Giveaway of the Day Forums » Talks

1. RunesageMagik
   Member

   Look, up in the sky, it's SuperRune! When it comes to digital camera shopping info, he's able to overwhelm and confound in a single bound. Rumor has it someone's in the market for a digital camera. Hope this helps.

   http://tech.yahoo.com/qg/quick-guide-to-digital-cameras/digital_cameras
   http://cameras.about.com/od/choosingacamera/Choosing_and_Buying_a_Digital_Camera.htm
   An oldie - http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,2400,00.asp
   http://www.pcmag.com/category2/0,1738,5,00.asp
   http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2209659,00.asp
   http://www.betterphoto.com/digital/buying-best-digital-cameras/01-intro.asp
   http://www.basic-digital-photography.com/buying-a-camera.html
   http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,125645-page,1/article.html
   http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-camera-buying-guide/
   http://www.epinions.com/Digital_Cameras/show_~top_sellers
   http://www.epinions.com/

   FWIW, a client gave me an Olympus D550Z a few years back. Nice, but its drawbacks included:
   a) poor macro shots (can't get closer than 7 inches to a subject, and I loved to do macro with my old SLR);
   b) 3.0 megapixel (I believe you need over 7mp to produce photo quality shots);
   c) voracious battery appetite that requires multiple sets of expensive rechargeables OR a very very very long extension cord;
   d) incompatible with the OS I was using at the time. Meant I had to buy a SmartDisk Flashpath floppy in order to download pix to the PC. I bot the dirt cheap IOMEGA Floppy Plus a couple years later for a new PC. It accepts floppies and about 39 different types of flash cards;
   e) flash is fixed in place with the only options being ON or OFF. This washes out close in shots unless I drape a tissue over it and/or aim slightly askew. Look for a camera with more flexible flash positioning.

   Caveats -
   a) if the old eyes can't see anything through viewfinders, a crystal clear LCD becomes critical, larger the better but they consume a lot of energy so memorize where the OFF button is located!
   b) first decide what kind of photos you'll take most, then shop for a camera that handles that specialty best
   c) fewer and easily identified buttons are better, menu trees (I hate the Olympus unintuitive tree) can be exasperating
   d) OPTICAL zoom is a key number... DIGITAL zoom is a red herring because it uses algorithms to manipulate and fudge picture quality (like image editing software), and that inevitably produces grainy shots
   e) prices continue to plunge, number of megapixels continues to rise - look for a number above 7 or 8mp to print realistic photo quality pictures. Make sure total MP claim isn't inflated. I seem to recall some mftr's using a number that included pixels outside the actual image size.
   f) as with PC's, the camera you buy will be obsolete before you reach the parking lot

   Posted 6 months ago #

2. maizeydaze
   Member

   How many megapixels do I need? This is an interesting topic. There seems to be many varied opinions on this. I've personally found that I can print a pretty nice looking 4"x6" photo with 1.2 megapixel at only 72 ppi. This looks good enough to put in a family album or even a frame, behind glass, on the end table. A lot has to do with your printer and the ink it uses too. Below are some examples some of the different oppinions on this subject.

   I especially like this excerpt from Steve's Digicams:
   "Photography: This probably shouldn't be the last topic because it is so important. The quality of your pictures ultimately depends on your ability as a photographer and your ability to utilize your tools. I've seen amazing photos from 1.5 to 2 MP cameras that beat photos from 6 MP cameras just because the photographer took the time to learn the tools of his/her trade (the camera itself and any after-the-fact editing tools) and was simply able to take good photos. Let us not forget that the "8 MP" logo on your camera can't make you a better photographer, nor can it make the camera any easier for you to use. Learning techniques and tools from listening to others can be the best way to improve your photographs. A lot of people spend a lot of money each year just to have the latest technology. That can be a disappointing and not very rewarding process if you are lured into thinking that a newer camera will make you take better photographs. The latest technology can help, but often it is more a question of whether you know how to use it and/or whether or not the camera suits your needs. — Mike Chaney"

   Steve's Digicams-megapixles This is my favorite site with the best unbiased camera reviews. Steve's Digicams - Reviews

