Digital cameras

Discussion in 'Photography / Video' started by Curtis, Oct 17, 2003.

  1. Curtis New Member

    Posts: 859
    Bothell
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    My camera just went tits up, I am seeing all of these awesome pictures, My camera didn't take very good close up pictures. Any suggestions?:dunno
  2. Rob Bodkin Member

    Posts: 97
    Mukilteo, WA
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    I carry a Kodak DX4330. It fits in the vest, though is not as small as some others I've seen, is a 3.1 mega pixel and is really solid and bullet proof. If memory serves it was around $350.

    I have used digital cameras in my work since 1996 and I've always had really good luck with Kodak. I've had 4 and never had to replace one due to it breaking, I usually upgrade every other year or so.

    There is a less expensive version, still with a good docking option and good mega pixel size that one of my employee's uses and we honestly can't tell the difference in photo clarity or usefulness. Mine has more bells and whistles, but we never use them.

    We work outside every day, year round and these cameras take a bit of rain, a few drops on the ground and general rough treatment. We are very happy with them.

    Good Luck.
  3. TANGLES Richh

    Posts: 405
    Lake Forest Park, Washington, USA.
    Ratings: +3 / 0
    I've been using the CooPix Canon 880for our magazine and, of course, my own stuff for a couple years and really like it. Don't think they make it anymore but have new versions of the same thing. Get at least 3.0 Megapixals for clarity and good printing down the road. Got it through B&H Photograpy out of New York. It's on the web and sometimes has some super deals on "open boxes" and reconditioned cameras.
  4. boneman Guest

    Posts: 0
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    Sony has a digital CyberShot model that is waterproof to 5 feet. It is very small, but I can't comment on its performance or value since all I've done is play with it at the electronics store.
  5. msteudel Mark Steudel

    Posts: 919
    Seattle.
    Ratings: +10 / 0
    Doesn't Nikon make the Cool Pix line?

    The leading digital camera makers right now are Canon and Nikon.

    Canon makes the great "elf" series, which is about the size of a deck of cards.
    They also make the S serries which is pretty robust and good cost ratio to camera.
    I have a G2, which has a flip out lcd screen that is great for taking pictures from any angle, you could probably still find these.

    The whole cool pix line from Nikon is awesome, haven't used them but all the reviews are good.

    There is only one water resistant camera that I'm aware of, which I think is a olympus.

    3.0 mp is about a low as you want to go, but if all you are doing is making 4x5 prints and posting to the web, that;s all you ever need ... If you ever want to blow a picture up bigger than 8x10 then you should get a higher mega pixel count.

    Couple of things you might want to think about

    What type of memory does it use? Compact flash is my favorite, cheap and you can get huge sizes, Smart media is limited to 128 megs, and anything proprietary just plain sucks, imho.

    How fast will it take a picture? Cheaper cameras take longer to calculate, focus and snap the picture, not so good when you are trying to snap a picture of a fish.

    A great site for reviews is

    http://www.dpreview.com

    If you have more specific questions I might be able to answer em ...

    Mark
  6. Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Posts: 7,028
    Not sure
    Ratings: +1,016 / 0
    Digicam technology is in a huge state of flux as makers race to introduce new models with more features at lower price points in time for the Holiays. I use digitals every day and also photos from pros with high-end digital systems.

    For my 2 cents worth I'd ignore the whole megapixel arms race and digital zooms and concentrate instead on the optical zoom ratio. A camera with a 3x optical zoom or better will generally be a better camera, all other things being equal. I'd also compare similar photos taken by different cameras. Kodak photos tend to be grainier than others while Nikons tend to produce duller colors, especially bright colors. Go to http://www.steves-digicams.com and navigate to the product reviews section. You can narrow your selection down based on image size and price and then see actual photos taken by each camera.

    Whatever you buy, get extra batteries as well as a couple of the largest memory cards available (check out Costco for great prices.) Finally, short of buying an underwater housing, there are NO waterproof digitals. If it gets wet, it's toast. I dunked a Canon S30 last year in Alaska and it cost me less to replace it than to have it repaired.


    "Fly tying techniques aren't about knowing the obscure, they're about understanding the simple." ~ Neil Patterson
  7. Rob Blomquist Formerly Tight Loops

    Posts: 1,343
    Mountlake Terrace, WA, USA.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    I have a Fuji FinePix 2650 with 2.0 MegaPixel resolution. I think it is a great little camera that can do short movies in addition to still shots.

    Its not the most solid bulletproof camera, but on the net, it is selling for $125-125.

    I have no idea why anyone would think that a 2.0 MP is too low a resolution, for me it is ideal. One needs to realize that at 1024x768 a 17" monitor looks pretty good. and yet, it is only .7 of a MP. So, I say that 2.0 MP is plenty of resolution unless you want to make poster size prints.

