Author |
Message |
Littlebuggles
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 05:49 pm: |
|
Need to get a camera so I can sell some parts, I'd like to put a current pic of my bike up too. Just basic photos, nothing special. Thinking the 3.2 Nikon but it's over $200, even on ebay. Suggestions and comments on what you use or would not recommend would be great and much appreciated. -Mike |
Newfie_buell
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 06:09 pm: |
|
Digital Rebel!!!!!!! This one is of Cape Spear at night looking towards the City of St. John's. 30sec exposure This one is of Cape Spear the same night but looking over the ocean. 30sec exposure I just love that camera. |
Buells Rule! (Dyna in disguise)
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 06:18 pm: |
|
Thats going to cost him more than $200. I want to upgrade mine, using a 2yr old Sony DSCP71, I want to go to one of the ones that llok more like a 35mm & have 7-8 mega pixels. I believe they have come down to the $500-600 area. Littlebuggles, Best buy or Circuit city both have pretty good selections & their prices are fair. Look for something with at least 3 megapixels,optical & digital zoom, etc. You can find several decent buys for under $200. Best buy has an Olympus 3.2 mega pixel right now for $179 & Circuit city has a Sony Cyber shot with 4.1 mega pixels for the same price. Both would work great for what you want it for. |
Phillyblast
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 06:29 pm: |
|
wondering how long it'll take for Blake to post telling Dyna why he's wrong and enumerating the long list of reasons why buying an Olympus is photo suicide
|
Gschuette
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 06:32 pm: |
|
The digital Rebel is on my short list of potential cameras. I think that list has one item on it. |
99buellx1
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 06:46 pm: |
|
Don't even consider the digital zoom of a camera when you are looking to purchase. It's useless! Also dont get over excited by the number of megapixels the camera has (you can have the most megagiggawhatchamawants but if the optics suck, your just gonna have really large crappy pictures). Generally for a point and shoot, general use camera look for about 3.2 MP. The 300D will be mine!! someday Craig |
Pdxs3t
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 07:02 pm: |
|
Take a look on Ebay for a Nikon Coolpix 950. Seen the 950 go for less the 100.00 bucks. I have had one for years, great little camera. |
Buells Rule! (Dyna in disguise)
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 07:07 pm: |
|
BTW, if you have a 35 mm you can just take the film to Walmart & they can put your pics on a disc. I have done this with my 35mm Canon & holy crap are the pics ever gorgeous. Digitals are nice & the pic quality is getting better, but wow do those pics on the disc look sweet. PS...action shots with most of your digital cameras tend to suck. You have a delay between hitting the button & the pic actually being taken. The high end cameras are obviously much much better at it. Eventually the technology will come down in price. Craig, isnt the 300D somewhere around $700 right now? Its a sweet @ssed camera & the pics are awesome. |
Littlebuggles
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 07:48 pm: |
|
Jim, Picture in your profile done with the camera you've suggested? Nice photo, good looking bike BTW. -Mike |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 08:16 pm: |
|
Ditto the coolpix 950. I still use mine all the time. You won't be able to come anywhere *near* the features and quality for under $250, so if you can score one for $100, thats a smoking good deal. It uses compact flash (easy to find big cards cheap) and AA batteries (so you can just use rechargable NiMh). It takes a wide variety of lenses and adapters (slide adapter, fisheye, lots of cool stuff). It has sophisticated metering modes (spot meter and focus and exposure lock). If you prefocus and lock (which you can almost always do), acquisition time is just about instantaneous. (it also has a killer macro mode, see photo on left ). (Message edited by reepicheep on December 01, 2004) |
Wyckedflesh
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 08:24 pm: |
|
I agree with Newfie, the digital rebel ROCKS. Dyna, one thing to keep in mind when it comes to pics on disk is what dpi the CD's are done at. They may scan the pics in for an 8x10 but if the DPI is less then 120 it only looks good on the net. Most are 72dpi which is just fine for net and email. One thing to look at for the point and shoot lower end cameras is find out if the add on multipliers will work with that model and how much they are. I have seen some phenominal zoom shots that worked because of an add on 20x filter that screws on the end of the stock lens. |
Buells Rule! (Dyna in disguise)
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 08:46 pm: |
|
Which one did you have when you were here? That was a pretty damn nice setup. |
Shotgun
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 08:48 pm: |
|
If all he wants is to post pics online to sell something, go to one of the online cheap camera sites and buy a camera on a keychain for $29.95 delivered. |
