On the verge of buying a digital camera.
- Thread starter Doctor Zoidburg
- Start date
Yeah, but the eye can only distinguish 300 dpi. So, sure go around your house and zoom in with your magnifying glass on your 8x10 pictures hanging up on the wall that you printed with your Dye Sub Printer and you may or may not see pixelation.CuteCob said:sure you can, zoom in on the pictures, then see how fast pixelation occurs on each photo
But, WHO does that?
I think a good zoom with depth of field, true colour and minimal shutter lag is much more important, unless you shoot billboards.
btw, CuteCob, cool avatar
Well, for you all "3 mp isn't enuff", as stated, go around your house and look at all the prints, photos, etc. 3 mp is about equivalent to asa 400 film and how long has THAT been around and how many thousands of rolls did kodak sell?
Anyhow, I don't have any prime examples of good 5 - 8 ps cameras but I was looking at fuji, they had a lot with add on lens' and tons of accessories. I forget who makes it but I think it was Nikon who overcame the shutter (sic) delay on PS cameras. I think the delay was .002 seconds or something like that on one of their new models.
I have an olympus D-540 and haven't needed anything more than that for about 9 months. Then I used my canon A-1.....
Then again, you forget the "wow" factor of a digital SLR....
If you don't mind doing some leg work, go downtown to henry's at queen and church. Those guys are THE photo nuts to go to......plus you might even find a demostrator or a nice used digital camera. They also offer a trade in, and satisfaction warranty.
Anyhow, I don't have any prime examples of good 5 - 8 ps cameras but I was looking at fuji, they had a lot with add on lens' and tons of accessories. I forget who makes it but I think it was Nikon who overcame the shutter (sic) delay on PS cameras. I think the delay was .002 seconds or something like that on one of their new models.
I have an olympus D-540 and haven't needed anything more than that for about 9 months. Then I used my canon A-1.....
Then again, you forget the "wow" factor of a digital SLR....
If you don't mind doing some leg work, go downtown to henry's at queen and church. Those guys are THE photo nuts to go to......plus you might even find a demostrator or a nice used digital camera. They also offer a trade in, and satisfaction warranty.
Oh, i thought you meant once you had that 30mb file on your computer and then looking at it through there.Meister said:
DOF is very important if you want crisp shots, but it also depends if you want the background blown out or not...so it varies.
Dye Sub Printer???
Avatar, well, thanks, very true about the company (considering i worked at their head office...go ahead and use it if you like, i really dont mind
)Suk: Film speed is and it's inherent graininess is a direct comparison to the resolution of a digital camera. As the amount of pixels a camera is capable of producing changes, this affects the resolution or image sharpness (due to, ahem, "graininess"). The less pixels per image, the grainier or less sharp an image will be. the more pixels, the clearer the image will be. This equates to film speed, the lower the asa of a negative or slide film, the more grains per frame.
Mind you sharpness, crispness can also be affected by optics, contrast, exposure, and many other factors.
As for sensor size, you are correct, this equates to the type of 'film' used: 35 mm, 4 x 5, 8 x 10 etc. The mp dilemma is based on the number of pixels per frame, not the size of the frame. Sure, a 1280 x 1024 frame is effectively "larger" than a 1024 x 768 but when blown up to the same print size, you will have more pixels in a 1280 than a 1024.
BTW do you realize that in order to get relatively good image production at 3 feet x 5 feet your original file only needs to be about 80 - 100 dpi?
BTW, I admit Henry's isn't the cheapest place to shop, but a wise man once told me: it is stupid to pay too much, but it is idiotic to pay too little. SOmetimes you pay for expertise and I've been going to Henry's for.....(cough) 30 yrs and they've never steered me wrong yet.
Mind you sharpness, crispness can also be affected by optics, contrast, exposure, and many other factors.
As for sensor size, you are correct, this equates to the type of 'film' used: 35 mm, 4 x 5, 8 x 10 etc. The mp dilemma is based on the number of pixels per frame, not the size of the frame. Sure, a 1280 x 1024 frame is effectively "larger" than a 1024 x 768 but when blown up to the same print size, you will have more pixels in a 1280 than a 1024.