   Helium

   Clark Vision

   MalekTips

   Flying Sam - Digital Photo Guide

   Pat McNulty-Premier Photographer

   digital-photography-tips.net

   BetterPhoto-Q&A

   Posted 6 months ago #

3. graylox
   Member

   Hopefully my son will read your list; last Saturday, hearing me swear about the horrible output of my outdated cam, he mumbled something about b-day ...Crucial criteria for me besides the price: lightweight, 7x-8x (or more) optical zoom; lightweight; anti-glare LCD; lightweight; disposable, rechargeable batteries not one compact battery; no toys like easy-share or mp3 player and did I say lightweight ?

   Posted 6 months ago #

4. RunesageMagik
   Member

   I don't dispute what you're saying, Maizey, because beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There's a sweet spot for every combination of discriminating taste, need, price... and level of technophobia. Reading reviews of individual cameras requires the ability to differentiate between those just trying to hype the latest & greatest, and those giving a truly unbiased/realistic POV with good benchmarks and valid comparisons.

   The recommendations for plus 7mp were (I think) for quality prints up to 8x10, which is a significantly larger in surface area than a 4x6. Also, 72ppi is fine for web sites, but IMHO, if you were to print identical 1.2mp and 7mp shots, many would notice a difference in quality even before any editing degraded the file. How much and does it matter? Eye of the beholder. Let's hope some camera and digital art buffs weigh in with more opinions and a better explanation of lossless/lossy problems.

   People with kids/grandkids, or anyone getting married or travelling a lot may want something above my old 3mp to allow for the degradation caused by editing and resizing. They might not "need" 8mp, and certainly don't "need" the high end monsters used by pros, but with some of the low prices (sub $150) that I saw advertized for 8mp, 4x optical zoom models (might have been rebuilts, I don't know), it definitely pays to be an informed shopper. The devil's in the details. That one ranty review of the Kodak (for its crappy software) would be a big detraction for some, though for people who barely know how to use a computer, it's probably no big deal. Also, a digicam newbie might be happy to plunk down under $100 just to experiment and to help figure out what their needs and likes are, then upgrade to something better later.

   Posted 6 months ago #

5. maizeydaze
   Member

   graylox - Are you looking for a Point-and-shoot or a Digital single-lens reflex camera?

   And what about the price? What price range?

   Posted 6 months ago #

6. maizeydaze
   Member

   Rune Sage - You have some good points and I do agree for the most part. I just wanted to let others know, if they are just a casual user, not to go overboard. You could end up with a very nice camera with a ton of features, lots of megapixels, 18x optical zoom, great lens and spend a lot of money, but might also have to take up engineering to figure it out and photography lessons to get good shots. On the other hand there are some nice, inexpensive, 5 mp and above, cameras that are considered point-and-shoot but have a good selection of options, similar to a DSLR. These can be both easy to use out of the box but also have advanced features for more experienced users and those who want to learn more before moving on to a DSLR.

   EDIT
   Do you really need to install Kodaks software if you use a card reader? I've use Adobe Photo Downloader which is part of the free Photoshop Album Starter Edition 3.2 for downloading and organizing. I've since bought Photoshop Element 5.0 that comes with different version. I've not installed the software that came with my cameras.

   Posted 6 months ago #

7. graylox
   Member

   maizey, asking me what I wish to have, so must I say a DSLR with all ... but reality is, I'm looking for a digital-cam, like you call it a "Point-and-shoot". My SLR was too heavy for me; couldn't take pics without a tripod any longer. Sometimes my hands don't want the same things like me, so I have to go with a lightweight (did I say that before?) digi cam. That's okay, I've learned, that those pictures are good enough for my needs.
   Don't know how the prices are in the US; I have missed a real bargain in December. All the big electronic shops had cams with 7x or 8x optical zoom and a good objective from €149:--. As I don't like to buy online or out of a catalog, I have to do some look-around-tours in the next days or weeks. Have to hold things in my hands, look at them and test them; then I ask the shop assistant and as he has no clue what I'm speaking about, he calls the next higher assistant. He is usually just now in the cellar for some time, but I have much time to wait, and wait and...until the assistant is embarrassed about that uncomfortable situation and he offers me some %% as compensation for their tardy service... ;)
   graylox

   Posted 6 months ago #

8. maizeydaze
   Member

   graylox - Maybe you could get a list of cameras that you a interested in then print out some examples of online ads with low prices to take shopping with you. When you find the camera you like in a shop, you can show the assistant that you can get the same camera cheaper online. Maybe they will meet or beat the online price.

