Digital camera advice

[03marauder]

Ok, I'm looking for some advice/help with digital cameras here. I'm not a big camera person, but I'm looking at picking up a digital camera in the near future. Need something to take some good pictures with at Marauderville. So I don't know a whole lot when it comes to the subject, and I'm looking for something in the more affordable range. What is a good brand to go with? What kind of features should I look for? What do I need to get the pics to the computer? We have one here at work with a floppy for storage, but it is an older camera, nothing like the newer ones that I see out. I figure I would ask for advice here before talking to a salesman at the store who is just looking to sell whatever. Thanks for the help.

[MM03MOK]

Where to begin!!

Check out this website: http://www.steves-digicams.com/

There are camera reviews. Under "Best Camera" it gives you top picks in different catagories. The larger the pixel capability, the more it will cost.

Most cameras come with removable media, such as Compact Flash, Secure Digital or Memory Stick. Very easy to use and transfer. Many printers now have slots for the media. It acts like another drive on the computer.

The Buyers Guide lets you shop by price range. You can then see what features are available that agree with your pocketbook.

Also consider how compact you want the camera and how automatic you want the features? Do you want the camera to do all the thinking or do you want to have some control, such as white balance and shutter speed?

I'm on my second digital camera now, Nikon D70. It has many more features than my Sony Mavica CD1000 and am still learning the ropes. I loved the Sony's 10x/20x zoom but didn't like the shutter delay in capturing the picture. The Nikon lets me change lenses and is a digital single lens reflex with "instant" shutter reaction.

Maybe ask a friend to borrow theirs to take some pics and see how you like it. I know it's hard to comprehend all the info in just reading reviews and specs.

[Donna]

Bunny covered most of the things I would have mentioned. I purchased an Olympus C-700 Ultra Zoom, with 10X optical zoom (which I love), 2.1 pixel over 4 years ago. The camera came with the Camedia software, that I installed on my computer, which allows me to download the pics from the camera to my computer and will allow me to resize, crop, remove some red eye, add text to the photo and can change the color, sharpness, etc of the photos. Here is a link to the olympus digital cameras. I would recomment the C series or even D series, depending on what you want.

http://www.olympus.com/cpg_section/oima_digital_all.asp

I basically purchased a good digital camera with a zoom (the 10x was the best for my needs at that time) on it for the dog shows, dog sled races that I was very active in back then. I also took the camera to Alaska with me 3 years ago (lol....came home with 500 pics on 3 meg cards) and thank goodness I had the zoom, because with out it, some of the pics would not have shown the beauty of Alaska that I was trying to capture, especially the whale on the cruise. It look like the whale was right next to the ship when you looked at the pics. :P With the zoom, I also have a habit of taking pics at events of people an event and getting a try candid shot. They don't even know I took a picture of them from a distance.

Mary made a great suggestion and see if you can borrow a couple of camera from friends (or check with a good camera store) and try them out. I will say one thing, at an event like the Woodward Dream Cruise, a nice zoom on a camera will allow you take pic of a certain car from a distance, that you may not be able to get otherwise.

Donna



Where to begin!!

Check out this website: http://www.steves-digicams.com/

There are camera reviews. Under "Best Camera" it gives you top picks in different catagories. The larger the pixel capability, the more it will cost.

Most cameras come with removable media, such as Compact Flash, Secure Digital or Memory Stick. Very easy to use and transfer. Many printers now have slots for the media. It acts like another drive on the computer.

The Buyers Guide lets you shop by price range. You can then see what features are available that agree with your pocketbook.

Also consider how compact you want the camera and how automatic you want the features? Do you want the camera to do all the thinking or do you want to have some control, such as white balance and shutter speed?

I'm on my second digital camera now, Nikon D70. It has many more features than my Sony Mavica CD1000 and am still learning the ropes. I loved the Sony's 10x/20x zoom but didn't like the shutter delay in capturing the picture. The Nikon lets me change lenses and is a digital single lens reflex with "instant" shutter reaction.

