Digital Cameras (PSR)

[xboat]

eldo -

NICE! thanks a ton for your time. you knew it, i was testing on the couch. learning more by the minute here...

oh yeah, for as thick as that manual is, it hasn't helped me out very much.

[midget]

I usually shoot with an EOS-1D. I'm probably going to buy that camera on those days I don't feel like carrying around the big ass backpack and having the extra 40lbs on my 130 lb midget frame making me ski like a gaper......always nice to have a camera, this one fits anywhere, and takes awesome shots.....i've convinced 6 of my friends to buy it and they do not regret it one bit.

As far as MP ratings, a good properly exposed and sharp 2.1 mp WILL give you a very good 8x10 print from that camera. Probably going to buy one of those soon enough.

[GT40]

Originally posted by midget
I usually shoot with an EOS-1D. I'm probably going to buy that camera on those days I don't feel like carrying around the big ass backpack and having the extra 40lbs.

Hey Midget, when you're really tired of carrying or shooting with the 1D, let me know. I'll be happy to take it off your hands.

[funkendrenchman]

Originally posted by jibij
i've got an s230 that is awesome! it's by far the least expensive of the 3 digi cams i own and probably the one i use the most. it's portability/quality are unbeatable. if they could somehow cram a 10X optical zoom into it, it'd be the perfect ski camera.

I have the same one. That's what all the pics I post on here are taken with. You can take pics with almost no delay if you hold down the button half way to auto focus, then when you want to take the pic, push it down the rest of the way. I also wish it had more zoom though.

[midget]

Originally posted by GT40
Hey Midget, when you're really tired of carrying or shooting with the 1D, let me know. I'll be happy to take it off your hands.

Heh, doubtful since I sold my race prepared Scirocco to buy that stupid thing! If ya sherpa it for me you could shoot all you want with it though! hehehe

[Foggy_Goggles]

SD100 vs S400

I honestly know very little about cameras or 'puter bidness. I want to be able to take skiing and kayaking shots and sightseeing, senery type stuff. I like the short video features.

Will the differnce between a 2X and 3x zoom be a huge deal?

If I don't plan on blowing up any bigger than 8X10, will I notice the difference between 3.2 and 4 mega deals?

Is there anyother major differences? The 400 is about $150 more.

I'll be taking the camera down the grand which will be 21 days without electricity. Any reason that a solar charger wouldn't work? Is there any advantage to having 2 memory cards instead of 1 huge one?

Thanks nerds.

[xboat]

foggy - you know what i have(S400). a buddy was in the market for something and i told him all about the SD100. i feel that it is plenty of camera for most people, including myself. will you notice the difference between 3.2 and 4 mp in a 8x10 print from your desktop?? i seriously doubt it. no way.

if you're the kind of person that wants something solid and is a great point and shoot camera that will take vid clips, this is your cam. take that extra $150 clams and buy yourself a USB memory card reader for easy transfer (worth it's weight in gold ), get a 256+ mb SD card and a spare battery (very important IMO) and a decent case because it doesn't come with shit.

check one out in person if you haven't yet and let me know what you think.

peace!

[backpack]

I don't know about anyone here, but I've blown up some of my 4mp shots to 16x20, and at that size compression artifacts can become an issue if you're shooting at something other than RAW or JPEG Superfine.

In order to take all my shots on the highest resolution/lowest compression settings, I took two 512 cards, and a 256 and 128 card with me to Ecuador last semester... and filled all of them up on two or three day trips. Given, most people don't take as many photos as I do (about 22,000 in 4 months), but you should definitely think about getting a couple 256s, at least, for those long weekend trips where you can't download. It's also always good to have an extra card in case one of them dies or has some other error that you can't fix on the road.

The extra battery is definitely a good investment as well, so you'll always have one that you know is fully charged. I considered a third battery for longer trips, but if you don't use the LCD, two should be enough.

