Cameras, what do you have

Casper · Post by **Casper** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:03 pm

I was wondering what you all have for a camera?

Why do you like the one you have?

How much did it cost?

Is it user (idiot

) friendly?

What kind of features does it have?

Anything else you might like to add about your camera?

I currently have a Canon EOS digital Rebel but taking it on a hunt is kind of a hassle. I would like to find something a bit smaller that can take an equaly good picture and fit into my pocket. I would like to find one that is quick to grab and take a pic without having to wait for anything to be ready. More a just turn it on and take a pic.

Post by **Ayres** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 3:18 am

Ha!

Motorola e815 cell phone with integrated 1.3 megapixil camera. No optical zoom, have to get in close.

If I'm lucky and remember to grab it, I've got a Casio QV-R40 4 megapixil with 10x optical zoom.

Never use a digital zoom on a camera. Take the picture at the max optical zoom if necessary, then zoom in on the picture once it's on your computer. It'll be better quality that way.

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:17 am

Kodak 740. I chose it because as soon as you stepped away from my camera and went with a different camera with 10X optical zoom or 5 mega pixels the price went up $100. Yes it is idiot proof. when u change wo a different camera setting (eg. going from normal camera to a fast moving picture) it says what setting you are on. even has a function where i can send pictures directly from my camera to your email without having to upload the pictures onto my computer.

The price was 300 CAD when it was boxing daysale or 375 CAD normal price.

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/prodde ... 893&catid=

Just remeber one thing when you buy a camera the human brain can only comprehend 7.9 megapixels so there is no need on going higher than that.

If I were doing it again I would be getting a Nikon they are a little bit more money but you will probally only buy 1 digital camera so you may as well get a good one.

Buckeye_V · Post by **Buckeye_V** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:42 pm

I too bought a Kodak 740. For the money ($279.00 at SAM's), you can't get a better camera with more options. I did my homework and checked about every camera out there.

It has a bunch of auto settings and manual settings that will allow experienced photographers the chance to tinker around a bit. I got a 1G card for $60.00. I also bought the 3 year warranty because my last camera made it 2 years and then croaked.

SteveB · Post by **SteveB** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:13 pm

Buckeye_V wrote:I too bought a Kodak 740. For the money ($279.00 at SAM's), you can't get a better camera with more options. I did my homework and checked about every camera out there.

It has a bunch of auto settings and manual settings that will allow experienced photographers the chance to tinker around a bit. I got a 1G card for $60.00. I also bought the 3 year warranty because my last camera made it 2 years and then croaked.

Ditto. Sams was much cheaper than others. I love the 10x zoom and the fact that it's large enough that it doesn't feel like a toy. I use the "binocular buddy" strap so it's always ready but secure against my chest.
steve

Post by **Greg Jennings** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:37 pm

New digital Rebel. Standard lens plus 70-300mm. Really nice pics.

Here is a picture. It's nothing like full resolution. Notice how it stops the water drops? And when you push the button, it takes the picture right blasted then....not 1-2 seconds later.

Best,

Post by **grant** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:45 pm

same as greg here. Canon Digital Rebel @ $900 USD

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:17 pm

Greg and grant my camera has this function also it is a maving picture.

Casper · Post by **Casper** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:13 pm

there is a sale on the Canon PowerShot A400 For a $100 is this any good

Specs:

2.2 optical, 3.2 digital

QuickShot function

Greg you didnt get teh 55 mm lens wiht yours? I got it but wanted to get the 300 just havent got around to it yet.

Grant what lens came with yours?

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:14 pm

I would go for somthing with mor eof an optical zoom. THe optical zoom actually zooms in on the object. while digital just increases the pixel size.

Post by **Ayres** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:55 pm

Ryan wrote:Just remeber one thing when you buy a camera the human brain can only comprehend 7.9 megapixels so there is no need on going higher than that.

Ryan, that's an interesting little fact I didn't know. Is there some study that found this out? (do you have a link?)

And Casper, remember, like I said, never use the digital zoom. Don't even factor it in. Some camera manufacturers will include it on the box as, say, a 10x zoom camera. In reality it's probably about 4x optical and 6x digital.

Your computer can digitally zoom in on the picture if you need to get closer than what the optical zoom allowed. Digitally zooming in on your camera will decrease the quality of the photo.

If you're going to want to take pictures of your dog outdoors, you'll want to look more at other factors than zoom anyway. The best cameras have a very high shutter speed (digital SLR, like Greg and Grant's Canon Digital Rebel mentioned above) so that even when you take a shot without a tripod the pic will register on the camera so fast that it doesn't come out blurry if you happened to shake a little.

For example:

Just keep things like that in mind when making a decision on what features are most important.

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:38 pm

No ayers i never researched it on the net. I went off of the guys at circut city, radio shack, futureshop and visions. I figured if 4 outt 4 employees said this it was true. Just a note it was the managers i talked to not some part time guy.

