Author Topic: 1st digital camera (Read 557 times)

Nilsen · « **Reply #15 on:** September 28, 2006, 05:06:44 PM »

Good camera BlueJ.

I have an older version by the name of A510. Only 3mp but those are 3 good mps. Now that i have the DSLR camera i mostly use it for partys etc and it ususally lives in the glove box in my car. I still take the majority of the pics with it.

BlueJ1 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 28, 2006, 05:12:30 PM »

Now then..what shall I look into for memory?

P.S. Having you guys saying good buy is almost the same as bringing home a new car to your dad and him saying good buy.

Nilsen · « **Reply #17 on:** September 28, 2006, 05:26:17 PM »

I bought two 1GB Sandisk SD cards. They fit both my canon and Nikon so it was the perfect choise for me. They are cheap, reliable and fast enough.

Golfer · « **Reply #18 on:** September 28, 2006, 06:04:10 PM »

BlueJ I picked up 2 1GB cards for $18 each from Amazon.

They'll hold something like 400+ pics on my cameras max setting or do 8 minutes of video each.

Total with shipping (they arrived in 2 days) was under $50 which you can't beat in the store.

BlueJ1 · « **Reply #19 on:** September 28, 2006, 06:08:45 PM »

Thankyou kindly.

Just checking, but I can save the pictures to my computer right? Then put them on a CD-RW ?

Golfer · « **Reply #20 on:** September 28, 2006, 06:24:50 PM »

BlueJ1 · « **Reply #21 on:** September 28, 2006, 06:28:38 PM »

Thanks again.

Halo · « **Reply #22 on:** September 28, 2006, 08:45:57 PM »

(quote) Just checking, but I can save the pictures to my computer right? Then put them on a CD-RW ? (unquote)

Yeah, but don't put anything you don't want to lose ONLY on a CD-RW. When you get 300 megs or so of pics you want to permanently keep, copy them to a CD-R. And then make a CD-R backup of that CD-R.

Nothing is forever, but some things last longer than others.

ByeBye · « **Reply #23 on:** September 29, 2006, 12:12:32 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by eskimo2

The picture quality of some pocket cameras is about 95% of that of much bigger and more expensive cameras.

Do not be swayed by mega pixels.

Even 4 mp is overkill.

This is true, unless you want to print a picture. 4 mega pixels is not enough to print a good 8x10

Widewing · « **Reply #24 on:** September 29, 2006, 12:28:35 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ByeBye
This is true, unless you want to print a picture. 4 mega pixels is not enough to print a good 8x10

Sure it is... I've printed 30"x20" crisp, sharp posters from 4 megapixel cameras. Just be sure to save the image as an uncompressed Tiff image instead of a jpeg. 3 megapixels is more than adequate for an 8x10.

My regards,

Widewing

ByeBye · « **Reply #25 on:** September 29, 2006, 12:34:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
Sure it is... I've printed 30"x20" crisp, sharp posters from 4 megapixel cameras. Just be sure to save the image as an uncompressed Tiff image instead of a jpeg. 3 megapixels is more than adequate for an 8x10.

My regards,

Widewing

I highly doubt that you could get a "crisp", 20 x 30 print from a poket 4mp camera.

Widewing · « **Reply #26 on:** September 29, 2006, 11:45:31 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ByeBye
I highly doubt that you could get a "crisp", 20 x 30 print from a poket 4mp camera.

It's not a pocket digital, unless you have extremely large pockets. In this case, it's a Fuji S5100.

Image size right off the camera is 2272x1704 pixels (11.1 megs). Perfectly adequate for 20x30 prints. My 5 megapixel S5200 does beautiful 24x36 poster size prints.

A 3 megapixel camera is perfectly adequate for 8x10s. Typically, 3 megapixels will produce an image measuring 1656x1242, with 1536x1024 being ideal for 8x10 photos.

My regards,

Widewing

ByeBye · « **Reply #27 on:** September 29, 2006, 12:24:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
It's not a pocket digital, unless you have extremely large pockets. In this case, it's a Fuji S5100.

Image size right off the camera is 2272x1704 pixels (11.1 megs). Perfectly adequate for 20x30 prints. My 5 megapixel S5200 does beautiful 24x36 poster size prints.

A 3 megapixel camera is perfectly adequate for 8x10s. Typically, 3 megapixels will produce an image measuring 1656x1242, with 1536x1024 being ideal for 8x10 photos.

My regards,

Widewing

I'm talking about photo-quality prints ( like a 35mm film shot would print)

If you set your picture's print output @ 300dpi, a 3 meg image size, as viwed for print without enlarging the picture, would be around a 4x6 in size.

ChickenHawk · « **Reply #28 on:** September 29, 2006, 02:56:54 PM »

There is more to consider than just megapixle size. Megapixls are something that the marketing departments of camera companies have latched onto and programed the public with. Sensor quality and size, not to mention the lense, has more to do with a clean picture than a large megapixle count.

There is an excelent artice on sensors and picture quality Here
Here's an excerpt:
Visible light is found in the wavelengths between a 400-750nm (.4 to .75 micron). Obviously, an individual pixel (photo site) can't be anywhere near this small and still record photons. Today's smaller digicams feature sensors down to about 2.2 microns in size, and as we all know can be quite noisy. At this small size they simply can't capture enough photons as compared with their inherent noise level. DSLRs offering 8-12 Megapixel on APS sized sensors seem, therefore, to have settled in the 5-6 micron level and offer an optimum combination of resolution, low noise and moderate cost.

Full size sensors and medium format and on up can have better light gathering capabilities and can get even better noise levels than pocket cameras or even APS sensor based cameras can. An 8 or 10 megapixle digicam will not have the same print quality as an 8 or 10 megapixle DSLR. The bigger the print, the more you will notice the difference.