zen, this inquiry is mostly for you, and i thought about emailing you but then thought maybe others would have input and/or use for the discussion.
sooooo ... if’n i wuz gwonna buy a digital camera (on a budget of say, less than $500 total), what sorts of things should i consider? any particular brand? must-have features? minimum pixels? other considerations?
i want to be able to zoom in very close to get the kind of detail i’ve seen in some of your shots with exceptional clarity and focus ... i like to take a lot of candid shots of people and animals in action, so having one that is fast and easy to the capture is good ... and color, color, color ...
my last digital camera was kodak, for its reputation for color at that time. it was a good camera but the software is so outdated i can’t use it anymore ... also, it was a mere 2.0 megapixel ...
While you wait for Zen. If I could chime in with my experience: I LOVE my Canon digital Elphs. I had an S400 but replaced it with an even better S800. The beauty of these are not just the wonderful macro (for great close up shots) and wide-angle (in the 800 models, that allows you to get a much wider range of panorama without having to step way back) features of the lens or the rock solid Canon quality or the cheap SD media and handy built in Image Stabilization in the IS models. It’s the form factor that ensures you will most likely take the tiny thing WITH you when you go somewhere and will actually have a camera with you when you need or want one (with far better quality and features than a camera phone).
You could spend many times more on a digital SLR instead of going with a point and shoot like these (they do offer a manual mode as well, though) but from what I have seen, in most cases it is far better to let the camera decide the settings anyway from the many blurry and poor contrasted photos I have seen friends and relatives take with expensive, high megapixel digital SLRs. Plus, I like being able to view the photo through the LCD screen and not the viewfinder. Also, don’t forget that the skills of the photographer are more important than the technology of the camera, particularly if they don’t know how to properly set all the manual functions. Then there is the size consideration I mentioned earlier and the tendency to not take the nice, big camera anywhere so it therefore does not get used much.
There is also the caveat about megapixels not being all that important past a certain amount, particularly when you have no plans to enlarge your shots to poster size or even past the usual 4x6 print. So, here’s one I would recommend:
(EDIT: Found out the SD850 above no longer has the wide angle lens that the SD800 does, so if that’s important to you, you should look for the previous model instead.)
For a low priced camera (less than $300), the one I’ve had for a few years is a really good one. It does all I need it for, which is to take excellent pictures without it being too complicated. It’s a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ5. (I’m partial to anything “Panasonic” because my experience has been they make excellent products.) Rather than posting all the particulars, here’s a link:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/lz5.html
And btw, you can look up almost any digital camera on that website and get lots of information.
It’s the form factor that ensures you will most likely take the tiny thing WITH you when you go somewhere and will actually have a camera with you when you need or want one (with far better quality and features than a camera phone).
…
Glad you didn’t need to wait, Lumina! And brebro’s quote above is the biggest key to it all and it’s something i preach constantly, the only camera that anyone will take good pictures with is the one that they have with them because it’s convenient. Said another way, you can guarantee not getting a good shot if you don’t have your camera with you. The digital Elph series is a wonderful camera and you should go into Best Buy (not to buy), to handle it and see if you like the feel, because one that doesn’t feel right won’t get used, either.
I happen to use the Sony DSC-W200 for my ‘carry around’ camera, but that’s 12 megapixels, steady-shot, Carl Zeiss lenses and already uses the same cards that my bigger camera holds.
If anyone is into camera reviews, the best site i’ve found is Steve’s Digicams. It really gets down to the nitty grit.
Now, the only other big thing to remember is that when you take shots with whatever camera you DO buy, take multiple shots, because card space is cheap - and you can always delete the shot where little billy had his eyes closed or the one where you moved slightly.
Thanks, brebro! And thanks Kris, i didn’t see your reference to Steve’s there, it is the best!
Now, the only other big thing to remember is that when you take shots with whatever camera you DO buy, take multiple shots, because card space is cheap - and you can always delete the shot where little billy had his eyes closed or the one where you moved slightly…
Soon after I got my camera, I went and bought a 1.0 GB memory card for it - never regretted that and have never come even close to filling it up.
oh, i’ve been a photographer for decades, but with the old type camera with interchangeable lenses and with film and such. i always took hundreds of shots for every one i ever kept ... the breathtaking photos are typically fortunate accidents, at least for me ...
and i know enough to ALWAYS shoot in the highest res, too ... you never know when you have a print-quality keeper and also, for those tight crops of small details you want in highest possible quality ...
i was looking for tips on the latest hardware ... and was i ever blessed!
Btw, on the plant picture I posted above, does anybody recognize what kind of plant that is?
Normally, i would say that the vine is Virginia Creeper, Parthenocissus quinquefolia, but the little single berry is a point of confusion. Usually, the flowers and berries are in clusters (like poison ivy) and the mature berry blue-ish in color. And would not normally be blooming and setting seed about this time unless unnaturally warmed by say the side of the house or building. The growth of the woody part is consistant with Virginia Creeper and i would probably go with this until i could ID it in the field.
Good try, Zen. I actually know what it is, but was just wondering if anyone else knew. I’ll give some hints. The pic is not current; it was taken in September of 2006. The plant is common in the mountains of Madison County and usually grows in the shade on the north side of a slope.