Post by **Ayres** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:08 pm

In actuality, it's the part-time guy that probably knows more! Managers have business degrees. They hire two types of part-timers: those with a lot of technical background to be able to explain things; and those who can sell just about anything.

Anyway, I'm looking into this to try to find some validity. I hope it is true (means saving me cash when I finally shell out for a good digi-cam), but I wonder why manufacturers are pushing the megapixel envelope like the space race if it is too.

Casper · Post by **Casper** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:30 pm

Ayres I to have the Rebel camera! got mine shortly after Grant. That is why I am looking for a "pocket" camera. I want something to carry w/ me all the time without the bulk. One that is fast and reliable so I can quickly capture the moment.

Post by **Ayres** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 12:02 am

Whoops, didn't know that Casper!

If you're wanting a pocket camera I'd prioritize in a practical manner about the capabilities then. First, make sure it has a quick start-up time, then make sure it has a 'good-e-nuff' resolution and compression, then make sure it has a respectable zoom (you likely won't be needing much, to be honest). Sounds like the Canon you have scoped out is a good bet.

Here's a little website I found that explained resolution and compression. It seems the statement that the brain can't comprehend beyond 7.9 megapixels is somewhat misguided. In actuality, a higher-megapixel camera allows you to print a higher quality image at larger sizes, so there's no real 'comprehension limit' for the human brain in that respect. For practical purposes, though, the home user won't print anything beyond an 8x10 photo, and 7.9 megapixels is quite enough to print a very high quality photo at that size.

http://www.microscope-microscope.org/im ... lution.htm

Buckeye_V · Post by **Buckeye_V** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:09 am

We also have a Canon EOS Elan 7 - 35mm camera with wide and telephoto lenses. When we get the fil developed we take it to Sam's and they put the photos online in a digital format. Besides, the photos are only like $5.00 per roll.

I usually take one camera and the wife takes the other. Hopefully between the two of us we'll get enough puppy pics when it gets here.

omega58 · Post by **omega58** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:46 pm

I have the Canon A80. . .it is a very nice camera, I wouldn't hesitate to get another Canon in the A series. Nice, small, takes good pics.

Allister Fiend · Post by **Allister Fiend** » Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:22 pm

Canon Digital Rebel with several lenses for just about any scenario you can imagine. That said, I use a fairly inexpensive ($200) Sigma lense most of the time. If you want a great camera and want to have money left over for lenses and all the extras, check out the digital Rebel. I have been very pleased with mine over the last 2 years. I recommend at least a 1 GB memory card and an extra battery if you take a lot of pictures. For around $1000, you can get a lot of camera and a few extras.

Guinness & Doug · Post by **Guinness & Doug** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 11:42 am

Hey, there.

I'm a bit of a camera freak. I like Nikon, and am drooling over an D70 - but need to work some overtime!!

My current SLR is a Nikon N70 - I love it but in this day and age of digital it's a bit of an dying breed, 35mm. Still love to take slides, though...

My current digital is a Sony Cybershot, 4.1 mega pixel. It's tiny and would fit in your shirt pocket, and takes surprisingly good pics, clear and sharp. And it's idiot-proof, too. Just set to full auto and point and shoot. Or you can tweak it to full manual or somewhere in between, too. Runs for about $400 Canadian.

Doug.

dhondtm · Post by **dhondtm** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:04 am

The investment is all in the lens....

When I am not shooting with my Weatherby I am shooting with my Canon 20D and an EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens.

wannabe · Post by **wannabe** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:08 am

I just picked up a Fuji F10 at Sam's Club for $227. It has 6.3MP, 3X optical zoom and it is slightly bigger than a deck of cards. According to the literature, it will take about 500 pictures before the battery needs charged.

Margaret · Post by **Margaret** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:20 pm

I have a little digital camera. It is a pain because it does not have a view finder. What I find is that it is slow to take the photo, the dog looks nice, I click and then there is this little delay and the picture is taken but the dog has moved.

Is there any setting I can change to correct this do you think?

dhondtm · Post by **dhondtm** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:27 pm

Margaret wrote:I have a little digital camera. It is a pain because it does not have a view finder. What I find is that it is slow to take the photo, the dog looks nice, I click and then there is this little delay and the picture is taken but the dog has moved.

Is there any setting I can change to correct this do you think?

That's the problem with most little point and shoot cameras they are slow to focus and difficult to use. Every camera is different and has a different feel to it. Almost all of them require you to press the photo button half way to establish focus then all the way to take the photo. Many people mis-use these point and shoot cameras and just press the button all in one motion and get nothing but an unfocused photo. So first try pressing the button half way and see if it is a focus issue. THe camera should beep or display a green square or have some kind of indication that it has now focused and you can continue to press the button to take the picture.

