Digital Cameras

[Smokin Joe]

What type of Digital Camera do you use?

I'm looking to pick up a new Digital Camera I would like the type of quality that The Reaper and MilitaryMoron have displayed around here.

Any recommedations?

[militarymoron]

SJ, i have a sony mavica CD400 (4 megapixels). the replacement model is the CD500 (5 megs) which is cheaper than my older model:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/cd500.html

it's about the size of a fullsize 35mm SLR, but quite light. the reason i chose the mavica is the mini-CD storage, as opposed to a flash card or microdrive. it's not as compact, but i can live with it, and i've had great use out of this camera over the past two years. it's got a zeiss lens, with exceptional clarity. but as you know, the ultimate quality of the photo depends on the photographer, with lighting being the most important factor IMHO.

this same question was asked by mad dog on tactical forums, and i went over the advantages and disadvantages of the mini-CD storage. here's the link to the thread:
http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum74/HTML/000288.html

jeff (USMC03) from the LF, TF, AW and arf.com forums bought a CD500 on my recommendation and has been very happy with it - he's been posting gun porn pics all over. shoot him an email at Crpntr74@cs.com for a 2nd opinion.

what will work for you depends on your requirements. if you're looking for a small, compact camera, then mini-CD media is not going to be your choice.
HTH,
cheers,
MM

[The Reaper]

I needed a small, compact model and was on a budget, so I wound up with a 2MP Fuji 2600.

Not a bad camera of the point and shoot variety.

If I was doing this professionally, I would go with one of the ones mm mentioned.

HTH.

TR

[Sacamuelas]

Originally posted by The Reaper
I ...was on a budget.
HTH.
TR


LOL You on a budget??? I can't help but laugh at that one Sir. Judging from all the personally owned gun, knife, and equipment pictures you have graced us with online, I would have to say using the term budget just doesn't seem to do you justice. :D I think you should refer to your situation as more of an "unlimited personal spending stipend". You must have decided that you didn't want a fancy camera...

Joe-
For net and home useage, most of the 4-5 megapixel cameras will be more than you should need. That being said, I would focus on the actual lens equipped on the models you are looking at for purchase.

Completely disregard the "digital" zoom number... the actual lens zoom is the only one that is important.

I have seen Sony, HP, and Olympus digital cameras all function for what you want. 4-5 Mg pixel and then cost,size,lens and accessories (like a docking station) are what I would look for. Good luck

[The Reaper]

Originally posted by Sacamuelas
LOL You on a budget??? I can't help but laugh at that one Sir. Judging from all the personally owned gun, knife, and equipment pictures you have graced us with online, I would have to say using the term budget just doesn't seem to do you justice. :D I think you should refer to your situation as more of an "unlimited personal spending stipend". You must have decided that you didn't want a fancy camera...


Doc (I use that term loosely):

I am in my mid-40s, and was single until I was in my mid-30s. I spent my money back then on gear, not ex-wife support payments. Most of my hardware is pre-ban/marriage.

I have several high end 35mm Nikon SLRs that I used to use professionally, and a couple of point and shoot 35mms for handy family use. I decided to try digital without wasting a lot of money, and got the equivalent of a point and shoot. The extra $200 for a 3-4 MP camera would have been would have been the equivalent of 150 rounds of .50 BMG or 1000 rounds of 5.56mm ammo. Priorities.

My next digicam will be higher end, but still not the equivalent of an SLR. Too inconvenient and bulky, not likely to be handy for anything but studio shooting. I plan to stick with the point and shoots.

I do a lot of research before I make an investment in gear, and hopefully choose right. If I buy every two or three years, I expect that I can buy a camera with twice the features for roughly the same price.

"unlimited personal spending stipend"? Hardly. I am a soldier with a family to support. When it comes to gear, I research, shop around, save, and buy the best that I can afford that meets my needs. My life can depend on it.

BTW, I really appreciate mm, eggroll and all of the other guys who runs T&E sites and report on their experiences. It saves me a lot of time and money if I can eliminate a number of the candidates right off the bat. Good show, guys!

