digital cameras: help needed

Parent Cafe
21

<p>Fender:</p>

<p>Are you giving them 300 dpi from the digital camera? For a 5x7 that would be the largest size – 2048 x 1536 pixels on a 3.2 megapixel camera.</p>

<p>Also, you have to use the SuperFine setting – minimum JPEG compression – if you want to rival film. The medium JPEG is noticeably lossy on some textures. The standard “max compression” setting is very noticeably lossy, even on a computer screen. </p>

<p>Neither of these is a standard setting because the file sizes are quite large: about 1.5 meg per photo. The pro stuff lets you save uncompressed TIF files, which is the optimum. But, a 4x5 is a 5 meg file.</p>

<p>No question that film is better when doing traditional custom-print developing. But, two cameras with comparable optics, being developed on the same machine one digital and the other digital scans of film negatives, should not look different at those small sizes. I’ve used both for four-color brochure work with the film stuff coming from 4x5 large format transparencies on a drum scanner and, frankly, the digitally shot stuff is more consistent and predictable. If it’s going to end up as pixels, it might as well start out as pixels.</p>

<p>One thing to keep in mind is that the scanner in the one-hour foto lab machine is doing sharpening, white point, black point, and gamma adjustments on your negs automatically. I’m not sure that is being done on your digital files unless you do it at home or on their little kiosk.</p>

22

<p>Digital Zoom can work fine if you start with enough resolution. For example, to print a magazine quality photo at 4x6, you need a 2 megapixel image. Blow it up to 8 x 12 (which is what a 2:1 digital zoom is doing) and you need to start with an 8 megapixel image to end up with the same quality.</p>

23

<p>All three of my kids have various editions of the Nikon Coolpix and have had no problems and good luck with them. The photos printed at Costco are fine in 4x6 adn 5x7 formats.</p>

<p>We like Nikon SLR cameras and are, therefore, inclined to them on teh digital.</p>

<p>I also have a Panasonic with a 12x optical zoom, it is big, but good. It still has a delay, though not like the smaller cameras, it also has the “burst” setting for taking lots of pics in a row, this works well for sports. To avoid the delay you have to go to the SLR digital which is generally $1000+ including lens’</p>

<p>We don’t print any pics at home, as it seems expensive, when you factor in mistakes and kids just goofing around plus the labs ones are not supposed to fade- I guess we’ll know that in 10 years!</p>

24

<p>kodak - I bought one for all three of my teenagers. Works great, easy to use, uses different types of batteries (which is a big plus, stay away from rechargeable cameras). My oldest used last summer during 12 weeks in Peru - fantastic pictures - easy to upload photos, etc.</p>

25

<p>ID - I take all of pictures on my camera in 2048x1536. </p>

<p>I believe my 32 MB card can hold about 25 pictures or something like that. I don’t know about my 128MB card, as I haven’t filled it up. </p>

<p>The prints made from my camera actually came out looking alright, but the 8x10’s i’ve had printed from my moms camera look really bad. I’m not sure what settings she took her pictures in, but they just came out looking awful. They actually looked nicer with us printing them out on our photo printer here at home.</p>

<p>Like i said though, i don’t want to rival film with my digital camera. i just use it for little pictures here and there when I need something quick. </p>

<p>i really love the whole old school film photography, and developing my own pictures and whatnot. it’s just a lot of fun.</p>

26

<p>I own a Canon SD200 ELPH. I love it. It’s small enough to take everywhere, and takes nice enough pictures to use for pretty much anything. </p>

<p>Good prices are to be found on the 'net. That’s my two cents, amigos.</p>

27

<p>I have the Kodak easy share. My problems with it have been that the printing dock is expensive to use and runs out of ink very quickly. It is much cheaper just ot get the prints developed. I bought Kodaks for the kids so we could all use the docking station, and I can vouch that the quality of prints is great, the thing is easy to use, but it just does not have the capacity. I am back to taking the danged things to Costco (sigh) after getting depleted in ink when my impatient kids just decided to do it all at home on the docking station. Also it seems to me that the batteries die awfully quickly, particularly the rechargeable ones. I am finding that I go back to my old camera nowadays.</p>

28

<p>Get the Sony Cyber-Shot. Its user-friendly, has tons of cool features, 4,1 megapixels… plus it’s really cute. :)</p>

29

<p>Lots of important aspects to consider, I can see by these replies. It sounds as if I should forget about doing in-dorm prints (more trouble than they’re worth, & not as cost-effective for the product, nor is she a mad photographer). I would actually get her a point-&-shoot 35 mm if I didn’t think she would want to share pics with very close friends going to other N.Eastern U’s. (I think she <em>will</em> want to.)</p>

<p>Main considerations will be not having to hunt for film or hard-to-find batteries. (Doesn’t drive.) I would want her to be able to get her supplies, & get her photos printed, as conveniently as possible.</p>