Buells Rule! (Dyna in disguise)
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 09:04 pm: |
|
If all he wants is to post pics online to sell something, go to one of the online cheap camera sites and buy a camera on a keychain for $29.95 delivered. We all know how that goes "oh I just want a little scooter to get around campus, it will be cheap on gas", next thing you know the guy is on a turboed Busa. |
Oconnor
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 09:04 pm: |
|
Great point about the lag time between pressing the button and the photo being shot.That is so far the only reason I have not bought a digital camera. Are their any cameras ought there that have gotten rid of most of that lag time? |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 09:15 pm: |
|
The digital rebel is a kick camera, with virtually zero lag time. It is also (last I checked) a $600 camera (or more). Out of my price range. Its a bit big as well. I have shot over 10,000 photos with my Nikon Coolpix 950. Shutter lag has never been an issue, if you take the time to learn to use the tools at your disposal (which the nikon has). Other older cameras have no good workaround, and the lag makes them more or less unusable. I don't really need more pixels. I will pry open my wallet when somebody comes out with a good digital with better low light response. I want to be able to shoot decent shots at ISO 800 or ISO 1600 sensitivity. I can pull out about the same as ISO 400 with tolerable (but obvious) artifacts on my coolpix if I crank up all the settings. |
Littlebuggles
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 09:19 pm: |
|
Shotgun, Tried that route using a borrowed 19.95er from my parents, software wouldn't work. Turns out they had the same problem. Turbo 'Busa or otherwise, I much prefer to spend good money before, not after. Took me three years to buy my Cyclone, glad I waited, [model improvements and such made buying a lightly used product with (most) reliability issues resolved] a good deal on a great product... |
Pdxs3t
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 09:44 pm: |
|
Mike, The profile pic of mine was done with a Olympus E-10 which is what replaced my 950. I keep the 950 in my camera bag as a backup just in case. Like Reepicheep, I shot at least 10,000 photos with the 950 and it just performed wonderfully. I believe Court has a 950 that he uses on a regular basis, sure he could give some positive input on the camera too. |
Wyckedflesh
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 09:47 pm: |
|
Dyna I had the Digital Rebel with me. Reep, I can set my Digital Rebel up to ISO3200 thanks to a certain firmware hack The new Canon Powershots are exceptional cameras for the buck, ranging in the $200-$300 range. They even have lowlight settings that let the camera raise the ISO setting for when flash is not an option. The digital Rebel can be as low as $599 for just the body and no lens or up to $999 for a "kit" which includes the stock 18-55mm lens, tripod, camera bag with spare battery, 128mg or 256mg CF card. I noticed the kits with the 128mg card came with the shutter release cord and the 256mg kits didn't. Quite a number of the pics I have posted all over the boards from my files are shot with the Digital Rebel. Like this one...which had the levels adjusted in Photoshop to match the colors evident in the sky. I need to reset the whitebalance on my camera but don't have a grey card to do so yet.
|
Pdxs3t
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 09:53 pm: |
|
That is such a wicked pic Wycked! |
Nedwreck
| Posted on Wednesday, December 01, 2004 - 11:48 pm: |
|
Check them all out. Very in-depth reviews and stats. http://www.dpreview.com/ Bob |
Court
| Posted on Thursday, December 02, 2004 - 04:52 am: |
|
Nikon Coolpix 950 I paid $850 in the days when it was top of the line. Now they are cheap. 950 prices, with the advent of the "super digitals" I'm currently in lust with a D100 have dropped like a rock. The Coolpix 950 remains THE digital camera on "The Best of Things" list. In an age of disposable technology, it's the equivalent of the old Motorola IMTS telephones (mine (YP-80895) weighed 105#, was pastel green, had a rotary dial)..essentially timeless. I've come within wallet reach of popping for a $2000 digital SLR (NYC is the camera capital of the world) but am restrained (in addition to pocketbook) by my theory.... "if you don't understand/can't use the myriad of features the 950 has what makes you think a more expensive camera will help" Mega pixels seem to mean little. Mine is something like 3.4 and I have pictures I'd match against any..... I like the 950. Court |
Firebolt020283
| Posted on Thursday, December 02, 2004 - 05:19 am: |
|
the one i have and i love this little camera is a kodak easyshare dx4530 5.0 mega pixel with optical and digital zoom. its not the greatest camera around but it works great to me. the only down fall to is it is the price which was around $289 and that was like 4 months ago. heres a pic i took out of a black hawk flying over bahgdad. |
Court
| Posted on Thursday, December 02, 2004 - 07:02 am: |
|
|
Newfie_buell
| Posted on Thursday, December 02, 2004 - 07:52 am: |
|
As for capturing the moment!!!! The Digital Rebel has no lag time!!!!