    Don't over buy resolution, its only there to make folks need to think they should upgrade.
  8. Peter Pancho Active Member

    Posts: 1,747
    Gig Harbor,WA
    Ratings: +8 / 0
    Kodak CX4300 3.2 megapixals

    http://www.digital-cameras.info/kodak-cx4300.htm

    All this for only $180.00 at Walmart if they still have them, got it last Christmas.
    If I drop this in the water forever, I won't have a cow due to its less than half of the price of most high end cameras out there.

    Good luck! Peter ><>

    "Follow Me and I will make you fishers of Men" Matthew 4:19
  9. Old Man Just an Old Man

    Posts: 21,146
    Dillon, Mt
    Ratings: +1,412 / 0
    I found out that they don't fix them if they do a swim. Sent in a Power Shot S40 to get repaired after it got a little wet and they sent it back saying it wasn't repairable. I now have a Olympus D-520 Zoom 2.0 Megapixels. It even does the short movie thing. But I just got it for fishing pics. But I don't get to use it as My catching is wanting.

    Jim

    P/S cost $125.00 plus tax
  10. DLoop Creating memories one cast at a time

    Posts: 226
    Washington.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    Canon S400 + Canon WP DC800 Waterproof Case ~$650 total.
  11. DLoop Creating memories one cast at a time

    Posts: 226
    Washington.
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    >
    >Canon S400 + Canon WP DC800 Waterproof Case ~$650
    >total.
    >

    ooops, make that ~$550 total.
  12. Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Posts: 7,028
    Not sure
    Ratings: +1,016 / 0
    Is your waterproof case one of the clear plastic scuba ones? Where'd you find it?


    "Fly tying techniques aren't about knowing the obscure, they're about understanding the simple." ~ Neil Patterson
  13. Jason Trout Bum

    Posts: 666
    Edmonds, WA
    Ratings: +0 / 0
  14. TANGLES Richh

    Posts: 405
    Lake Forest Park, Washington, USA.
    Ratings: +3 / 0
    Opps, meant Nikon Cool Pix. Nice size. I dropped it once and cracked the case and got it fixed for about $60. Pretty reasonable.
    I agree, ignore the digital zoom numbers, optical zoom is what counts.
  15. msteudel Mark Steudel

    Posts: 919
    Seattle.
    Ratings: +10 / 0
    I can't wait to get my hands on the new Canon Digital Rebel .. 899 for the body! Digital SLR's are finally getting into the more reasonable range ...
  16. Fred Aldridge Member

    Posts: 128
    Everett
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    I too found that repairing my Canon S30 cost almost the same as buying a new one. Instead I bought an Olympus Stylus 300. It isn't waterproof but is advertised as weather resistant. So far no problems with taking pictures with wet hands. It's 3.2 megapixels and they do have one at 4.2 meg. It takes an extremely small xd picture card, about the size of a postage stamp. I did upgrade to a 128m card as they only provide a 16m with the camera. The pictures have turned out very well. I recently took a bunch of shots at a friends wedding and they've made several 8 x 10's from them.:beer2
  17. Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Posts: 7,028
    Not sure
    Ratings: +1,016 / 0
    I feel the same way about digital SLRs. However, I probably won't buy one for a while until full-size CCD or CMOS chips percolate down into consumer versions. Current digital SLRs (with two exceptions, the $7500 Canon EOS 1Ds and the equally expensive Kodak/Nikon Pro 14dn)use chips that are about 2/3 the size of a 35mm film frame and which 'sees' only the center of the image. This results in an effective magnification ratio of about 1.6 times the focal length of the lens being used. So a 50mm 'normal' lens effectively becomes an 85mm, etc. That's good if you shoot a lot of telephoto shots. But a 24mm wide angle is reduced to just 35mm and it takes an expensive 13mm fisheye to yield the same angle as a 20mm lens on a film camera. I'll wait for now.



    "Fly tying techniques aren't about knowing the obscure, they're about understanding the simple." ~ Neil Patterson
  18. sportsman Active Member

    Posts: 744
    Kirkland, wa., 98034.
    Ratings: +48 / 0
    Worth a trip to FRY's electronics. New store right off 405/Sunset in Renton. If it plugs into a wall or needs batteries they HAVE it! Great place to comparison shop or even purchase. {NO, I don't work there or have any stock!}
  19. alpinetrout Banned or Parked

    Posts: 3,879
    Hiding in your closet
    Ratings: +59 / 0
  20. Sisu Banned or Parked

    Posts: 92
    some where cool,usa
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    Either the 400 or the s230 is nice and both can be purchased with a waterproof case. The nice thing about the s230 is that it’s smaller than a pack of filter less Camels. I use it for rock coming to get some very nice shots. (3.2 meg.) It’s all personal choice though. I chose Canon because it’s the only one with a Stainless Steel case. Stainless beats plastic and Al any day in my book, but then I'm a stubborn Finn.
    Sisu, its what America needs