<p>I also wonder what would be used more: a camera with a large viewfinder, or one which is pocket size & can easily fit into a purse on occasional train trips to major NE cities?</p>

<p>Jamimom, did you mean that you go back to a traditional 35mm? (Again, ease of operation is a major consideration.)</p>

30

<p>Yeah, I’m a slow learner. After some dead batteries, and problems printing out the pictures, either I use my trusty 35mm which gives me gorgeous pictures and it’s a no brainer for me, or I just use the memory card on the digital these days just like the roll of film.</p>

31

<p>Carolyn asked for similar assistance back in March (3/21). I don’t know how to reference that thread, so I’m copying my reply below. You might find additional info. in the old thread.</p>

<p>Also as an update, I believe the Canon A75 I reference below has been replaced with a new 4 MP model, which has similar features.</p>

<p>Carolyn,
I researched digitals for my d. in December, and based on the CR magazine, and on-line reviews, we ended up with a Canon A75 for less than $200 including a spare 128MB memory card. It is only a 3.2 MP, but takes great photos. (The A-85 is the 4MP in this series). We wanted a lightweight, easy-to-use, inexpensive camera that she would not feel “devastated” if she accidentally left it someplace. After the purchase, we held on to it unopened for about a month researching all the alternatives (I obsess over cameras), and came to the conclusion it was still the best of its class. It is slightly heavier since it takes 4 AA batteries, but they also last more than 2x longer than most comparible cameras, and as digmedia mentioned, can be easily purchased anywhere. </p>

<p>The A-75 has manual over-rides (nice if you’re accustomed to a manual 35 SLR), but my daughter rarely uses anything other than the simple point and shoot. I find the controls overwhelming, but I read that this is common with digital cameras. While I did the research, she is the end user, so I cannot give you first-hand critique on its ease of use. Also consider the type of memory. The Canon uses the inexpensive CF card. I liked it’s macro capability, allowing close-up shots as close as 2 inches. It has some video capibility (with audio), which my daughter loves, although the quality is not the best, but we did not expect that of any camera in this group. The reviews I read, praised the lens quality, and I’ve been amazed at the sharpness of the prints (at 4x6). It definitely sold me on digital, and I LOVE my 30 yr. old 35mm Olympus.</p>

<p>If you want to enlarge your pictures greater than 5X7, or crop, then you’ll need a higher MP, but for 4X6 shapshops, this camera is great. Ultimately it depends on what you want to do with it. While I love my 35mm, and continue to use it for vacations and special shots, there are many times I want the ease and convenience (and size) of the small quick point and shoot cameras. The main missing feature of the A-75, is a greater optical zoom (It is only 3x). I also did not like the “design” with the curved battery case that forms the grip, but ultimately decided had the best features for a great price.</p>

32

<p>This year’s replacement for A75 is the A510. Same camera, but in a new package with only 2 batteries instead of 4, making it a bit smaller. They’ve increased the optical zoom from 3:1 to 4:1, too.</p>

<p>The A520 is the 4 megapixel version. Not sure the upgrade from 3.2 to 4 megapixel is worth much, however.</p>

33

<p>Another happy Canon A70 user (though I just moved up to a D-SLR). If I were getting my kids a camera now I’d get the A510, the latest version of what I have, without hesitation.</p>

34

<p>kjofkw,
Thanks for going to so much trouble to recopy an old message! (I also don’t know how to access recent – '05 – archives.) A friend told me yesterday she had major bad luck with a Canon & would never get another one. But there are a lot of positive comments on this thread, so perhaps her experience was unusual?</p>

<p>I’ll have to check out cost also. She will not be a frequent photographer, but will want one really reliable for those must-have moments. A high-end model of anything will probably not be worth it</p>

35

<p>Epiph:</p>

<p>Here’s a link to a website with very comprehensive reviews:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.imaging-resource.com/MFR1.HTM?view=Canon_reviews[/url]”>http://www.imaging-resource.com/MFR1.HTM?view=Canon_reviews&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>The relevant Canon models are the A75 (last year’s model) and the A510 (new model). This is Canon’s best selling camera, period…of every camera they make.</p>

<p>I have no reason to believe that the comparable camera from the other manufacturers (Nikon, Olympus, Sony, etc. aren’t every bit as good. Knowing a bit about Asian consumer products marketing, I would be surprised if there were any great differences.</p>

<p>I chose the Canon based primarily on the fact that it uses off-the-shelf AA batteries (as do several other top brands). That means that one NiMH charger and a few sets of AA NiMH rechargeables covers all the junk in the house: cameras, Discman players, etc. I’m not a big fan of proprietary batteries. And you definitely, definitely do not want to be feeding a digital camera (or a Discman) disposable alkaline batteries. They’ll eat you out of house and home do the power consumption of these LCD displays and flash units.</p>

<p>You can link to other manufacturer reviews from that webpage. These are very comprehensive independent reviews.</p>