   Posted 6 months ago #

9. RunesageMagik
   Member

   Maizey, I don't know if that Kodak software's mandatory. (wouldn't surprise me if Kodak relied on some sort of proprietary file naming convention or transfer process, nor would it surprise me to learn the ranter simply overlooked an option to skip the install) I don't use the software provided by Olympus, just download straight to the HD, then mess things up good and proper using Photoshop, Paint, Reshade, Goo or wherever whimsy takes me.

   BTW- The professional DSLRs are amazing creatures, but are so far beyond my needs and wallet as to be untouchable... except in a camera store where nobody knows my name much less my budget.

   Your suggestion to haggle inside the camera store while holding print outs of on-line ads is a good one. I don't haggle very well, but hear that many brick & mortar outfits are willing to do it. Besides, getting some hands-on demos from a competent camera salesman (not a seasonal clerk) is worth a few hours of time.

   Posted 6 months ago #

10. graylox
    Member

    Good idea :)

    Posted 6 months ago #

11. copmom
    Member

    OK maizy.. here's the camera link I posted in the other topic:
    http://www.komando.com/buyguide/index.aspx?id=1318

    Posted 6 months ago #

12. LeKanaw
    Member

    Bonjour,
    Thank u for all the interesting links!!

    Hi RM:
    When you said "GOO", I said "What a fun name", what could that be?
    Well, 1hr later of searching (yeah, I know, I'm slooow), I now know what it is.
    I was right: very nice & fun! But strangely I can't find it anywhere...
    Were you talking about this: http://www.hopkinscounty.us/tracezone/QGOO.htm
    Is it normal that anywhere I look it's either discontinued, Out-of-Stock or past tense?

    Could u or anyone else direct me to a link?
    Merci beaucoup!

    Posted 6 months ago #

13. RunesageMagik
    Member

    Bonjour là-bas, Mangoette! J'espère que vous et votre vieil homme est bien.*

    By "Goo", I meant the famous Kai GOO, a drop, drag and smear morpher by MetaCreations.
    EDIT UPDATE
    Wow, it has been a while since I thought about this... Metacreations is the company that bought Kai's Power Tools, slapped an awful price on GOO and discontinued the old FREE version. GOO isn't compatible with WinXP and I rarely bother cranking up my old PC these days. Hah, maybe it just needs a bizarre workaround like the Micrografx Draw/Photoshop solution to work with WinXP?

    FYI- Google finds some Torrent download sites, but I've never done Torrent, can't recommend it. Maybe someone else can 'splain pros and cons.

    The Qgoo you stepped in is a mimic I'd never seen before. Fun find.

    
    *Please don't blame me if the above greeting actually says "Stop spitting mango pulp on the floor... use the garbage can!" I just paste what FreeTranslator tells me to.
    Psssst... did you get a longwinded reply (in English) from moi?

    Posted 6 months ago #

14. goodgotd
    Member

    http://tinyurl.com/3amyc7 has looked tasty, the refurb Kodak EasyShare Z712 7.1MP 12x Opt 4.2x Digital Zoom Camera is $159.50. looked interesting when I saw it in an office depot.

    new Kodak Z712 IS 7.1MP 12x Optical/4.2x Digital Zoom Camera $189.99- http://tinyurl.com/28bobv , both at geeks.

    still think this would be a good start: http://tinyurl.com/2ez23g Kodak Easyshare C653 6.1MP 3x Optical 5x Digital Zoom Camera, 80 clams plus 10 shipping, (to oregon).

    optical viewfinder, optical zoom, anti-blur- plenty good enough.

