Digital Camera question...

[Guest]

.... anyone know what to look for in one...

I had one that I loved and someone appropriated it (read: took the bloody thing without my consent... *mutters*)

 

[Zeb_Carter]

.... anyone know what to look for in one...

I had one that I loved and someone appropriated it (read: took the bloody thing without my consent... *mutters*)

You may want to contact Bel, I think he knows digi-cams.

Personally, I would pick any that is 3.2 mega-pixels (should be fairly cheap now) or more (the more pixels the more it costs).

And it would all depend on what kind of bells and whistles you want it to have.

Hope that helps. A little.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

.... anyone know what to look for in one...

I had one that I loved and someone appropriated it (read: took the bloody thing without my consent... *mutters*)

Depends on what you intend to use it for, Elizabetht. Generally, you look at the number of pixels rated for the camera. The lowest number will give you grainy pics. For snapshots and general all round family pics you should be around 300. For professional use they go up to 800 and higher and give fabulous resolution, but the cost is out of sight.

I don't usually buy by brand name, but with an investment like a Dig Cam... I would concider it.

Hope this helps.

 

[Guest]

I want to take pictures of me actually... mine used to have a timer on it so that I could do that...

I think its time for more pictures of myself

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

I want to take pictures of me actually... mine used to have a timer on it so that I could do that...

I think its time for more pictures of myself

Uh huh

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I want to take pictures of me actually... mine used to have a timer on it so that I could do that...

I think its time for more pictures of myself

I believe that most come standard with the timer thingy so that's not a worry. Beside those beautiful self portraits, what else will you use it for?

 

[Guest]

I want to take pictures of me actually... mine used to have a timer on it so that I could do that...

I think its time for more pictures of myself

What was the question? I sort of lost concentration after reading this...

Don't get one so cheap that it doesn't have a memory card. Then invest in a 256 or 512 meg card to go into it so you can save 100's of photos (depending on resolution). That way, you can travel for a week, and have room for enough pictures.

An extra battery is a good idea too if you are going to be out taking photos.

 

[Weird Harold]

I had one that I loved ...

If you really liked the one that you had, then what you need to look for in a replacement is the features that you liked in the old one.

I don't think I've looked at any digital camera that didn't have a timer function, although the timer function is a bit hard to find and/or use on some.

It doesn't sound like what you're looking for is something that can only be found in the expensive models -- something like my $80 Digital Concepts camera will do what you appear to want in a package about the size of a pack of cards -- i.e. it ha a timer, takes 3.1 Megapixel images at its best resolution, can take three image bursts or ten second (silent) videos and stores images on removeable memory chips. It will also work in web-cam mode when connected to the USB port.

The only drawback to mine is that it's a battery hog -- three AAA alkaline batteries are only good for about three to four hours of use. I think If I ever need to replace it, I'll look for a camera that uses AA batteries instead of AAA.

 

[gauchecritic]

I read somewhere that after 6meg pixels(?) the resolution doesn't get much better, comparatively.

The latest cell phones have something like 3.5 meg pixels so you should be able to pick up a camera of that quality for virtually nothing. This resolution is enough for web publishing.

 

[R. Richard]

From what I have read, I would get at least one with a 5 megapixel image capability. The trend eems to be to go to more megapixels with each passing month, but 5 seems to be a good choice for right now.

JMHO.

 

[footlongish]

www.dpreview.com.

Start reading ! Cameras are as varied as cars.

PM me if you need more. I'm an amateur photographer.

 

[Weird Harold]

I read somewhere that after 6meg pixels(?) the resolution doesn't get much better, comparatively.

The resolution continues to get better but the files get bigger and the ability to display or print the full resolution gets more expensive so it's a case of diminishing returns.

Even 3 megapixels is more than required for web-publishing -- even with broad-band connections they just eat up band-width and slow things down.

Unless you plan to print images from the camera in large format -- i.e. 8"x10" and larger -- the higher mega-pixels are just status symbols. The files are to big to e-mail, you can't display them on your computer without compressing them down to your screen resolution, and the human eye can't detect any difference beyond a certain point.

High mega-pixel cameras do have their uses; even if you have to resize the images to use them, starting from a very high resolution gives the resize function more to work with. BUT, for the average non-professional photographer, 3 to 4 megapixels is as much detail as can be effectively used.

 

[Guest]

I read somewhere that after 6meg pixels(?) the resolution doesn't get much better, comparatively.

The latest cell phones have something like 3.5 meg pixels so you should be able to pick up a camera of that quality for virtually nothing. This resolution is enough for web publishing.

I don't think phones are up to that yet. I am thinking 1.2 meg for maybe the best in the US. Overseas might be better, but they always seem to get the better cell technology first.

And phone cameras generally do not have zoom.

 

[Guest]

Okay I saw one with like 6 mega pixels....
I want to take pics of me... and of where I drive when I am out on the road.... sometimes I want to be able to print them out (ya know some days I miss real cameras)....

would that work?

 

[Guest]

Okay I saw one with like 6 mega pixels....
I want to take pics of me... and of where I drive when I am out on the road.... sometimes I want to be able to print them out (ya know some days I miss real cameras)....

would that work?