Maybe ask a friend to borrow theirs to take some pics and see how you like it. I know it's hard to comprehend all the info in just reading reviews and specs.

[oldekid]

There are lots of cameras out there that are good. People will normally suggest the one that they use. It also depends on what you plan to do with the shots you take. Most major brands will have a variety of models, with a variety of prices. You will simply have to shop around for your desired price range. I personally would not look at anything below 3 Megapixels these days. You can get some decent 8 x 10 shots (if needed) with these.

If you aren't real familiar with photography, you will probably want to start out using the camera's fully automatic settings. This will get you some reasonably good shots without any post processing on your pc.

Most digital cameras can download directly to your pc, or you can download your camera's card directly to a card reader, which will not drain your camera battery. You can also take your card to most photo processing shops and get prints as well. There are some cameras that work with a docking/printer station that download and print very quickly if you prefer to go that route.

I would recommend that you do some research. Here is a site that is pretty fair about evaluating cameras. http://www.steves-digicams.com/default.htm

There are a lot of things to consider. For car shots, you will want some zooming capability, which most cameras do come with. You might want to do some research for tips on shooting cars as well. You might also find other uses for a camera other than shooting cars.

I hope this helps. I know I didn't tell you exactly what to buy, but I did want to at least point you in the right direction. I use Canon equipment, but that is just my preference.

Good luck!

[oldekid]

That's what happens when you try to work for a living and keep up with this forum. It looks like several people have responded before I actually got to post my response. Sorry for the redundant link. It looks like you are in good hands here.

[03marauder]

Thanks for the advice. I'll have to check out those sites and some of the reviews. I'm not trying to win any photo awards or anything, just want something to take decent pictures of cars or whatever. I'll see what I can find, hopefully without spending to much money. After all i need to have funds for 4.10's when this is all over.

[Marauderjack]

My advice...It is free and you are getting your moneys worth!! :D

Don't bother with one that is over 4.0 mega-pixels...files are way too big unless you want 8x10 prints??

I have an Olympus C-750UZ with a 40X zoom......A bit too much for free hand shots!! :confused:

If I were looking now I would probably get a Kodak EasyShare C-340....It can be had from a vendor on Steve's site for $170!!! Not bad for a GREAT little camera!! :beer:

Wal-Mart also carries them.....

Marauderjack :D

[2004mercuryman]

make sure you get one with over 4 pixel and above i just bought kodak easy share Cx7430 and i love it. I have the printer and the picture look great evertime.

[Bluerauder]

Ok, I'm looking for some advice/help with digital cameras here. I'm not a big camera person, but I'm looking at picking up a digital camera in the near future. Need something to take some good pictures with at Marauderville.
I am also a photographically challenged person. :rolleyes: The camera that I use is a Kodak "Easy Share" CX7300, 3.2 MegaPixel camera. It comes with software to download and manage your photo albums. Real easy set-up for novices and very user friendly --- IMHO. :D It comes with 16 Megs internal storage for pics. I am currently using a 128 Meg pic card supplement. Of course, you can get 256, 516, 1024 (1 Gig) to fit your needs. Download of pics is easy as pie. Connect the cable, turn the camera on and the software detects the camera and starts the download process. No sweat !!!

Camera features are pretty limited though. No zoom. :( But it does have a viewfinder. Sorry, I don't know the price 'cause I received it as a gift. Now I have the printer dock as well to do photo quality prints. There are probably better cameras; but it like mine and it is really easy to use and download. :up:

[TAF]

I just bought this one yesterday, 7.1 megapixel...and I'm looking forward to receiving it by Friday.

CLICK THE PIC FOR SPECS (http://butterflyphoto.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=SD500)
http://butterflyphoto.com/assets/product/images200/3146C11E59664E3E8F8179CCAE047F 0D.jpg (http://butterflyphoto.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=SD500)

[CRUZTAKER]

Any camera that requires holding it away from your body and shooting what you see in a 2" lcd window is worthless.

