requesting digital camera update
- Thread starter ewoss3
- Start date
Jeff396
Veteran Member
I get the impression you are talking about still cameras but I just want to throw in something to think about. I purchased a digital video camera for my wife. It a Sony TRV17 and all I kept reading was how bad the still shot feature was. There was another model for $600 more that was supposedly better in that one area but still lacking according to the experts. Well, I guess it's relative because I think the still camers picture quality is outstanding especially when compared to the crappy web cam we were using. Attached is a picture of my kids scout pinewood derby cars, which both came in 1st by the way. My point is that you have to take the ratings with a grain of salt!/w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif
Jeff
Jeff
Attachments
Jeff396
Veteran Member
hwp
Platinum Member
Hi Rob:
I was in that boat in December and bought a Kodak DX3900. It is simple and easy to use, expecially for a non-camera buff like me. I consulted a couple of "experts" and they thought the Kodak was a good deal at the time. My impression is that there are a lot of good units out there. The standard at the time I was in the market was at least 3M pixels. That may have chaged by now. The prices change every day. I found the prices on eBay higher than in the stores!
I was in that boat in December and bought a Kodak DX3900. It is simple and easy to use, expecially for a non-camera buff like me. I consulted a couple of "experts" and they thought the Kodak was a good deal at the time. My impression is that there are a lot of good units out there. The standard at the time I was in the market was at least 3M pixels. That may have chaged by now. The prices change every day. I found the prices on eBay higher than in the stores!
Jeff396
Veteran Member
RoyJackson
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2001
- Messages
- 24,890
- Location
- Bethel, Vermont
- Tractor
- John Deere 4052R Cab,, Deere 855D UTV, Z920A Zero Turn Mower and assorted implements
I've a Sony FD-90. Cost was about $650 two years ago.
I like this camera because the battery cells last 120 minutes or more...you can get a higher rated cell that goes 210 minutes (both shorter if the LCD screen is left on).
Also, the Sony uses a standard floppy disk for the recording media. No adapters needed...you can put the floppy in any computer.
However, the Sony's don't produce the crispest image of the digital cams...there are others that are better...so don't expect the quality that a 35 mm film camera will give you.
However, the pictures look really good..on both the monitor screen and when printed on quality photo paper.
I recomend the Sony FD series of cameras.
I like this camera because the battery cells last 120 minutes or more...you can get a higher rated cell that goes 210 minutes (both shorter if the LCD screen is left on).
Also, the Sony uses a standard floppy disk for the recording media. No adapters needed...you can put the floppy in any computer.
However, the Sony's don't produce the crispest image of the digital cams...there are others that are better...so don't expect the quality that a 35 mm film camera will give you.
However, the pictures look really good..on both the monitor screen and when printed on quality photo paper.
I recomend the Sony FD series of cameras.
rancar
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2002
- Messages
- 1,726
- Location
- Cambridge, New York
- Tractor
- JD425 lawn tractor; JD4710 CUT; JD JX75 Walk Behind
Gentlemen,
If you would, please list your purchase prices for the cameras you're recommending. This would be helpful for digicam wannabees like myself. Thanks.
If you would, please list your purchase prices for the cameras you're recommending. This would be helpful for digicam wannabees like myself. Thanks.
DocHeb
Veteran Member
I love my Olympus 2.1 megapixel, C-700 zoom ($499). It has a 10x optical zoom so it lets me get shots from a distance, but will also focus macro. This camera costs more than typical 2MB cameras because of the optical zoom. A 10x digital zoom does not match a 10x optical zoom. Software will let you zoom in to the pixel level - it's the original image capture capability that makes a difference. It came with a 8MB SmartMedia card, which will only store 7 SHQ shots (the only resolution I shoot at), but also had a rebate for a 64MB card (55 shots) which is great. Make sure you get Olympus brand SmartMedia cards if you want to use the panorama feature (lets you combine several photos into one). Battery life is acceptable, and the automatic settings allow you to take pictures easily. This camera uses SmartMedia cards (available up to 128MB), but CompactFlash cards used by other cameras are out in higher capacities.
The only thing that takes some getting used to is the shutter lag. There is 0.3 - 0.6 seconds between pushing the shutter and the picture being taken. This happens more or less with all digital cameras. It can make candid action shots difficult. This time can be lessened by prefocusing, or by bracketing your shots (take several automatically).