Try searching reviews for faster focusing cameras. The best are the big bulky SLR digital cameras. But, if you can't afford that there are some nice point and shoot cameras out there that have a quick response.

My favorite review link for cameras is Steve's DigiCam...
http://www.steves-digicams.com/hardware_reviews.html

SwitchGrassWPG · Post by **SwitchGrassWPG** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:31 pm

Nikon D50 w/28-70 & 70-300 MM lenses and a 2X converter. Less than $1000
Fuji Fine Pix S5100. About $300

rosiesdad · Post by **rosiesdad** » Wed May 03, 2006 12:18 pm

Fuji finepix 3000, but would consider the Kodak version next time. Similar money and maybe a few more features.

gundogguru · Post by **gundogguru** » Fri May 12, 2006 7:56 pm

We just bought a Kodak z760 6.1 megapixel. can wait to try it.

Post by **ezzy333** » Fri May 12, 2006 9:04 pm

Justy got a Kodak 850 with 5.1 mega pixel and a 12 power optical zoom.

Ezzy

Maverick · Post by **Maverick** » Fri May 12, 2006 9:19 pm

I have a Kodak Z740 which has a 10X zoom.
Takes pretty good pics but I would really love the Nikon D70.
One day it will happen.

Mav.....

Valley Quail · Post by **Valley Quail** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:02 pm

I like digital cameras and am always looking for improvements since my main use for them is in the field hunting quail with my setters.

Almost any of the small cameras are fine and you get good pictures easily. I like to take videos also, sort of as a gunning diary. The talking helps me remember where I was etc when I took the video. For a couple years I used one of the little Sanyo C5 camcorders. It was very handy and took good videos and stills. The only limitation was the lack of an optical viewfinder. Sometimes it was hard to compose a picture in bright sunlight. I switched to a Canon A710 in the middle of this season and it works great. It's a tad larger but still fits in my hunting shirt pocket. It will take 16 min of high quality video and has 6X zoom and an optical viewfinder. For right now, I think it's the best thing going for a field camera, especially if you want to take video clips also. Probably the most important feature for the bird hunter is that this camera can be used completely with one hand.

When my dogs go on point, I usually take a short 10-20 second video on 6X zoom so that I can talk and not cause the bird to flush. If it's an especially good point, I'll also take a still. After this, I put the camera back in my pocket, walk in and shoot (at) the bird. Sometimes I'll take a picture of the retrieve.

This little camera also has a continous function which allows full res pictures to be taken as long as the shutter button is depressed. When you take a series like this you can usually pick out one or two great stills of retrieve, foir example.

This A 710 has image stab and all the bells and whistles. I'm amazed that they can sell it for about $300.

h20fwlkillr · Post by **h20fwlkillr** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:45 pm

I have a Nikon L3. great little camara for $150.

ohiogsp · Post by **ohiogsp** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:32 pm

Nikon N65 film, Nikon D70 digital slr, Fugi s5100 digital. I love the D70 my only gripe is it don't do movies. The fugi is nice and has 10x optical zoom plus the movie option, takes great pics, also easy to operate. I have a 2x teleconverter for the nikons with a 300mm lens so that will really reach out there at trials. For the money and simplicity all around easy camera go with the fugi 5100s for around $300 dollars it is very nice.

nj gsp · Post by **nj gsp** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:07 pm

My first digital was a Canon G3. Great camera for the money, as it was free (Amex rewards points). 4mp and lots of features.

I also bought a Canon Digital Elph. It fits easily in your pocket, and has epic battery life. This camera takes excellent pictures with only 3.2mp. Honestly, you don't need more megapixels unless you plan on blowing the print up to the size of a bus shelter. The Elph also takes reasonable quality video clips as well. Lots of features and very easy to use.

I'll see if I can link to some pictures I've taken with it.

Post by **Greg Jennings** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:38 pm

Under ideal circumstances, if you are going to only print to 8x10, a bunch of megapixels isn't a benefit.

But if you take a lot of pictures, you really like *great* pictures, and you are half-decent with a photo editor, the extra MP can help you bring the *great* picture up out of one that is completely ordinary.

For example, consider a picture that doesn't follow the "rule of thirds" and is too distant to have any punch or sense of motion or personality.

Take that picture and edit it so that the subject is framed to convey what you wish it to convey and blow it up so that it has punch and you have a real picture.

You can do that if you have the MP to spare...if you don't have the MP, you are stuck with a lousy picture.

Bottom line, more MPs...up to a point..., buys you options that less MP deny you.

Best,

nj gsp · Post by **nj gsp** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 4:13 pm

True what you say Greg, but there is no difference between a 3mp and a 10 mp camera if the pic is out of focus, blurry, under/over exposed, etc. You can't really fix that with photoshop.

Don · Post by **Don** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 3:14 pm

I don't have a pocket camera but I do have a few.