Sorry....but if your'e gonna keep this thing and use it as a camera, atleast spring for a Coolpix.

Again, sorry, but after using my mother in laws 4X4" run of the mill hand held 4 megapixel Sony for a few hours I found that it is impossible to square a picture, the auto white balance is horrible, the flash is worthless, and the zoom is incredibly difficult to use looking through that little lcd screen (the eye piece is a mere through hole look), and the refresh rate on those things is absolutely terrible. Don't even try to get an action shot or a multiple shot of something as the frame takes several seconds to go to the card, and even longer to refresh for the next shot.

Again, if your'e going digital, and want to use this camera like the old faithfull SLR'S in auto mode....look at the coolpix series of Nikons. Easy to learn and use.

[MM03MOK]

As your eyes get older, a decent eye piece is worth its weight! Some even offer optic correction. I would be lost if I only had the display screen to use. You lose creativity because you lose accuracy (framing etc.) Good point, Barry.

[CRUZTAKER]

As your eyes get older, a decent eye piece is worth its weight! Some even offer optic correction. I would be lost if I only had the display screen to use. You lose creativity because you lose accuracy (framing etc.) Good point, Barry.I really didn't want to come off condecending....but after using a Nikon D70 or heaven forbid a D100....picture taking even in the modest level just doesn't compare.

We've been spoiled....ehh Mary. :bows:

Where's James? He'll contest as well.

[Donny Carlson]

The Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-H1

http://image.compusa.com/prodimages/39/3a4762bf-5c00-4189-9680-3147953c3bf0.gif

http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code= 320038&pfp=BROWSE

You could probably shop this around for a better price, imo. I would buy one, but my existing Cyber Shot is still producing great shots.

[Mike Poore]

That's easy. Get the Nikon Cool-pix 2600, or whatever the latest version is. :D

[ncmm]

James? WoaFace please chime in with your thoughts. . . thank you :D

[Sactown]

I just bought this one yesterday, 7.1 megapixel...and I'm looking forward to receiving it by Friday.

Nice! If you don't mind wrangling with the larger files, I say the more MP's the better. Sure a 4 or 5 MP gives a decent 8x10 but forget about cropping and still getting a nice print. With more MP's you can crop your images or even use the "digital" zoom (AKA built in camera crop) and still get a decent 8x10. I guess the muffler business isn't as bad as your other thread indicated :)

[CRUZTAKER]

James? WoaFace please chime in with your thoughts. . . thank you :D
James uses the Nikon D70 as well....;)

[TAF]

Nice! If you don't mind wrangling with the larger files, I say the more MP's the better. Sure a 4 or 5 MP gives a decent 8x10 but forget about cropping and still getting a nice print. With more MP's you can crop your images or even use the "digital" zoom (AKA built in camera crop) and still get a decent 8x10. I guess the muffler business isn't as bad as your other thread indicated :)
Thanks...yeah for the price & ease of use, I don't think you can beat it. SLRs are not my bag...just takin' pics of customer's cars for my website. And, 7.1 mp is perfect for that....

[Donny Carlson]

Thanks...yeah for the price & ease of use, I don't think you can beat it. SLRs are not my bag...just takin' pics of customer's cars for my website. And, 7.1 mp is perfect for that....
Yeah, there's a difference between snapshots and artsy-fartsy. I have a pro quality Minolta SLR I paid $2000 for 15 years ago and don't touch it now. And you've seen my Sony. I use the viewfinder, but lots of time it's better to line stuff up in the video window, because the the optical viewfinder tends to be off somewhat.

And yeah, that's a good camera you got there, my friend. It's perfect for filling up the walls with customer shots. Screw the naysayers.