|
Newfie_buell
| Posted on Thursday, December 02, 2004 - 07:55 am: |
|
Resolution on those pictures was shot at 3072 X 2048 (6.3mp) but to get them on the Badweb I had to shrink to 640X427 which really does not do the camera justice. I have been having enlargements up to 11X14 with the rebel and it is better than print film. The colors are absolutely beautiful. |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Thursday, December 02, 2004 - 08:28 am: |
|
Thanks for the info Wyked. How bad are the artifacts (like pixel noise) when you start pushing the ASA up past 800 or so? Still can't afford a $1000 camera, but will put it on my "watch for it on ebay for $400 when the next whizbang something or other comes out" list. That's how I got my Coolpix. Probably take another two years. |
Bcordb3
| Posted on Thursday, December 02, 2004 - 09:53 am: |
|
Take a look at the Casio Exilim 4.0. Small, compact, lots of features and not a lot of money. |
Henrik
| Posted on Thursday, December 02, 2004 - 10:18 am: |
|
The Canon Powershot A95 seem to provide *a lot* of bang for your $$. Point and shoot if you want, all the manual controls you'd want as well. Good lens and decent lag times. As low as $250 (just make sure you do not buy "Gray Market Import". Here's a test conclusion: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona95/page9.asp Henrik (thinking that a Panasonic DMC-FX7 and a Canon PowerShot G6 would be a great MC touring combo - yeah, dream on ...) |
Scooterroid
| Posted on Thursday, December 02, 2004 - 11:35 am: |
|
Considerations: Pixel Size - ~3 Megapixels seems to be sufficient for general purposes. It's good for photo quality prints up to 8x10". Most of the time I find my self having to down size image files that I shot on high quality settings so that I can e-mail them. Storage Media - Each manufacturer is using different types of media, ie, Compact Flash, Smart Media, etc. The storage media range in size (capacity) and are priced accordingly Power Source - How many batteries does the camera use, 1, 2 or 4 and what type? Digital cameras are notorious for eating up batteries. The number and type of batteries used will affect camera size and weight and how often they will have to be changed or re-charged. Zoom - Digital zoom is useless. Consider only optical zoom power. Generally 3X is fine. Camera size - Makes a difference. Compact digitals can be put in pants pocket. Other cameras may require a case for transporting. PC connection - The latest cameras will hook-up to PC's via USB2 without proprietary software. Exposure Modes - Unless you are an advanced user you probably just need a camera with Automatic Exposure Mode (Program) and a couple of Special Exposure Modes like night-time settings and action settings. Video Capabilities - Will the digital camera shoot videos? With or Without sound? This is a nice feature. Price - Probably the most important factor. Decide what your price range is versus features and quality. Generally speaking I think you can get a nice digital camera for $150 - $200 with all the features you need. Name brands are highly recommended, like Nikon, Olympus, Canon, Fuji and of course Kodak. I've read a lot of reviews and have come to realize that everyone has their own favorites for whatever reason. They are all good cameras. I highly recommend staying off of eBay when shopping for digital cameras and just go down to your local Best Buy or Circuit City (or equivalent) in your town. Their prices are highly competitive and they can help you make a selection. Plus, if you don't like the digital camera you can always exchange it for another, eh. Good Luck, Steve-O |