Nikon D70 (only digital)

Nikon F5 35mm

Hasselblad X-Pan 35mm panoramic

Pentax 645 NII med format film

Mamiya RB67 med format film

Post by **Greg Jennings** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:00 am

NJ GSP wrote:True what you say Greg, but there is no difference between a 3mp and a 10 mp camera if the pic is out of focus, blurry, under/over exposed, etc. You can't really fix that with photoshop.

I don't believe that I said anything about extra MP helping a non-picture. An almost-random collection of pixels is crap no matter what.

I said that you can take an *ordinary* picture...one that is in focus, but just doesn't have any punch and with some editing make a *great* picture out of it. Extra MP can help that.

I have one two *great* pictures on my wall, things that are huge events in my life that were captured that way and they're worth every penny I paid for the whole camera, not just the extra MP.

Regards,

snips · Post by **snips** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:58 pm

We just got the Canon Rebel xi, (10 mp) love it. Took the pix in my avatar with it. Still learning about it.

Casper · Post by **Casper** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:22 pm

snips wrote:We just got the Canon Rebel xi, (10 mp) love it. Took the pix in my avatar with it. Still learning about it.

MIne is the XT and I am still learnign how to use it. Had it over a year. Need new lens that costs more than camera itsself.

My best photo so far

AceofSpades41 · Post by **AceofSpades41** » Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:24 pm

Casper

looks like a peaceful place, where is it????

DKRick · Post by **DKRick** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 5:59 am

Yeah,

Great picture. I have looked at the rebel have a Kodak Dx 4900, no problems other than I want to get closer pictures. I realy like what I read about the rebel. Caspar did you go with off brand lens then or what? If you went with off brand lenses are they hard to find or did you gt them on-line?

Thanks Rick

Casper · Post by **Casper** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:46 am

AceofSpades41 wrote:Casper

looks like a peaceful place, where is it????

That there is some Eastern Nevada Grouse cover. I have gotten a mix back of Ruffs and Blues in here. Thats all I am telling

Rick I have not bought the lens yet and when I do I will not buy off brand. Guess I am brand specific. The lens I have now is just the basic one that comes with the Rebel, the 18-55

Post by **ezzy333** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:56 am

The best lenses I have ever found were Tokina. Not only the best but one of the cheaper ones. I have several and they are all great. A few years ago I saw a rating some where and they were on top of the list on it also. I think you will find many good ones when you get into the high end cost wise but it is hard to find real good ones at a reasonable price.

Ezzy

DKRick · Post by **DKRick** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 10:03 am

ezzy333 wrote:The best lenses I have ever found were Tokina. Not only the best but one of the cheaper ones. I have several and they are all great. A few years ago I saw a rating some where and they were on top of the list on it also. I think you will find many good ones when you get into the high end cost wise but it is hard to find real good ones at a reasonable price.

Ezzy

So did you buy your Tokina lens local or on-line?

Post by **Greg Jennings** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 12:07 pm

We bought a Tokina 70x300mm for our Rebel XT and love it. If you buy a big zoom lens like that, I suggest getting a monopod. We bought ours at the store where we bought the camera. They had thrown in some extras that made it worthwhile. Otherwise, I would probably buy online.

Best,

Post by **ezzy333** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 1:30 pm

I bought a 35X200 from the store I bought most of my equipment from. I agree with Greg that you need a good tripod though and buy a good doubler(2X). You will find the limiting factor noramally is light unless you want to spend a few thousand on the lens. I also have a 500 that is great if you are out on a bright day and have the tripod.

Ezzy

hubweims · Post by **hubweims** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:52 pm

i have the canon rebel xti. love it, need new glass though. i too am partial to brand specific. can't go wrong with canon glass. the glass is the most important part of the camera. if you buy good canon glass, you can always upgrade camera bodies and the lenses will still work. so, it's worth the money to buy the lenses. they will last a lifetime with proper care.

ohiogsp · Post by **ohiogsp** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 7:56 am

Brian the off brand lenses that are bought for a specific camera will work if you upgrade and if they don't neither would the brand name lens. They are built to work the same way.

Post by **ezzy333** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:29 am

Plus many of them are better than the camera makers lenses. And sometimes cheaper.

Ezzy

hubweims · Post by **hubweims** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:26 am

sweet, i am new to the slr world. i have only had my xti since november last year, and haven't really spent a lot of time learning all that it will do. it can be a little overwhelming, as i am new to photography and lingo (aperture, iso, shutter speed). I will be adding new glass soon especially as i get a better handle on the camera. it wasn't until late jan or feb that i started trying to tackle the programmable modes. before i stuck with all the auto modes and was a point and shoot kind of picture taker. so, if the money is way less for the lenses and the quality is good, what brand is the must buy?????

Post by **ezzy333** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:34 am

Tokina

Ezzy