[Mikeenh]

I bought a Nikon D70 last year on the advise of my neighbor who is a professional photographer / retired state trooper that did lots of tricky undrcover picture taking.
I helped him shoot the contents of a house last week. He was using a Nikon D2X. I believe his camera is in the $6,000 dollar rage. My D70 is around $1,200. Our pictures were equal in quality.
The last camera I had was a cannon G2 that you see the picture on the back before you shoot. It had a huge lag time after you pressed the go button and would not lock onto anything that was moving. The D70 nails it every time.

[Mongoose]

I bought a D70 also and am completely satisfied with it. It replaced a Sony Mavica. With a 1GB flash card, picture quality set on normal, and file size set on small, the flash card will hold 2000 pics. Every bump up in either size or quality halves the capacity.
Eg: fine and small=1000 pics
fine and medium=500 pics
fine and large=250 pics
The main reason I bought the D70 though is that all my Nikon FG 35mm SLR lenses will work with this camera although manual focusing and settings are required.

[CRUZTAKER]

The main reason I bought the D70 though is that all my Nikon FG 35mm SLR lenses will work with this camera although manual focusing and settings are required.Me too...but ever notice the pics sometimes need a little tweaking with software....and more so the older nikor lenses weren't built for the digital SLR so you lose MAJOR wide angle shots?

IE: The older 35mm lenses attached to the D70 actually give you more like a 44mm view. Makes for a real PITA to take pics in a tight room.

I recently gave up out of frustration and not only skipped purchasing the stock D70 18-70mm lense and went with the tamaron 18-200. The beauty part...same price for both, but the zoom on the tamaron is awesome.

Next on the list...tamaron 1000mm ....can you say zoom a 1/2 mile....:woohoo:

BTW: I shoot large fine every time. I do so to enable further zoom on any object within the original shot with software, and the tiny object brought forward and cropped is clear as a bell. I get 279 shot on a 1gb card.

Here is an example of max distance and clarity after zoom. I took this shot with the D70 AT 200mm from nearly 200 feet away. If one plans on using their camera for anything other than a shot from say a maximum 35 feet....a DSLR is the way to go.

http://www.mercurymarauder.net/gallery/data/500/disney8_018.jpg

Same position at 50mm:

http://www.mercurymarauder.net/gallery/data/500/disney8_019.jpg

[jawz101]

I bought my current camera like I buy my computer equip. Just pick what you're willing to spend and find the most camera for your money.
Things I've learned-
Digital zoom means nothing. 3.2 MP is good enough; anything better is a bonus.
ex: my cam is 4 megapixel. When I 1st got it I took a picture from across the room. Used the 'fine' quality setting (I can only guess you can pick how many pixels/inch I want based on how much storage I have on my camera. At fine, i'm guessing using 4megapixel, I took a picture of a water bottle. Using MS Paint I zoomed in and I could almost read the nutrition info on it. That's 4megapixels. I can't imagine not needing more.
A good photographer doesn't use zoom(esp. when using a camcorder!). Unless you're going to snipe someone 3x optical is good.
ex: Mine is 3x optical. It's good enough if I want to zoom in a little. If I were a secret agent I'd definitely get 7-10x optical. Someone at work took a pic of the skyline out of our office w/ a 7x optical and we zoomed in w/ the viewfinder on his camera and we could see people in cars from about 1/2 a mile I'm guessing.

Other than that- I price shop online, then I check places like ebay, then www.dealcase.com or gotapex.com, look for stores w/ coupon code options on their shopping cart or even allow stackable coupons (like Dell)
the great thing about places like dealcase and gotapex is they'll walk you through a site and what to click on to get you the best deal (click on for educational purposes, select these options, and enter these codes in this order... you get the idea)

[CRUZTAKER]

Megapixel increase is very noticable if you plan to PRINT your pics on high quality photographic paper. There is no arguing that if PRINTING your shots is something you want to do...the lower the mp the grainier the shot is going to appear on paper.

I lowered the res of all of my some 700+ shots from Disney to 1024x768 to save image load time, and figured they would print fine as they look great. The two above are 1024x768. My wife showed me the difference between those, and the ones I saved at 6.3 mp 3008x2000, and hands down, the hi res pics in fine mode appeared better than any film shots, and 4 times as sharp as the low res.