BTW do you realize that in order to get relatively good image production at 3 feet x 5 feet your original file only needs to be about 80 - 100 dpi?
BTW, I admit Henry's isn't the cheapest place to shop, but a wise man once told me: it is stupid to pay too much, but it is idiotic to pay too little. SOmetimes you pay for expertise and I've been going to Henry's for.....(cough) 30 yrs and they've never steered me wrong yet.
when im not charging taxes it's a pretty good deal (forgot to mention a 2nd battery which runs $80 plus tax...(battery never used).Sukdeep said:
Huh? film speed is not a comparator to sensor size. You should equate sensor size to film size (35mm, 4x5, 6x6, etc.) for image resolution comparisons.
ever think PopPhoto, is sponsored by Canon?
there is absolutely NO WAY IN HELL digital will compare to film anytime soon.
ESPECIALLY SLIDE film, ever shoot slides?
Ken Rockwell (great well known photographer) said, scanners tomorrow will scan film incredibly.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm <-read this enlighten yourself =) (this coming from a guy who is unbiased in his remarks/comment and never even bashes Canon -and he's an AVID-DIE HARD nikon user-, so that'll let you gauge that's he's pretty fair about things.
(press CTRL F, then type the following, Baloney. (read that paragraph and look at the photos below).
The allure of digital is it's ease of use and REAL TIME viewing results.
I'll admit, I have an F90X camera, but when one of my more expensive lenses broke, and i got the money returned cash in hand, i didn't go out and buy a new lens, I bought the D70. Haven't looked back since because of its convenience.
Kodak's Provia line film is pretty damn good, and i shot almost everything.
I do prefer Fuji's slide stuff, but you can't exactly knock Kodak's either
Henry's is competitive it's not the be all of camera stores, but it's competitive.
If you know what you want, Downtown Camera (west one block from Henrys on Queen) is always willing to deal. Aden Camera on Yonge is also a good place to haggle for a fair price.[/QUOTE]
The DR is ok - Get a quality 200mm Zoom $1300 or so.
Cannon does a good job with Cameras as for whats new - nothing in that price point probobly for 18months.
Better camera choice 20D, but optics are more important. The lenses that come with really suck so just get the body if possible and leses separate.
Extra battery, &1G card highly reccomended.
Ah and dont worry pic size isnt 30mb just 8 for raw at full quality.
I have 3 Cannons and a minolta camera body - by the way film is still better quality than digital unless your into 12+MP.
$ Hobby - But worthwhile.
Enjoy.
Cannon does a good job with Cameras as for whats new - nothing in that price point probobly for 18months.
Better camera choice 20D, but optics are more important. The lenses that come with really suck so just get the body if possible and leses separate.
Extra battery, &1G card highly reccomended.
Ah and dont worry pic size isnt 30mb just 8 for raw at full quality.
I have 3 Cannons and a minolta camera body - by the way film is still better quality than digital unless your into 12+MP.
$ Hobby - But worthwhile.
Enjoy.
mmm hasseyblad...must be nice.Sukdeep said:
although as much as i'd like to shoot film, i have sold myself to the digital world...for now anyway, ill wait till im 65+ years, when i have to and patience annnd nothing better to do, then ill go back to film lol
Ah, the smell of the stop bath or the fixer....those were the days!
Film for the money is much better quality IMHO and the grains in film are round not square which makes em harder to spot. But for ease, instant results, and the fact that you can print your own photos without the mess and chemicals of your own darkroom, digital does it hands down.
You want super high quality? Try an 8 x 10 view camera....negs at 8 x 10 inches? Plus you have the ability to keystone correct BEFORE printing? Except for the size, they can't be beat for quality.
Film for the money is much better quality IMHO and the grains in film are round not square which makes em harder to spot. But for ease, instant results, and the fact that you can print your own photos without the mess and chemicals of your own darkroom, digital does it hands down.
You want super high quality? Try an 8 x 10 view camera....negs at 8 x 10 inches? Plus you have the ability to keystone correct BEFORE printing? Except for the size, they can't be beat for quality.
CuteCob.... I said I liked the Minolta cameras and I stand by that. However, today there was a press release that said that Konica minolta is vacating the canadian marketplace, effective Oct. 1.