    Posted 6 months ago #

15. BuBBy
    Administrator

    FYI- Google finds some Torrent download sites, but I've never done Torrent, can't recommend it. Maybe someone else can 'splain pros and cons.

    pros - file hosters don't have to foot the entire bill for hosting. Usually free $$ to download.

    cons - usually (not always) used as a transfer/sharing method for pirated/illegal music/software/movies. It is not private and easily traced back to participating users. Linking participating users/computers to infringing materials is a fairly trivial exercise as downloading and uploading requires advertising IP Address to all other participants for that download. Quality of files can be suspect.

    BT File Sharing - read about all related matters etc from http://www.slyck.com - it's not discussed in these forums.

    Posted 6 months ago # | Login to Send PM

16. RunesageMagik
    Member

    Thanks, BubbyCo,
    I had a faint recollection about Torrent being an ill-wind, but I've never done warez or kazaa, never had any interest in file sharing. Safe Computer basics plus a vested interest in honoring copyrights. Seems foolish to be constantly updating virus defs and security appls on one hand, while opening the door and inviting the devil in with the other!

    Posted 6 months ago #

17. BuBBy
    Administrator

    Don't get me wrong - but there is a legit purpose for BitTorrent - (don't hate the tool, hate the user) - but then again there is a legit purpose for balaclavas, lockpicks, explosives and firearms too (so they say).

    Posted 6 months ago # | Login to Send PM

18. goodgotd
    Member

    another couple of not-bad inexpensive ones in the 5 mp/3x optical zoom class , the HP Photosmart M517 at geeks $70, on sale- optical zooming viewfinder (http://tinyurl.com/2qf3va) and, on ebay, also new but the camera is ldc-only, HP Photosmart HP A444 [M447 Camera & A440 Printer] $72.99 + $14.99 ship in the US at http://tinyurl.com/35teem

    factory year warranty on both, 2 AA's for power, charge-in-camera.

    (anyone able to confirm/deny the Kodak Easyshare series won't let you just copy pics off the removable card with a generic reader?)

    guns are fun, too.

    Posted 6 months ago #

19. goodgotd
    Member

    a note regarding the rumor I heard about 'Kodak software required to get images from Kodak camera'...

    I suspect it's like my HP M517- certain *features* are unavailable sans software, which may not be of much (or any) value depending on how one uses the camera.

    I today found it required to install the HP PhotoZone software on my computer, as without it I was unable to access and play the "audio notes" I attached to 3 of the photos, so I think I will do without audio notes. and the bloated HP software.

    Much simpler.

    Also, geeks ran out of the M517's.

    Posted 5 months ago #

20. goldeneagle
    Member

    Maizey.- Yes, I think Goodgotd got it. You won' t have access to higher end features, but if you just want to load pics and vids from your camera the only software you MUST have is Windows. I don' t like any software that slows down my pc or dial-up so I don' t use Kodak (on pc or online storage album)or Adobe (I have, but to me it' s too pushy). I have a multi-slot (PIC Transfer BRIDGE) reader on my pc and also on my printer. To manually load pics yourself without Kodak, Adobe, or any other program(even if you use the black cord from your camera to a pc USB slot) just go to Start/My Computer/Removable disc and see the pics directly there or move them to your desktop or wherever.

    Posted 5 months ago #

21. maizeydaze
    Member

    goldeneagle, thank you. You are the first person that responded who actually owns a Kodak camera. This does clear up the question about their software. :)

    Posted 5 months ago #

22. goodgotd
    Member

    Far Out, Thanks for clearing that up, I can put Kodak back on my list of camera brands to suggest by what the *camera* specs say it can do, without worrying about what the software needs for installation.

    I've got some odd twitches about Things That Don't Make Sense, and unless you have to, transferring photos by plugging the camera in is one of them.

    Turns it into a boat anchor until done.

    If a camera has a memory card, it only makes sense to have 2 cards- so while the card reader is copying the pictures from one card and a 'gotta-have' shot comes up, you can *take it* then and there.

