| Official Luthiers Forum! http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| Digital camera recommendations http://mowrystrings.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=13669 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Jimmy Caldwell [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 1:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My digital camera has cratered and I'm in the market for a new one. Trying not to break the bank and would like to stay under $200.00. I've seen a lot of great photos here, particularly good close-ups. What's everyone using? TIA. |
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My 6 megapixel by Kodak does a pretty good job for about $198. I cant remember the model # but will check tonight when I get home. The secret to good close-up is to use a tripod and avoid using optical zoom more than nesssary and never use digital zoom and avoid flash on reflective surfaces. |
|
| Author: | Steve Saville [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
$200 will get you a nice tripod. 
Cannon, Fuji, Nikon, HP and many others make pretty nice point and shoot cameras for less than $200. I just bought my daughter an HP on eBay for under $100. It would work for you. If you want real nice close up pictures, you need something mounted to a tripod that you can focus. |
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My 6 megapixel by Kodak does a pretty good job for about $198. I cant remember the model # but will check tonight when I get home. The secret to good close-up is to use a tripod,shutter cable or timer to avoid shake Also avoid using optical zoom more than necessary and never use digital zoom and avoid flash on reflective surfaces. Also use the highest resolution setting |
|
| Author: | WaddyThomson [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I just bought a Panasonic - Lumix DMC-LZ7K, 7.2 MP, and I like it very well. It has that, anti shake technology, that helps stabilize pictures. It also has a 6x optical zoom, which appealed to me. It seems to work fine. The only disadvantage, if it is one, is that it does not have an eye - viewfinder. You have to look at the ample 2.5" screen on the back. It does have a gizmo that lets you brighten the view in the screen when you have to hold the camera above your head, and you have to look at it at an angle. It works pretty well. It lets you see well enough to compose a picture. I caught it on sale, and paid something like $175. It does not come with a memory card, though. 1 G about $20. It does have some internal memory, though, like 24MB or something like that. I don't have it here. The camera has a Leica lens. The buttons on the back are well designed to let you easily compose your shot's brightness/exposure, flash, etc. I have seen it on sale at a couple of places since I bought it for something like $150. The link above is at Circuit City, which is where I got it. There was some kind of bonus sale that knocked off an extra $5.00 at the time. |
|
| Author: | burbank [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I love using my old Nikon Coolpix 995. Only 3.2 Mpixels, which is more than sufficient for web site images, since you strip out much of the resolution when compressing for the web anyway. Excellent closeup capability. Big plus is that the lens portion of the camera pivots up and down, so getting low-angle shots is a breeze - lower the camera, point it down so you can look down into the display, then tilt the lens up to where you want it. Mine is going on five years old, hasn't missed a beat, though it's had its share of nicks and bumps. Plus, it has external flash sync. Not available new anymore, but lots on ebay for around $200. These were taken with room lighting on a tripod, compressed with Photoshop at medium quality, so they'd be better at high quality setting. 
|
|
| Author: | WarrenG [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm a big fan and user of the of the Canon Rebel (outside the price range) and PowerShot 640 (I think it's in range these days). 
|
|
| Author: | WaddyThomson [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just for comparison, here is a close up I took with the Panasonic, also with room lighting.  I think I have the camera set to take at about 3 MP then this shot was reduced to 480 pixels and is about 101 KB in size. |
|
| Author: | Colin S [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've always used a 3mp Sony for my work and it has never let me down and produced quality pictures beyond my ability. However I have recently bought a 7mp Panasonic Lumix DX50, 3" screen, 3.6x zoom wides angle (28mm) the optics are by Leica which is the best you can get. But the real advantage is the anti-shake, technology which really helps. I believe some of the Canon cameras have it as well. Get a 1gb card and you have one hell of a camera. I'm afraid I don't know the US pricing. In a recent comparitive test of compacts, the DX50 came out on top with the Canon Ixus 850 next. Colin |
|
| Author: | Michael Dale Payne [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just to clarify take the photo at highest resolution then compress the photo via software to post. The better or higher resolution the original or prior to compression the better the compressed image |
|
| Author: | LuthierSupplier [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jimmy, I used to be a big fan of Nikon, until I recently switched to a Canon PowerShot SD850 IS Digital ELPH(8 megapixel). It is over $300, but just an amazing camera. Very solid and takes awesome pics. The video from this camera is also amazing! The thing that I really hate about the Nikon is the slow lag between pics. On this Canon, only about 1.5 sec wait between pics, even with flash. Truly amazing! Good luck finding the camera of your dreams. Tracy |
|
| Author: | WaddyThomson [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
That looks our old Sony, except ours was a 2 MP version. Great camera. It went through 1 repair cycle, but has recently started blacking out with no warning. A sharp tap will get it going again, but who needs that going on. What a pain. Nice camera though always took great pictures, and it doesn't owe us anything. We probably have taken over 20,000 pictures with it in the 8 - 9 years we've had it. My wife has a newer Sony, and loves it. Lots of close-ups of text pages from books in libraries and pages from Deed Books in the basements of City Halls. She's into Genealogy. |
|
| Author: | James Orr [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I try to think in terms of the camera's sensitivity to light rather than its number of megapixels. Try to find examples of higher iso pictures that the camera takes. Look for any pixelation (dots or blotches) in the pictures. I would go to dpreview.com camera review galleries and look at the camera settings of recent point and shoots. The image quality tends to break down around 200 or in low (indoor) light, but you might find something. My opinion is that the only digitals that take clear pictures at and above iso 400 are digital SLR's. You want the higher iso because you want to be able to get at least a 1/20 shutter speed inside. This is from a Canon D60 at iso 400 with a 1/60th shutter speed. Look how clean it is. I think you can find one of these on eBay around your price point. 
