Digital cameras

[Howard 13]

Norrie:

Hi Guys, My input , I got a Kodak DX4900, 4million pixels from my wife for xmas last year, and am over the moon with it. its only a x2 zoom, but is doing the biz ok. It was £400, but in the sales £200.The printer I use is an Epsom 760, which has done a great job for me. The quality of pic is (I think) great depending on the paper used.

That's the same camera as mine. Although pleased with the quality of the shots, don't you find the software is a real pain, the way you've got to save the shots?

 

It's also good with the charging dock so you know its always fully charged and ready to go.

 

HB.

[Apache]

Another point is that if you have a camera that you plug in to download the photos, it is worth gettign a card reader as it is so much quicker.

[Peter Sharpe]

I thought I had a bargain from Aldi when I bought a Traveler (correct spelling) 3.3 megapixel camera for about £184. I also bought a 64mb flash card for about £35, which holds more pictures that I am ever likely to take in a session. I've never heard of a 16mb card only holding one picture, so it makes me wonder if the camera dogfish is using doesn't actually recognise that the card is installed, and is only using its internal memory.

Using the A4 size I often get dropouts in low light conditions, but in A5 size it is perfectly ok if the light conditions are perfect. The worse characteristic is the two stage shutter release, which sometimes leaves me not knowing if it has taken a photo or not. The self-timer process is a nightmare, and I have sometimes had to take about ten or more attempts before it decides to work - not a good idea if you have a carp out of the water. It is hopeless in any kind of backlight. There is an over-ride, but it is quite a lengthy process, and has to be re-set for every shot. Even then, it still often leaves the subject in silhouette.

At work we have a Canon Coolpix 2.2 megapixel camera (it cost about £1000 a couple of years ago), and the pictures are of far better quality, and can even be used for some of the smaller pictures in the magazine. If you are going to buy a camera, you should insist on taking a few photos in difficult light conditions to see how the automatic metering compares, as I think this is where the real difference in quality lies.

 

[ 27. July 2003, 01:42 PM: Message edited by: Peter Sharpe ]

[poledark]

Peter, one TIFF image at 2048xi536 takes up almost 11Mb so you will only get one pic on a 16mb card.

Rethinking my earlier post I would use TIFF if I was going for best quality print, but I am not sure that the printer would be up to reproducing the number of pixels!

 

Den

[dogfish]

Peter

The camera I use is a Kodak DC4800.The example I gave is for a 3.1 MP uncompressed TIFF which requires 9170 KB. Using a JPEG image at 3.1 MP takes only 960 KB. I was using this as an example. I usually find using 1.6 MP JPEG fine for images on my PC.This requires only 550 KB. Otherwise I generally use 3.1 MP High Compression JPEG which takes up only 480 KB.I have never tried to produce an A4 photo. I do not Know what would be best foe this. Small ptints are no problem.

What this discussion demonstrates is how difficult it is to decide what you need .I still feel more at home with good 'old Fashioned' slides.

Cheers.

[Floater]

No desktop inkjet or lazer printer is capable of printing full A4 images at anything like that of the quality of print you get from a film cameras process. You need full CMYK postscript thermal dye-sublimation to come close. Not even PS colour lazer compares on any type of paper. To get that quality costs over £1000 for an A4 printer and the materials and consumables are likewise costly. So even a relatively cheap 2MP Nikon Coolpix will create an image better than what you can print at home. You also need to consider colour matching your monitor and printer so what you see on screen is what you get on paper which is easier said than done on a PC. Macs are better for that.

[dogfish]

This is getting pretty technical eh!

On printers.My wife has produced some lovely 10x6 prints from scanned 6x4 prints ( on jessops/agfa print film).These have been good enough to frame.They were printed on an ordinary HP930C deskjet printer and tweaked through Photoshop.These are good quality but are either sunsets or silhouettes and I do not Know how they would look if more detail were needed.This may though be an alternative way forward We have never tried witha digital image although I now intend to give it a go.Incidentally the print colour varies enormously depending which photo paper you use- yet another consideration.

[Peter Sharpe]

Another point to consider is that images printed on a home printer are enormously more expensive that those reproduced from 35mm by many of the postal print services. I only use my digital images for use on-screen. If scanners capable of taking slides were more affordable this might be the best compromise.

Meanwhile, I compromise by taking digital images at 1024 x 768mm. Don't ask me why, but when viewed in Paintshop Pro at 1:1, they appear on-screen at approximately 2700 x 1700mm at 300dpi. On the highest setting, each one takes up 2304k (It only produces jpg). Don't ask me about that because I have absolutely no idea.

[Alan Pearce]

Thanks guys some interesting points to consider. I was thinking of buying an SLR digicam, either a nikon or fuji body so that I could use my existing Nikon lenses. However having read all of the latest digicam mags out at the moment, I was impressed with the reports on the Cannon G5. But it is not an SLR. What image do you get from non SLR cameras in the fixed view finders?

 

I'm looking for at least 5mp and 4 to 6 optical zoom. My budget for camera, printer, card reader and extra memory cards is around a grand.

 

I also understand that purchasing from USA web sites is a hell of a lot cheaper, are there any snags to look out for?

 

Alan.

[dogfish]

Alan

The image I get from my Kodak DC4800 is very like that from a compact Ie.line up within the marks.What I do find though is that the camera takes a picture much larger than that I see.I do not Know if this is the same with all digital cameras. I have never bought camera stuff from the US so do not know how it compares.I have bought SLRs and lenses from Singapore and these were cheap.I do not Know if this is possible through mail order.

Good luck with your purchase.