    Posted 5 months ago #

23. goodgotd
    Member

    Anybody with those card-reader equipped printers want to look in the manual and tell us if the xD card slots still remember how to read SmartMedia cards?

    Lots of inquiring minds want to know!

    goldeneagle, what say you, and what kind of printer can we check off the list??

    Posted 5 months ago #

24. goldeneagle
    Member

    Maizey.- Yes, I' m a fan of my new 12 MPixel easyshare (and most of my relatives also have various versions-handy for battery and cable sharing). I' m also a long time fan of their film, but not a fan of their printer paper or photo softwares. New improvements are gonna' make midsummer cams even better, too (if you can afford new prices) and 'old' models cheap.

    Goodgotd- Wow! You were meant for digital if you must be ready for a pic during the 30 seconds the memory card is transferring all to pc. My printer (Epson stylus CX 7800- an all-in-one-type)is a good year old but I like it (waited a while for one w/ pict bridge/seperate ink catridges for each color/ and a _real sale price). It does read xD/SM (also CF and SD/MS,pro),(and also has a USB slot). My brother wants one but i have no idea what the newest version of same is? If you' re a purist though, you may want a dedicated _"photo" printer and get your copying done down the street?

    Posted 5 months ago #

25. goodgotd
    Member

    does the sm/xd slot label just say xD?

    at the moment I have *no* functioning printers, I have an epson stylus photo 870 that is a dried up boat anchor for lack of funds to buy ink and get the print heads soaked loose.

    As far as 30 second transfer, in the field (where photo ops can happen fast) I use an old laptop and card reader limited to USB 1.1 (both) and under certain conditions I have not been able to recreate (and thus define- and avoid) blocks- bracketed by turning the camera on and off- of pictures and video disappear from the sight of the camera and reader.

    while I've found and have installed recovery programs that work well to find them, recovery is *slow*, so I have 2 good reasons not to tie down the camera at any time.

    You were meant for digital if you must be ready for a pic

    I'd love a nice, fast, flexible DSLR. But being disabled means if it weren't for gifts, I wouldn't have what I do.

    I've been digital since 1998 when I was given a hp photosmart C200 for a digital memory prosthesis, since by then it was obvious that the Valium I had to take was destroying my wetware memory.

    Never had pix disappear from the C200's compactflash card- I'm theorizing it's a much-faster-camera vs slow-cheap-sd-card (salvaged from mp3 players) problem.

    The C200 took 9 seconds to cycle (in spite of the idiot claims on ebay, there is no optical zoom) flash or no flash, slow original 4 meg cf or fast 512 meg 50x cf card, and there's no internal memory.

    And it has *terrible* shutter lag even not using auto-focus.

    The current M517 the flash takes 8 seconds to charge- but in 2-picture timed mode it takes flash pictures at 4 second intervals including focus- and the flash fires twice for each photo- haven't pushed it, but each full flash charge can probably light 3 pix... so it buffers the photos in internal ram and shoves them on the card (insert a card, the internal flash memory is locked out) as fast as it can and sometimes I think that's too fast.

    I'm also one of the standard-battery fans, the M517 takes a pair of AA NiMH rechargeables, but I carry a pair of alkalines JIC- in addition to 2 pairs of higher-capacity NiMH.

    Posted 5 months ago #

26. goodgotd
    Member

    btw, 12mp sounds way cool, this one's 5.2 mp, made in 2005.

    Again, it kills cats- does that have an optical viewfinder or just the lcd?

    I told my pal gary the new lcd's could finally be used in full daylight, and he hit me over the head with the fact he can't see the lcd without glasses, then he can't see what he wants to shoot with 'em on.

    (90+ years old, I've known him for 33 years)

    Forgot to mention that I've taken over 30,000 pictures with that C200.