From this gallery |
|
| Author: | James Orr [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
You can! I just found a few D60's on eBay for or around $200. |
|
| Author: | WaddyThomson [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I saw a D60 body for 207.00 current bid. No lens though. |
|
| Author: | SteveCourtright [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Look at a Nikon L11. I like mine well enough. 2Cents |
|
| Author: | John Watkins [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My former camera was a Canon Powershot G2 (semi-slr), which are now available for cheap. It did a great job for years in the shop environment. It took this picture... 
However, for ultra closeups, you need a good SLR with a macro lense. Now I have an Olympus E-500, which essentially the same as the Canon Rebel with a few subtle feature differences. I actually went to the store to buy a Rebel, but tried the Olympus and liked it better. Personal preference. Here's a typical shot from my camera... 
And here's a super macro shot... 
|
|
| Author: | Rod True [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jimmy, I have an Olympus FE-180 6.0 MP that I use every day for work and for shop pics. I bought it about 8 months ago and you can get it at Wal-Mart for about $125 Here's a close up I just took of a quarter, this required me to steady the camera on something but no tri-pod required. 
|
|
| Author: | WarrenG [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Have a look at the reviews at Digital Camera Resource. They're are extremely thorough, and seemingly unbiased. |
|
| Author: | Rod True [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Actually, I just looked at Wal-Marts website and the next generation Olympus of my model is $119.84 Check it out here if you want. It's a great little camera, batteries last long too. |
|
| Author: | Philip Perdue [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jimmy, It looks like you are getting plenty of good advice. My personal camera is a Kodak easy share but I can’t remember the exact model and I’m not at home. My wife can use it and feels comfortable with its large view screen (I use the view finder). I have been very please at all types of photos that I have taken. The photos that I have enlarged have been beautiful. The model that I have has a quality glass lens and 10X optical zoom. Below is a link to a comparable camera in your price range. Camera example A note on optical vs. digital zoom. Optical zoom magnifies the object in the lens directly through lens movement. When you do this you maintain high resolution in your photo. Digital zoom is not really a zoom at all. Digital zoom enlarges the object in the lens by stretching it to make it appear larger. If you just stretch a portion of the photo to look larger you will be lowering the resolution. Take your time and choose the best camera for you. Make sure that it feels good and has the features you desire. Go to a couple of stores and feel the cameras and make sure they feel right to you. After all this is still an investment that you will most likely have for a number of years. Don’t be like my brother in-law who had to have the big name brand ultra thin and light camera. He has been very unhappy with it because the only decent photos it takes are portraits. Any thing else looks like an Instamatic photo (unclear and far away). Best of luck, Philip |
|
| Author: | Colin S [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=fmorelli] My advice would be to buy a camera from a camera company (Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Olympus, et cetera). [/QUOTE] The advice I've always been given is that because they are mainly electronic devices then look to the electronics companies for the best CCDs and controls. So say the Panasonic produces the electronics and marries it to a Leica lens gives you the best of both worlds. Because you can make a great optical system doesn't mean that you make good electronics. Colin |
|
| Author: | Don A [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I just recently bought a Fuji FinePix S9100 and am happy with it so far. It will do point and shoot photos but it also gives you many more options. I'm still in the learning curve of how to use it correctly. However, if your looking for small...this one isn't. It is a lot of camera for the price so give it look. 
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|