limited settings. Links please to "reliable" reviews that state the F50 is "crap" compared to F30/F31? F40 is how many mm thinner than a F30/F31 :D ? "a lot bigger" "much smaller" ...how many mm's is that?
     
  16. Over Achiever thread starter macrumors 68000

    Over Achiever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Toledo, OH, formerly Twin Cities, MN
    #16
    Well, from my personal experience with the F50 for two weeks really didn't impress me at all, especially with the IS on the F50 not providing any noticeable benefit (compared to other cameras with IS).

    You're right about the bright weather, but I tend to use EV -1/3 in daylight anyway, that should help with the F20/30/31/40 correct? Especially with overexposure?
     
  17. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #17
    You want links? Does Google work on your computer? ;) Working strictly from memory, the F40 is around 23 mm thick, and the F31 is 28 or 29 mm. You can definitely tell the difference when you hold them.

    The F50 is crap compared to the F20, F30, F31fd, and F40, but only if you care about photo quality. ;) Just look for photos from the F50. They're all over the net. Do you really need reviews to tell whether an image is good or bad? Just look at the photos from the F50.......soft like photos from any Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Sony, Pentax, or Ricoh point and shoot with 8+ MP. Sorry, but if you're talking about photo quality, the F40 is fantastic compared to the competition. Since it has shutter priority, a runner will be OK, even if the ISO automatically adjusts itself to ISO 800.

    Is this an organized run that's done within the city? If so, there will be shadows and low light through stretches of the run. High ISO will help you more than IS in these situations, and high ISO is where the F40 will beat any other slim camera. I can take a photo using my F31fd at ISO 800 that are almost as good as my Nikon D50 at the same ISO. Using a high ISO freezes motion better than IS. After all, it doesn't matter if you and your hands are shaking while taking the photo, not if the things around you are also moving.

    Or go with the Canon. Just be prepared for bad photos whenever you're in a shady spot near a building, tree-lined streets, etc. You have IS, but when other people around you are moving, it's not going to help.
     
  18. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
  19. redrabbit macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #19
    I hope he's ok. That marathon didn't go too well
     
  20. Squonk macrumors 65816

    Squonk

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    #20
    How so? I didn't see anything in the press....
     

Share This Page