The lab gear, film and such will be sub-distributed by a local firm, and the suggestion is that film cameras and digital cameras will onlly be available for purchase via the internet. This does not affect the other Konica minolta subsiduaries,, just Canada.
That's why I said... not Minolta ... no support at all.
Interestingly, DP Review, a well respected photo journal online, reported that the KM sales were only 5.6 million in Canada. There is no way to support a company here on that revenue. My guess is that they may have only reported sales in one or two categories in that number, but still, it's scarey.
The lab gear, film and such will be sub-distributed by a local firm, and the suggestion is that film cameras and digital cameras will onlly be available for purchase via the internet. This does not affect the other Konica minolta subsiduaries,, just Canada.
That's why I said... not Minolta ... no support at all.
Interestingly, DP Review, a well respected photo journal online, reported that the KM sales were only 5.6 million in Canada. There is no way to support a company here on that revenue. My guess is that they may have only reported sales in one or two categories in that number, but still, it's scarey.
At work i use D70 and Olympus E1 and the Olympus Evolt and to be honest the Evolt is probably the best camera on the market for the price ....Henry's 1049 u get two lens......amazing deal considering the quality after the last firmware update....... I have used the Rebels also and they feel like u r using a kids camera cheap feeling and very plastic like.
But to each their own....... the difference between and 8 MP and a 10MP is barely noticeable anyways..... more megapixel is just a myth......... I get some of my best quality shots off my Old D100 .....but i am learning to love this Olympus.
No matter which SLR u buy get 8 Gig cards and a firewire reader...... I have two 8 gig cards and i can fill them in a day of fun easily.
But to each their own....... the difference between and 8 MP and a 10MP is barely noticeable anyways..... more megapixel is just a myth......... I get some of my best quality shots off my Old D100 .....but i am learning to love this Olympus.
No matter which SLR u buy get 8 Gig cards and a firewire reader...... I have two 8 gig cards and i can fill them in a day of fun easily.
wow that's kinda sad...i mean there light metre is great, i assume their cameras would be good to...i guess it boils down to marketing, Nikon is very in your face, you see it almost everywhere, as with Canon to.seymore said:
ya, i agree if there's no support, i wouldn't buy the product.
5.6million is nothing really =\
you are right... it is sad. This is the result of cheap "off-shore" read Chinese, manufacturing. The quality of these mass manufactured products is rapidly improving, and consumers these days don't give a shit about brands and service. That's why you can buy a plasma Tv at zellers with points. It's like DVD players. The Chinese brands simply refuse to pay royalties to the brands that invested in the R&D to create the product.
Remember though you get what you pay for. The cheap brands tend to be replicators, not innovators. And you can only pay for and support innovation with a return on investment. Support a brand and product that you beleive in. Or buy cheap. The cheap buy helps you in the short term (maybe) but the smart buy creates the opportunity for better product development in the future.And, likely gives you a better product right now.
The issue of sustaining a subsiduary company in Canada will loom large this year and next.
My guess? More and more electronics, computer and photo brands will close here, and simply have a sales agency, with all shipping and marketing run from the US, Japan, Korea or China. A loss in tax revenue here, and a sad state of affairs. But, you get what you pay for.
Remember though you get what you pay for. The cheap brands tend to be replicators, not innovators. And you can only pay for and support innovation with a return on investment. Support a brand and product that you beleive in. Or buy cheap. The cheap buy helps you in the short term (maybe) but the smart buy creates the opportunity for better product development in the future.And, likely gives you a better product right now.
The issue of sustaining a subsiduary company in Canada will loom large this year and next.
My guess? More and more electronics, computer and photo brands will close here, and simply have a sales agency, with all shipping and marketing run from the US, Japan, Korea or China. A loss in tax revenue here, and a sad state of affairs. But, you get what you pay for.
Just as you wouldn't put all your eggs in one basket, or fail to diversify your portfoloio, it can be a gamble relying on one huge card. I'd rather get a bunch of 1 and 2 gig cards, in case any of them fail. I know, top brand name cards shouldn't, but with my luck, something would go awry on the last shot of an 8-g card, and I'd lose the whole kit-n-kaboodle...