    Posted 5 months ago #

27. goldeneagle
    Member

    Goodgotd- Yes exactly as i typed it xD/SM. I' m new to digital and also can t afford thousands of dollars of DSLRs and have only used SDs. I def. agree you get what you pay for in memory cards. Mine was the newest Extreme III ($60.oo)BUT it holds 75 mins. of VIDEO or a gazillion(maybe) pics. Also I can burst shoot 3 or 10 shots in 3 seconds. A Ultra II card would be fine for most uses. You can buy Bob' s discount SD cards for $9.oo but I wouldn' t.My cam has a 30 or so pic internal memory but alkaline batteries would never last past 20. All Easyshares should come with a warning "you must buy camera NiMHs and a charger". Others told me if you' re an old SLR shooter you must get a viewfinder digital. Since I didn' t I can' t share their enthusiasm. I have a large LCD with 2 power settings 1."how long to you think that will last" and "go, big spender"! (just kidding)but yes to glasses to see- and I only _feel 100. There' s a deleted pic recovery program with my cam , but like you said it doesn' t work without the software. My dial-up is counting down...gotta' go.

    Posted 5 months ago #

28. copmom
    Member

    goodgotd... sounds to me like you have an Olympus. Well, I've got the SM cards and I did just order another one that's 128MB. Already have a 64mb and two 16 MB.

    I just found out that "somewhere" there exists a "multi-media card adapter" since the SM cards are becoming obsolete for the new gadgets out there. Not to be mistaken for a card 'reader'.

    How many pictures do we really need our camera cards to hold unless we're traveling and have no access to a computer, (or want to shoot videos). If everyone will think back.. we all used to be happy being able to just take 12, 24, or 36 pics on a roll of film and then having it developed!

    I, too, keep a spare set of regular batteries handy even tho' I have 2 sets of rechargeables. I recently read somewhere that alkaline batteries DO last a lot longer than rechargeable ones.

    Even tho' I have and love my Olympus C4040 zoom, I just bit the bullet, and ordered 2 Prakticka DC Slim 5 cameras, 5mp (made in Germany), that takes the SD card. One for me and one to give my daughter as a surprise. She doesn't have one at all. They were priced at only $69.95 each on special in an email I got from Serif software.
    http://www.serif.com/serifExtra/sale.asp?locale=USA&mc=XSLE231
    Forgot how much memory it comes with but I also got a spare 1GB SD memory card for each @$12.95. I know I probably could have gotten the cards cheaper but didn't want to pay several shipping charges, and theirs was only $4.95 s/h.

    And as for installing certain softwares, I find that I mainly use Jasc Paint Shop Pro for most of my photo editing.

    Posted 5 months ago #

29. goodgotd
    Member

    no, this is the hp photosmart M517 I pointed out at geeks.com, came with a pair of 1700 mah NiMH AA's and the power/charger brick.

    The problem I'd have with the slim 5's would be the lack of a viewfinder and no optical zoom. no idea of shipping, but that;'s the same as geeks for a 6 mp Kodak EasyShare C633 refurb with 1-year warranty and 3x optical zoom, fwiw. AA instead of AAA battery.

    My spares are 2500 mah, and the originals are supposed to get about 200 photos a charge.

    Alkaline batteries, being a primary source rather than storage cells, have both a larger total capacity and a smoother voltage drop as they get drained. they also store better. rechargeables self-discharge very fast in comparison.

    NiMH and NiCad both stay close to the same voltage until drained then drop like a rock.

    how many pix on a card? I'm happy with the 400 that fits on a 1-gig sd. the other thing I worry about on sm cards is the contact cushions can get stiff and not make contact.

    Posted 5 months ago #

30. goodgotd
    Member

    And I apologize (I just reread that after waking up after sleeping a mite) if I sounded critical of the slim 5's- that was what would be my purely personal desires would say- I left out the fact that using AAA's, the slim 5 will be half the size and far more portable (convenient as all get-out for actually *having it with you* compared to others) than any other 5 mp I've seen, it has a good macro range, plus faster to start, not having to extrude a lens- less likely to get damaged.

    (I've already started getting paranoid about that)

    shipping alone makes my comparison idiotic.

    I'll finish off reminding myself that *I* took a huge number of very good photos with a camera 5 times the size, 1/5 the resolution, and a quarter the storage, would have maimed severely for those specs all that time, and and slink off to sleep again before I get my keyboard stuffed in my mouth again.

    Posted 5 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.