Why do you want the camera? If you want it to put pics on the web (or only computer monitor viewing), most any 1-2 megapixel camera will do, since you need to keep the file size down (and therefor resolution and color depth) to decrease the download time. For example, my SHQ pics run about 1 MB in file size when taken, but to post on this site they must be <150,000 bytes. Most cameras have software that allow you to compress the files, and a certain amount of compression isn't too noticable, but it does decrease the resolution. If you want to replace your film camera and print photos, you'd be better off with the 5-6 megapixel cameras. Either way, find a way to archive the original pics, then develop a file naming system to keep any modified pics under a different name. That way, you'll always have your original to go back to.
Using a video camera for still shots is a possibility, but the cameras are more bulky.
The only thing that takes some getting used to is the shutter lag. There is 0.3 - 0.6 seconds between pushing the shutter and the picture being taken. This happens more or less with all digital cameras. It can make candid action shots difficult. This time can be lessened by prefocusing, or by bracketing your shots (take several automatically).
Why do you want the camera? If you want it to put pics on the web (or only computer monitor viewing), most any 1-2 megapixel camera will do, since you need to keep the file size down (and therefor resolution and color depth) to decrease the download time. For example, my SHQ pics run about 1 MB in file size when taken, but to post on this site they must be <150,000 bytes. Most cameras have software that allow you to compress the files, and a certain amount of compression isn't too noticable, but it does decrease the resolution. If you want to replace your film camera and print photos, you'd be better off with the 5-6 megapixel cameras. Either way, find a way to archive the original pics, then develop a file naming system to keep any modified pics under a different name. That way, you'll always have your original to go back to.
Using a video camera for still shots is a possibility, but the cameras are more bulky.
blurrybill
Gold Member
Chris,
Thanks for that info. My wife and daughter collided while ice skating recently damaging our little Olympus so we're in the market for a digital camera for both internet and printing quality pics. How much cost is involved to reach a level where the camera can replace a standard 35mm?
I have learned that optical zoom is desired over digital. Anyone have sources for good buys? A neighbor said that KMart isn't much different in price than camera stores. Comments?
Bill
Thanks for that info. My wife and daughter collided while ice skating recently damaging our little Olympus so we're in the market for a digital camera for both internet and printing quality pics. How much cost is involved to reach a level where the camera can replace a standard 35mm?
I have learned that optical zoom is desired over digital. Anyone have sources for good buys? A neighbor said that KMart isn't much different in price than camera stores. Comments?
Bill
StoneHeartFarm
Veteran Member
Blurrybil,
I've got an Olypmus D500L that I've used for work everyday since late 1998. I take between 4 and 20 pictures per day and download them using a flashpath adapter. My camera isn't as sharp as most of the new units out today (Heck, it wasn't "state of the art" when I bought it.) But, it seems to do well enough for my purposes. 99.9% of my pictures are taken on medium resolution and do quite well enough in 3x5 and 4x5 format. On High Def, I can print an 8x10 that is so close to a 35mm quality that it's difficult to tell the difference. But, remember, much of what you see is the computer's software and the printer quality.
If I were to replace my camera I'd look real hard for something with a little wider field of view. My 35mm with a standard lens has about 10-20% wider field than the Olympus. I know different digitals have different widths of field, I've had friends with Sonys stand next to me and take the same picture. The Sonys take a wider picture. Like the surfer guy on TV says "wider is better".
SHF
I've got an Olypmus D500L that I've used for work everyday since late 1998. I take between 4 and 20 pictures per day and download them using a flashpath adapter. My camera isn't as sharp as most of the new units out today (Heck, it wasn't "state of the art" when I bought it.) But, it seems to do well enough for my purposes. 99.9% of my pictures are taken on medium resolution and do quite well enough in 3x5 and 4x5 format. On High Def, I can print an 8x10 that is so close to a 35mm quality that it's difficult to tell the difference. But, remember, much of what you see is the computer's software and the printer quality.
If I were to replace my camera I'd look real hard for something with a little wider field of view. My 35mm with a standard lens has about 10-20% wider field than the Olympus. I know different digitals have different widths of field, I've had friends with Sonys stand next to me and take the same picture. The Sonys take a wider picture. Like the surfer guy on TV says "wider is better".
SHF