TR

[Smokin Joe]

Here is what I have been using:

Its a fujifilm finepix 3.2 megapixels, produces images 2048x1536, w/ a 3.2 optical zoom. I have found that the camera doesn't collect enough light for up close shots (as evidence of the photos I have posted here). Additionally it gets pretty grainy when I print photos over 5x7.

Thanks for the info Gentlemen. Cool Camera MM, but its a little out of my price range, I'm looking more around the 200-300 range.

TR how do you produce such great photos with a 2.0 megapixel camera?

[The Reaper]

Experience, shooting at the max resolution setting, filling up the frame to minimize cropping, and lighting.

I reduce the pics at least 50% to fit them in the size limit here.

TR

[militarymoron]

even though my camera will take up to 4 mp's, i'm usually shooting at the 2nd to lowest resolution (1280x960) for web photos. sometimes i'll shoot at 1600 for printed stuff, but i've actually never had to use it at the max resolution of 2272. in fact, i did the photography for the 4 ft tall banners for the buffertech booth at the SHOT show, and all those enlargements were made from 1600 resolution pics.
if most of your applications are for snapping pics for the web and printing no larger than 5x7, you don't really need a hi-res digital camera. but one thing you may not get with a compact camera is the variety of settings, or light metering options, which can be important.
like others have pointed out here, the lens is important, and even more so is the lighting. get more light on your subject and your pics won't come out so grainy. it's always better to shoot with a bit more light than not enough. i always adjust my photos in adobe photoshop anyways. but you'll learn from experience, as TR pointed out. learning is something that will never stop. i'm only in the infant stages of product photography, and haven't even gotten into the realm of the 'professionals'. however, what i've found out is that you don't always need all that expensive equipment to take decent photos - a lot can be done on a shoestring budget and a little ingenuity. i don't have a studio - all my pics are taken in the bedroom, living room or outdoors. you'd laugh at some of the techniques i use. instead of spending $500 on a hotbox (the studio standard lighting diffuser for product photography), i made my own out of a paper grocery bag, tape, and tracing paper. but i did find it necessary to invest about $150 in daylight-balanced studio fluorescent lights, otherwise i'd be a slave to dayllight.
another cheap, simple tip that goes a long way to improving clarity is to use a tripod as much as possible. all my product photography is done with a tripod. if light levels are a bit low, i set the auto timer and let it take the pic to minimize shake. you'll find that the quality of your pics can improve substantially.

sure, i wish my camera were more compact, but i was used to carrying around a fullsize nikon 35mm SLR anyways (which was heavier). for snapshots, i had a olympus stylus. but those two cameras have been untouched ever since i went digital. i ain't going back.

TR - thanks for the kind words.
cheers,
MM

[Sacamuelas]

Good point.. If accurate color representation is needed then color corrected bulbs are definitely beneficial as MM stated.

They can be found much cheaper than they used to be. Check your Lowes/Home depot for availability. I used to have to purchase mine (large tube 48� fluorescents) for operatory lighting from specialty makers as color/shade selection is vitally important in my field. Now I can get them MUCH cheaper…

I think I saw regular 60-100 watt bulbs in a Walmart that are close to 96% corrected to sunlight.

[militarymoron]

let me clarify on the lighting - the $150 was for a lighting kit, which included two daylight bulbs (the bulbs are $15 each), stands, and reflectors. you can buy the bulbs alone and use them in a desktop lamp at a pinch.
these are the bulbs:
http://store.yahoo.com/greenbatteries-store/51comfluorbu.html
this is the kit:
http://store.yahoo.com/greenbatteries-store/digtabstudtw.html

my very first product photography gig paid for the entire kit.
here are some examples and what i used for lighting for each of them (username and password are both 'mm' to view pics):

desklamp and inova flashlight for 2nd light source (http://www.militarymorons.com/mmphoto/img/mtmod10.jpg)
outdoor lighting (http://www.militarymorons.com/mmphoto/img/tube.jpg)
daylight balanced studio light kit (http://www.militarymorons.com/mmphoto/img/lmt1.jpg)
daylight from a window, a desklamp and a flashlight (http://www.militarymorons.com/mmphoto/img/artsy.jpg)
hope that helps give you some ideas.
cheers,
MM

[Smokin Joe]

It does thanks MM.