On a computer all formats appear nice. On paper the truth comes out.

As far as zoom, a good photog does indeed use zoom! Not all picture are taken 15' from the subject. Those guys on the sidelines at sports events aren't using Tamaron 1000's just for grins. Otherwise you'd never see those choice closeups on the cover of Sports Illustrated.

[jawz101]

I do agree w/ Cruz. Some professions do make use of zoom.
3-4 megapixel prints still look the same as non-digital camera prints in clarity. Obviously if you compare a 3 MP camera shot to a 6+ MP camera shot there would be a difference.
If I was budgeting for a 500 dollar purchase I'd definitely go with MegaPixels and sniper-like zoom.

Then again, I'm not this guy http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/gigapixel.htm

[MM03MOK]

linky no worky

[CRUZTAKER]

Link worked for me Mary....and good thing for you...cause that guy is just plain Mega pixel CRAZY!!!!


WOW!!! :eek:

He shows a great example of what a 3mp camera WON'T capture however.

[Sactown]

You are both right. jawz was talking about "digital zoom" and it indeed means nothing. It is a marketing spin that should basically be ignored. It is like an image crop followed by a resolution enhancement algorithm that results in fuzzy, interpolated images, made worse as you increase the "digital zoom" factor. "Optical zoom" is the only zoom value matters.


As far as zoom, a good photog does indeed use zoom! ...


Digital zoom means nothing.

[MM03MOK]

Link worked for me Mary....and good thing for you...cause that guy is just plain Mega pixel CRAZY!!!!


WOW!!! :eek:

He shows a great example of what a 3mp camera WON'T capture however.The site must have been down. I'm going to bookmark that link.

[TAF]

I just took this with my new camera....

http://www.mercurymarauder.net/gallery/data/500/IMG_0078.JPG (http://www.mercurymarauder.net/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=7620&cat=500)

[Slowpoke]

you're forgetting the most important part of digital photography... Photoshop!

Gotta get Photoshop or some other really good image editing software to tweak the photos.

I use Photoshop and Illustrator nearly every week for 5 years - took me two years just to figure out how to work well with it and another 2 years to become skilled at using it. I am not talking about simple things like cropping, color balance, and shadows, fixing a red eye, removing a background, but much more complex things.

there are lots of decents cameras out there but if you can manipulate the images well then you got squat.

Incidently, I created my little Slowpoke graphic for my signature in about one minute using PhotoShop.

[Sactown]

I just took this with my new camera....
Is that at the highest resolution?

[TAF]

Is that at the highest resolution?
Nope...at about 3/4 (approx. 4.5 MP) camera goes to 7.1 MP

[Sactown]

Nope...at about 3/4 (approx. 4.5 MP) camera goes to 7.1 MP
Full res will get that bugar on the door handle :)

[MM03MOK]

A word about zooming, if I may. For me, a decent zoom range is important. (My SLR zoom ranges is 28mm-200mm using various lenses.) Yes, you can crop the crap out of a picture using Photoshop. But why not compose it properly when you take the picture? Sometimes you're prevented from getting close enough to your subject but having a decent zoom rectifies that problem. I guess that's the difference between a snapshot and a photograph - composition. I have over 25 years of professional experience too.

[woaface]

Yeah I'm really late....

James uses a Nikon D70 with three Nikkor lenses. A 18-70 that's broken (just stuck in one place) a 28-200 (I love it, it was $400) and a 60mm macro.

James also wishes he had a real version of photoshop.

If you're looking at a Nikon D70 also check out the Cannon 20D. I like my camera, but that's competition and you can compare to see what fits your needs best.