The s400 is a great camera... took a lot of abuse and still took photos (though only with some manual lens extension and other tricks at the end) until the end of my trip. It will fit into just about any pocket and gives you little excuse to leave it behind.

[The AD]

Originally posted by xboat
take that extra $150 clams and buy yourself a USB memory card reader for easy transfer

Those things are dirt cheap now, too. I've seen "free after rebate" deals on them.

[Foggy_Goggles]

More jonginsh Qs -

The sd100 has a SD/MMC memory card while the s400 uses Compact Flash (Type I). What's the difference? Do I care?

The max res on the s400 is 320X240. Is that enough for the stuff you guys do like posting clips on the web etc?

The UBS memory card reader plug into the usb port and accepts the memory card from the camera instead of plugging in the camera itself. This uploads the data faster, yes? Are these compatible with compact flash and sd/mmc?

Keep the info coming

[Spats]

I did this video with the Powershot A70 (RERUN: the Cirque video from last year):

http://www.eengoedidee.nl/videoz/ski...irque_5603.avi

It'll take even bigger movies: 640x480 @ 15fps, audio, 30 seconds max which is fine for skiing clips. 320x240 will go indefinitely.

It's a great little camera and has insane battery life: I've got over 200 pictures turning it on and off after every picture, over 300 otherwise. About double the life of any other digicam. Plus it takes AAs so if your rechargeables run out you can use alkalines in a pinch.

Only trouble is the Axx series is a bit delicate. More than one maginion has broken theirs by dropping it.

[Superstar Punani]

Originally posted by KQ
(Possibly Skiing Related )

http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/...s/prod_img.jpg

Tell me everything you know about those pocket sized (or credit card sized) digital cameras.

What do you like/dislike about the one you own?

Would you purchase the same again or go with a different one?

Did you get the weather resistant version?

Best prices you've ever seen?

Pixels?

Help a girl out here!!!

I have the Sony DSC-P32 ($200) that I'm stoked with.
3.2 megapixels

Likes: Easy to use, cheap, good quality pictures, small (easily smuggled into strip bars, porn conventions, etc)
Dislikes: Nighttime / clubbing / home-made XXX shots can be blurry.

Pics taken with the Sony DSC P32
[Shameless self promo/RERUN]
sample pics from Splat using the Sony DSC P32
http://www.biglines.com/photos/blpic16306.jpg

Porn for the sake of porn
http://www.tetongravity.com/usergall..._14-teanna.jpg

Disadvantages: nighttime / low light conditions make for blurry shots
http://www.tetongravity.com/usergall...0-gogogirl.jpg

[The AD]

Nice job showing the versatility of the camera, Punani!

Hope you can put that thing to good use in Cham.

[Steven S. Dallas]

I just got a Nikon Coolpix 3100- I haven't really put it through the paces yet, but the picture quality is excellent, really sharp (which was the biggest concern for me). The next best thing about it is that the assload of features are easy to use and access. A lot of cameras that I saw at the same price ($250) had the same bells and whistles, but when I played with them in the store it was hard to remember how to use the different settings, or you had to go through a couple of menus to get to them. This one is really easy to use in that regard.

Cons: only comes with a 16mb card (which is good for only 30 pics or so), need separate charger and batteries. Some of the slightly more expensive cameras will come with a bunch more memory and an ac adaptor so you can just charge the batteries by plugging the camera in; these are things that you will need to upgrade to soon so you might just want to spend the extra $ up front.

[Steven S. Dallas]

Originally posted by backpack
most people don't take as many photos as I do (about 22,000 in 4 months...

Most states don't take as many photos as you do.

[Snow Dog]

Originally posted by Punani
Disadvantages: nighttime / low light conditions make for blurry shots
http://www.tetongravity.com/usergall...0-gogogirl.jpg

The pictures are blurry because your hands are shaking. You've got to learn to relax.

