FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD
Posted on 09/28/2002 10:04:02 PM PDT by EveningStar
What are your recommedations for best digital cameras?
This is not easily done, but it much more easily done with the Nikons than with other cameras.
The results can be stunning.
If you really want to get into a discussion about all this, log onto the UseNet group: rec.photo.digital
The people there are *very* knowledgeable and very helpful.
But the outcome will be the same: Nikon Coolpix. The most expensive one you can afford.
The problem is that that the scope will cost you close to $1000, if not more. Add another $300 for the tripod (think Gitzo), and a couple hundred more for the stuff that all makes everything work together.
Then we have the computer, which will not be good enough.
If you get into digital photography, you need to be careful. It is probably best to go either very small or to be prepared to get in fairly deep. A budget of $10,000 or more is not unreasonable if you want to get into the deep end.
The shallow end is not bad. There is a lot you can do there. I'm not sure which cameras are considered to be best there these days, but I know the Konicas used to have have a good reputation. I'd stay away from the Sonys.
You really need to talk to the people on rec.photo.digital
But, again, you originally asked which which camera is best. The answer to the question is Nikon.
Fwiw, this comes from someone who is a longtime fan of Canons.
I'm about to give you some good advice. Listen closely.
Think about what it is you want to do, and then call the people at Eagle Optics.
It was around $400 so it isn't an expensive camera, and obviously not professional quality - but we take some pretty nice shots with it............
Sony have a floppy disk version (I highly dislike this version) and a cd version. The picture quality for the floppy disk one is very low, it has to be to fit pictures on the disk which can only support around 1400 kb. That is just three pictures with my camera. Convience is minimum over my plug in Fuji with basically little time difference (but you are correct about the battery drain while uploading).
You want a digital camera that at least has 2.3 megapixal quality. If you are wanted very profession looking photos, then invest in a camera of over 3.3 million megapixals. If you are just wanted pictures that look good but not professional, you can get by with a 1.3 million megapixal camera. I don't suggest the 1.3, cause I have had one and needed to get better ebay pictures upclose and 1.3 just don't cut the mustard.
The Sony with a cd may be a good camera, but I don't like the floppy disk limitations. It's megapixal quality is not good at all.
The best place to compare items is Ebay IMHO. Be sure to click the "completed items", cause the running auctions don't help you one bit when comparing prices. Even the nice cameras are cheaper now than they were 6 months ago. But don't expect to come out with a good camera under 300 bucks. Nice name brands could run as high as 1000 bucks (with lots of bells and whistles). The LCD screens are a waste in my opinion. I have yet to use my screen (it eats up the batteries bad and is hard to see), I just use the view hole. I wished they never put the LCD panels on them.
I'm very happy with my Sony and I can get about 30 pictures on a disk.........
I didn't mean to come down hard on your choise of cameras, as a matter of fact I looked very hard at buying one at one time. My sister has one and yes it does do a great job of fun fast photos. The author wanted to know about point and shoot cameras and the Sony was just that (as my old Fuji was). But the fact was/is that the storage capicity of a floopy disk is limited. Getting 30 pictures on one disk means the average jpeg size is 47kb per picture. Then if you want to mess with it with a photo editor, you have to be careful. Now there is an disadvantage to more pixal quality, it makes HUGE photos that have to be resized to email and resized to view so it doesn't take two screen area to see it. So there is more work to be done to email pictures that are larger jpg/kb/mb size. Any good photoeditor program can do it for you (usually included with new camera purchase) but that is a step some people perfer not to deal with. I have gotten fast with the ole photo editors but still it is time consuming with alot of pictures.
You mentioned asking ValeriaUSA and I must admit to having a small chat (limited due to it was late) and she is a much better expert in the field than myself. Her photos are exquesive to say the least. I am not sure she uses a point and shoot camera much anymore though. Her closeup photos are hard to do with a P&S camera (you can use a high resolution camera and just clip the up-close section if need be though).
Here is an example of what happens if you get too large a jpg and try and send it via email. ----->
Click "HERE" for a oversized 142kb jpg that needs to be resized to email
I have a Nikon Coolpix 900 and it's great. It's old and doesn't have the resloution of the newer ones but has a twist body/viewfinder so that you can take photos over heads, etc., which can be handy.
Recently I got a Kodak DX3900. Not expensive and pocket-size, it has 3.1 megapixel resolution and can point and shoot. You can get complicated with it if you want to and its menu is the easiest to use that I've encountered yet. It uses a flashcard and comes with a computer interface.
The Kodak gets my vote because it is highly portable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