[python357]

Ok, I'm looking for some advice/help with digital cameras here. I'm not a big camera person, but I'm looking at picking up a digital camera in the near future. Need something to take some good pictures with at Marauderville. So I don't know a whole lot when it comes to the subject, and I'm looking for something in the more affordable range. What is a good brand to go with? What kind of features should I look for? What do I need to get the pics to the computer? We have one here at work with a floppy for storage, but it is an older camera, nothing like the newer ones that I see out. I figure I would ask for advice here before talking to a salesman at the store who is just looking to sell whatever. Thanks for the help.
The best camera is the name brand of your chioce with the highest "OPTICAL ZOOM" that you can afford and around 3 mpixels should do for any casual photos. The optical zoom gets you the clear photos, digital zoom starts to pixelate the picture grainey look. Most newer cameras only need a USB port to connect to your PC and if you have Windows XP it has a transfer utility built in, other wise the camera will come with the appropriate software and drivers.:beer:

[Mad1]

Just thought I'd post a link to this great sports photo journalism site. It's patronized by most of the serious (re: good) professional photographers and by every wanna-be sports photographer.

SportsShooter.com (http://www.sportsshooter.com/)

The shots are simply amazing and the discussions on photo techniques, camera features and related topics are pretty interesting, even to a "regular" photo monkey. (Just don't ask me to explain chimping to you.)

I agree with most of the stuff people have said on here and only have a few morsels of info to add. I've been shooting breaking news and sports for nearly 15 years. I'm a semi-pro shooter and also sold digital cameras at CompUSA between newspaper jobs.

Mega-pixels are important, but anything over 4 MP isn't really needed unless you intend to print the pictures larger than 8x10 or 'blow-up' a postage stamp-size portion of an image to full page.

If you're taking stuff you really want to keep, then make sure your camera shoots in RAW image files, as well as in JPEG formats. The RAW image is "EXACTLY" what the camera's sensor saw when you snapped the picture. JPEGs are compressed files, even after a few times of opening, editing and saving ... you will notice a difference in quality from the original RAW file as JPEG processing always throws away pieces of the picture to save file space. The more you edit/save a file ... the more of your original photo is being degraded and lost forever.

SLRs are definitely better as an investment than a "point&shoot", if only that you can become a better photographer and use more of their capabilities with new equipment (better or longer lens, faster zooms, remote flashes, etc.) You will be limited to whatever abilities the point-n-shoot has "built-in."

My biggest problem with point-n-shoot cameras is the delay from shutter press to image is taken. Like TAF said, it will work for a snapshot of a non-moving object if it is within 25 feet in daylight. If you want any thing else, get an SLR camera.

Digital Zoom is an illusion created by marketing stooges. The camera simply crops your photo and blows it up bigger, which is definitely not better in this case. You can do the same thing and better with any photo editing program. Stick to "Optical Zoom" or buy a better camera if you want to shoot things that are far away.

Personally, I have a Canon Digital Rebel EOS. Low-end of SLRs at just under $1,000, but it has all the capabilities of the same cameras used by true professionals. (6 mega-pixels, white-balance, fully programable, ISO (film speed) from 100 up to 1600, able to swap in any EOS-compatible lens for zooms, wide-angles, telephotos.

Buy a pair of memory cards that are as large as you can afford, you will likely use them. (I have a 1gig compact flash set) And after you download your photos, always FORMAT your media cards ... this is vital because otherwise you WILL get corrupted images at some point. A quick format or just erasing photos with the camera is not enough ... you don't want to lose that one unreproducable photo to digital gremlins.

Jeremy
Mad1

[MM03MOK]

And after you download your photos, always FORMAT your media cards ... this is vital because otherwise you WILL get corrupted images at some point. A quick format or just erasing photos with the camera is not enough ... you don't want to lose that one unreproducable photo to digital gremlins.

Jeremy
Mad1Good advice, Jeremy. Hadn't thought about it before. Just like defragging......

[woaface]

It is VERY good advice. I learned that the HARD way on VACATION of all places.


RARRR!!! I'm still bitter about it...


Good advice, Jeremy. Hadn't thought about it before. Just like defragging......