[FreakofSnow]

Going to get my package from FedEX that contains lil beaut in a few minutes:

http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/...s/prod_img.jpg

can't wait to shoot w/ that beaaaatch

[Buzzworthy]

Originally posted by FreakofSnow
Going to get my package from FedEX that contains lil beaut in a few minutes:

http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/...s/prod_img.jpg

can't wait to shoot w/ that beaaaatch

OOOOHHHHHH!!!

I likey likey!!!

[Mcwop]

Here is a picture of Casper Bowl (in Sepia) taken from the bottom of the Jackson Gondola (about 3000+ feet away). Shows the power of the Panasonic Lumix FZ1's 12x zoom lense.

http://homepage.mac.com/mcwop/.Pictu...8E599B11D8.jpg

[summit]

YAYA A70! I love mine! 2.4FPS and 640x480 15fps
Controls are awesome, lens awesome, features insanely awesome, manual abilities awesome, image quality awesome!

I'd only trade it for an G5 G3 A80 10D 1Ds 1D or 1D II (NEW! $4500!).

The only complaint I have with it right now is the LCD... its too small, too low res, doesn't reproduce the contrast range of a stored image, and sucks in bright light. I wish the lens was a 24-135mm equivelent instead of a 35-105mm and I wish it were faster and could stop down past f/8. I also wish for 30fps but that would require insane buffers.



I disagree that 2.1mp will produce a good 8x10. 2.1mp is as low as I would go on a casual 4x6 (2.1mp gives less than 300dpi at 4x6).

I consider 8mp to be what is needed for 8x10 although one can get away with a 6 MP if properly exposed with low image noise.

[backpack]

Originally posted by SummitCo 1776

I disagree that 2.1mp will produce a good 8x10. 2.1mp is as low as I would go on a casual 4x6 (2.1mp gives less than 300dpi at 4x6).

I consider 8mp to be what is needed for 8x10 although one can get away with a 6 MP if properly exposed with low image noise.

An 8x10 is only 7.2 million pixels at 300dpi... a 4 megapixel camera can put out good 8x10s if it's reasonably sharp. Heck, I've made good looking 16x20s (28.8M pixels printed) from a 4MP G2... though only with really, really sharp source files... I also resample them to the correct resolution for printing myself so I know the quality won't be screwed up by a crappy nearest-neighbor job by the printing service. (I also try to use ISO 50 most of the time, so noise isn't much of an issue for me) Also, depending on your camera's aspect ratio, you may have to crop off a good bit to fit an 8x10.

Anyway, 4mp is enough for amazing 8x10s if the original is good, and 3 might be ok, but I don't see a 2-megapixel camera resolving enough detail to make an 8x10 worth it, either.

[summit]

8x10 is 4:5 and digital cameras are almost all 3:4 and some are 2:3 as well. This means you must crop and start from a image of more than 7.2MP if you want to crop to one with 7.2mp of data

[backpack]

Originally posted by backpack
Also, depending on your camera's aspect ratio, you may have to crop off a good bit to fit an 8x10.

Originally posted by SummitCo 1776
8x10 is 4:5 and digital cameras are almost all 3:4 and some are 2:3 as well. This means you must crop and start from a image of more than 7.2MP if you want to crop to one with 7.2mp of data

Common steps suggested when replying to a post:

1. Read post
2. Think
3. Reply

The following is not suggested:

1. Skim one or two lines
2. Reply

[summit]

shaddup biatch! i'm a lazy and preachy mofo!

[backpack]

Originally posted by SummitCo 1776
8x10 is 4:5 and digital cameras are almost all 3:4 and some are 2:3 as well. This means you must crop and start from a image of more than 7.2MP if you want to crop to one with 7.2mp of data

Even so, you can have great prints that have resolutions greater than the image files put out by your camera. As long as you've got good data, resampling the image with a good algorithm can yield excellent results. You don't need to have 7.2M original source data points to have a good print.