What digital camera do you have/want?

[Robert_in_NY]

The Sonys use Zeiss lenses as well. Kyocera is a good company. I have their MicroElite 3300 digital and is a fun little digital for taking quick shots for files. It is much smaller then my sony so is easy to carry and not as noticable if I leave it in the truck. Also my last digital I bought is an Olympus D-390. It takes better pictures then the Kyocera but that is mostly because of the way the technology has been improved. However, I like the Kyoceras rechargeable battery as the Olympus takes standard batteries. Also, the Kyoceras menu is much easier to use then the Olympus.

 

[BigDave]

I have a 4 megapixel Minolta Dimage S404. It's not a popular camera, at least I haven't seen it in many stores. It is fairly compact & has 4x optical zoom. IMO it takes pretty good pictures. This is my first digital, so I don't have too much experience as to how it compares to others.

 

[pruntyc]

I guess mine is kind of old now. But I have a Olympus D450 Zoom. I like it very well, and am well satifyed with the pictures. Have blown a couple up to 8x10 and they looked good. I don't have a card reader, I use my HP photosmart 1115. You just stick the card into it and it loads them to the computer. And the photosmart prints a good looking picture also

 

[_RaT_]

Richard no question that the Zeiss optics are superb. A bit limited in terms of lens variety, but very sharp. Contax has but a couple of cameras in the digital side. Their 35mm are indeed excellent.
Contax SLR




Sagebrush, there is a Canon A80 out now as well. My sister just got the A70 and is very, very impressed.
Canon A80


BigDave Minolta S404


Prunty, you bring a great point. How do you get whats in the camera outputed to a format other then a computer screen. The new inkjets are fanatastic. Epson is using a a chrome ink that will last many years. Canon and HP have some very good inkjets for photo purposes. The prices are reasonable and many are now providing individual ink cartridges.

 

[chim]

Olympus C-3020. It's a 3.2 megapixel w/ 3X optical zoom. Like many others said, I go halfway on the button to avoid the shutter lag. That allows me to get pix like this one of our youngest son this past Spring.......................chim

 

[OkieG]

RaT,
Three years ago I got a Sony Mavica...not as nice as the more recent versions. And, this summer I bought a Canon 10D.

I use 'em both. The Mavica is great for pics to post on TBN. Little or no manipulation required to conform to the <100000 kb size limit. Also, I'm willing to take it where I'd rather not risk a nicer camera. The resolution is a bit weak for photos though. That's where the 10D comes in.

Almost 30 years ago I got a nice Minolta 35mm camera, but the cost of wasted shots discouraged me enough that I put it on the shelf many years ago. With digital, picture taking is fun again.

OkieG

 

[_RaT_]

Okie, I currently use a borrowed Nikon CoolPix 950. It has a relatively small CF (compact flash memory) of 32 MB. In 1999, this camera was close to state of the art in the newly and quickly advancing digital world. Sure there were better cameras, but some exceeded $15,000 dollars at the time. This is where a memory card reader works well. The 950 uses a serial port to download the cards memory to your computer. The full 32 megs can take about 30 minutes. I am looking for my own digital camera because much like you, am tired or either paying so much for film and processing only to have what amounts to maybe a couple of worthwhile photos or transparencies or just getting shots that should have been bracketed. I have been doing a considerable amount of homework and while the Canon 10D is an excellent, my relatively simple needs lean toward the Canon 300D/Rebel. What lens(s) do you have/use. My previous 35mm was a Canon A2E and a 135mm f2.0L. Sold it last month.

 

[Gatorboy]

<font color="blue"> Some of the other advantages of card readers is the ability to read differant types of cards. My Kodak will read 3 differant types. </font>

I only have 1 type, but if I had 2 cameras w/different cards, I would still use the camera to offload pictures.

<font color="blue"> I also like the ability of not only being able to read from the card but also the ability to write to it. "Copy to and from". </font>

When I hook up the camera to the PC, it is just another drive and can be read and written to also. However, for the life of me, why would I want to write to my camera's disk? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Unless these readers are FREE, there is no need to waste your money buying one.

 

[MikePA]

<font color="blue"> Unless these readers are FREE, there is no need to waste your money buying one. </font>
In your opinion... /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

On some outings, I have filled several memory cards. (SmartMedia, CF, MMC, SD) and the
thought of having to put them back in the camera they came from just to copy them to my PC not my cup of tea. Plus why power up the camera mechanism and use up the batteries when there's a $20 solution? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

[Mark_in_NH]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Unless these readers are FREE, there is no need to waste your money buying one. )</font>

This is true to a sense. They are by no means a necessity.
One of the main reasons I spent the $20 for mine is that after most of our kayaking trips we bring the kayaks back to my house for storage on the trailer. My friend Normans camera uses the Compact Flash card where as my two cameras use the Smart Media card. It makes it nice to be able to put both cards into my reader, copy his pictures to my computer and then copy my pictures onto is card for him to take home.
It tends to save me and him from copying the pictures onto a CD to give to each other at a later date. Cd's aren't that expensive any more but why waste them.