I have zero training or experience with photography so I will defiently use any advice. I think I just need to play around setup shots, and take lots of shots.

Thanks again for the advice all I will not be buying a new camera yet. I will instead try and become a better photographer with what I have.

[militarymoron]

Originally posted by Smokin Joe
Thanks again for the advice all I will not be buying a new camera yet. I will instead try and become a better photographer with what I have.
excellent decision! :D
you could post some pics here or email them and i (or anyone else) could give you our humble .02 and critique them for photography technique, and provide any tips that we think might help, if needed. i've done that before for friends and find that the most common difficulty that most people have is with lighting.
cheers,
MM

[Smokin Joe]

Thank you MM for the advice and offer I will defiently take you up on it.

I'm uploading some pics right now I just took of my new Aimpoint and I will post them in the Aimpoint v Eotech thread I started in the weapons forum.

[ktek01]

I use a Sony DSC-P51 2.0 MP I think I paid about $300 for it 2 or 3 years ago, cameras in that range can be had for under $200 now. 3.2 is probably more than most of us will ever need, unless you want to print lots of 8X10 or larger. One thing I would want though is more optical zoom, the digital just enlarges the pixels which will make it very grainy the more you blow it up. I like the memory sticks on the Sony, on the max setting a 128 stick will hold 133 pictures (with a 2.0 MP camera) on 640X480 it will hold over 700. One program I like a lot is Roxio Photo Suite 5. Only $29 and it lets you upload from the camera, and all the photos on your PCs hardrive, edit, print, archive, etc. I like the CD burner options, you can put albums on a CD that you can play on a CD-R capable DVD player and watch them on your TV, also can add music to them. They have a website it can upload them to so family and friends can view the pictures (password protected) and even order prints from if they like. I took pictures at my sisters wedding last year and sent everyone the CDs, they were a big hit.

[lrd]

Does anyone (besides me) have problems keeping the battery charged on their digital camera?

[ktek01]

Originally posted by lrd
Does anyone (besides me) have problems keeping the battery charged on their digital camera?

Mine are a pain, and you cant use regular AAs in it. Needs the special 1.2v "digital" AAs instead of the regular 1.5v IIRC.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally posted by lrd
Does anyone (besides me) have problems keeping the battery charged on their digital camera?

If one were to keep a second battery in the charger one would not find themselves in this situation.... (hint) If you use the camera that much get a stand alone charger and another set of batteries, you will never be in need again.;)

TS

[The Reaper]

Mine has a 128MB card and on a fresh set of MH batteries, will take over 100 pictures at Fine Res.

I have three sets of MH AA batteries and they are more than sufficient.

TR

[lrd]

Thanks for the hints, guys. :)

I have a friend who took several hundred pictures at our last fly-in without changing the battery.

I can take, maybe, 10 pictures before my battery goes dead. I put a new one in and it hasn't changed. I have a Kodak DX3700.

I just seems like I should be able to take more than 10 pictures without changing the battery.

[ktek01]

10 is bad, mine will take over 100 before the bats die, even while using the flash a lot.

[ktek01]

Saw some newer models the other day, if I was looking again I would take a hard look at these two.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=1058188656320&skuId=5805934&type=product&productCategoryId=cat04002

3.2 MP 6X Optical Zoom $299

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=1055770478662&skuId=5686947&type=product&productCategoryId=cat04002

3.1 MP 10X Optical Zoom $399

If I had the money to blow I would want this one

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=1061769822853&skuId=5992848&type=product&cmp=%20%20

6.3 MP SLR Type IIRC Will Use Regular Cannon EOS Lenses $999
Another 6 months to a year and it may be quite reasonable though.

[eggroll]

All

Check out the following URL
some good reviews and decision points to consider.


http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp

[SilentObserver]

I have a Fujifilm S5000. I have had it for about 3 months now and so far it has been easy to use, 3.1 million effective pixels, 22 X Zoom, and numerous settings for action pics and short movie clips with sound. The battery life while taking pictures has been great, the real drain comes from downloading the images to the computer. Like I said I've only had it for a short time but so far have no complaints. I think it runs around 250-300 dollars.

SO