It's getting so the best thing to do is not print them yourself, but to take the memory card into the local grocery/pharmacy/Walmart and do it there. Cheaper considering the ink cartridges those little printers run through, and better quality.

 

[Weird Harold]

Okay I saw one with like 6 mega pixels....
I want to take pics of me... and of where I drive when I am out on the road.... sometimes I want to be able to print them out (ya know some days I miss real cameras)....

would that work?

If you like it, that's the primary consideration.

I'd definitely check on how many pictures it can store without downloading or changing the chip, how much exra chips are (the larger, 256MB and up, chips for my camera are nearly twice as much as the camera was), and what kind of power consumption it has.

6 MPx is more than enough resolution to print from for normal prints up to 8x10s.

 

[gauchecritic]

I don't think phones are up to that yet. I am thinking 1.2 meg for maybe the best in the US. Overseas might be better, but they always seem to get the better cell technology first.

And phone cameras generally do not have zoom.

Nokia N73

They have zoom but it's digital, high res for digital zoom is the best option. Low res prefers optical.

Okay I saw one with like 6 mega pixels....
I want to take pics of me... and of where I drive when I am out on the road.... sometimes I want to be able to print them out (ya know some days I miss real cameras)....

would that work?

6 is close to a real camera for most intents and purposes. With 6 meg you get the luxury of taking pictures in a larger frame without losing quality and then picking which part of the pic you want. (As with writing, don't be afraid to cut out the parts you don't want.)

 

[zschachwitz]

you mention a self-timer: my 6-y-o model stays on self-timer till I turn it off - it came "free" with my PC as part of the shop's "deal", yet my latest has to re-set the s/t every time. So, pics for here are on the old one, with the added bonus that i don't have to resize them for posting. But the new camera's got a movie function

I agree with the other comments already posted and reckon you should just pay the most you can afford

Better get a tripod as well. LOL

 

[gauchecritic]

Better get a tripod as well. LOL

Tripods are good. You can never have too much tripod.

 

[Guest]

Nokia N73

They have zoom but it's digital, high res for digital zoom is the best option. Low res prefers optical.

Is it available from an American cell company? And how much? A quick google didn't turn up any providers offering it.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I don't think phones are up to that yet. I am thinking 1.2 meg for maybe the best in the US. Overseas might be better, but they always seem to get the better cell technology first.

And phone cameras generally do not have zoom.

My kid has a 3.5 mega-pixel phone/cam/pda/pc/multi-media device.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Even if you get a large (4 meg and up) you will have the ability to reduce the number of mega-pixels the camera uses.

On mine the max is 3.2 mp but I rarely go above 1 mp to take pictures. Only when doing a landscape and I want to capture as much detail as possible do I increase the pixels used to 3.2.

 

[gauchecritic]

Is it available from an American cell company? And how much? A quick google didn't turn up any providers offering it.

It's very recently launched and I can't find any suppliers either. It seems to be a smart phone rather than a cam/phone, but it does have 3X optical zoom.

Somewhere in the region of $800.

My last phone (razr) and seperate digital cam (gendigital 3.1) cost less than $200.

 

[zschachwitz]

If you really liked the one that you had, then what you need to look for in a replacement is the features that you liked in the old one.

I don't think I've looked at any digital camera that didn't have a timer function, although the timer function is a bit hard to find and/or use on some.

It doesn't sound like what you're looking for is something that can only be found in the expensive models -- something like my $80 Digital Concepts camera will do what you appear to want in a package about the size of a pack of cards -- i.e. it ha a timer, takes 3.1 Megapixel images at its best resolution, can take three image bursts or ten second (silent) videos and stores images on removeable memory chips. It will also work in web-cam mode when connected to the USB port.

The only drawback to mine is that it's a battery hog -- three AAA alkaline batteries are only good for about three to four hours of use. I think If I ever need to replace it, I'll look for a camera that uses AA batteries instead of AAA.

to follow up your battery point, I find that rechargeables are worse than useless: with my camera (Fuji Finepix 5600) they're OK for a while, say 50-odd pictures over three week, and then - as dead as mutton, and what's more irritating, there's no warning either. I much prefer conventional Duracell, or whatever conventional (heavy duty, not cheap and nasty) ones I can get.

 

[Weird Harold]

to follow up your battery point, I find that rechargeables are worse than useless: ...

If I used my camera more, I'd invest in enough rechargeable AAA batteries to have three sets. Keeping a couple of spare sets charged offsets the lack of endurance and is cheaper over the long-run than feeding a battery hog conventional alkalines.

But I've learned over the years that relying on rechargeables alone is generally a bad decision in the long run -- it's much better if the camera -- or any other device -- can accept conventional alkaline batteries when you find yourself without any way to recharge.

Some cameras that use a rechargeable battery pack -- albeit, mostly video cameras -- have an available optional adapter to use conventional batteries.

Still, the main point is to consider how the camera is powered and how easy it is to re-power it when the batteries go dead -- and whether you can replace the batteries without losing the pictures in memory!

My camera loses all of the internal memory when the batteries are removed, but doesn't lose anything on a chip if one is installed -- consequently, I seldom rely on the internal memory unless I'm sure that I can download the pictures before the batteries die.