Camera questions

[bunglehead]

Okay, now I'm just as confused. So with a digital camera, do you have memory cards that take the place of traditional rolls of film? What if you're going on a 2 week trip? And you need an interface for your computer, right? And do you need special software? And with a 35 mm SLR, with the good models, if the battery dies, you can theoratically still take pictures, although I'm not as concerned about this. And how many pics can you get with a digital camera? Is memory related to megapixels, or is this a function of picture quality? What about shutter lag time? Is this an issue with digital cameras?

 

(ok, be nice to me, I've got an old Canon AE1 that I operate in fully manual mode, so a lot of this shizzy is new to me)

[Figger_Eight]

Yes, digital cameras use memory cards instead of regular film. You can either hook the camera up directly to your computer, or use a media card reader to pull the pix off the card (this is the better way because it won't drain the camera batteries). If you're out for a long time, you can either get more memory cards, download you pix to your computer (if you have laptop), or take your memory cards to a Kinkos or something and burn them onto a cd.

 

The number of pictures a memory card holds depends on how big you want the picture to be. For digital output, I can take over 1,000 on a 128 meg card. Bump it up to 2 Megapixels, I can get around 90, but I can print up to 5x7 (8x11 okay) photo quality on good paper.

 

Some of the better digital cameras will allow you to take multiple pictures before storing them on the disk. Is that what you mean by lag time?

[bunglehead]

Thanks, Figger!

What I mean by lag time is the time delay between when you snap the shutter button and the time the canera actually records the image.

So if I undertsand you correctly, if I have a 3MP camera, I can change the number of pixels per image?

 

How big is a typical memory card?

you can prob'ly have as many of those as you want huh?

What about lens quality? Are they just as good as old school SLR lenses? (So many questions!)

[Figger_Eight]

With the digital SLR's this lag time, called the "refresh rate" will not be as long as the point and shoots, but not as fast as a conventional shutter.

 

Yes, you can change the number of pixels per image - and the pictures don't all have to be the same size.

 

Cameras usually come with a dinky 16 meg card. Memory is getting cheaper and cheaper though, so you can load up as much memory as you want. The cards are just a little bigger than a postage stamp, so you can carry an enormous amount of memory in a really small space.

 

Digital SLRs use the same lenses as their conventional film counterparts. For example, if you already have a Canon body with a bunch of good lenses you'll only need to buy the digital SLR body.

[cj001f]

Figger_Eight said:

Yes, you can change the number of pixels per image - and the pictures don't all have to be the same size.

 

Cameras usually come with a dinky 16 meg card. Memory is getting cheaper and cheaper though, so you can load up as much memory as you want. The cards are just a little bigger than a postage stamp, so you can carry an enormous amount of memory in a really small space.

With the new camera I bought a 256mB memory card - that's about 180 pictures with my 4 megapixel camera. More than enough for a weekend (I've found since the pictures are free I'm more likely to take snaps that I think might not work out). My camera came with rechargeable battery - I've found it'll last a long weekend without much bother. Go digital - you won't look back. Especially since digital projectors are under $1k and heading down.

[PONCHO&LEFTY]

If I didn't honk digital enough I am going to again right now. I have had one for a week (slr type) and have taken more pictures then ever and tried things i wouldn't have with film things I was scared to try because of wasting film and such (i.e. different fstops, time values, and night scenes and such).

 

-One of the best things I think though is being able to set the ISO for individual shots.

[jon]

The quality of slide film and negative film has closed greatly. The one thing nice about negative film is that you have a greater exposure range, with the disadvantage of typically not having the color saturation and accuracy.

 

I bought a Canon G2 digital earlier this summer and it has been the best photographic investment I've ever made. The obvious part is that I don't have to develop film, I more or less see the pictures instantly and can make adjustments. I bought a 512 MB card with mine which allows me to take about 250 4 megapixel non-compressed images. With that many pictures I don't hesitate to take a shot and it allows me to play with composition. I have been doing a lot of exposure bracketing which has been a godsend. My friend is a pro and he shoots almost exclusively digital now, and he brackets his exposures like crazy. Weight and size of the camera is much less then a SLR. I can easily make prints of any picture either using my printer or I can order them online which is pretty cheap.

 

Disadvantages of digital. Obviously you don't get the color accuracy and saturation of a slide film. Unless you have a really high end digital they can be sluggish for shooting action type stuff and can be frusterating to use especially if you are used to a SLR. Battery life on a digital isn't great, but with mine for instance I can bang off 400 shots before I need a recharge.

 

The last disadvantage of digital is the technology is still in it's infancy. Soon they will be using a whole new type of layed CCD that will significantly raise the bar. My suggestion is to buy something that has been out for a while because you will save a lot of money and can get something that is time tested. The G2 you can find for $400 now and it is a very popular choice, there are even some pros who use this one from what I've read.

[David_Parker]

One way to compensate for slow shutter speed in digital cameras is to press the shutter half way to set the exposure and focus. Then when you fully depress, the camera fires instantly. The initial slowness comes from the camera needing to set exposure and focus first. This helps a lot for "action" photos.

[Ursa_Eagle]

A few comments:

I have a Minolta 450 SLR and a Canon S200 Digital Elph. I carry both with me on climbs. I use the digital to capture the fun shots and set up shots, etc. I use the SLR for the shots I think are gonna come out good. I've found that digital (or at least my camera) doesn't have the same exposure latitude as a film camera. I like using both, the Canon is small, light, and durable, and it still takes decent pictures, but when I know I have a good shot I break out the SLR.

 

I've heard vastly different opinions on what 35 mm film is equivalent to in terms of megapixels, anywhere from 5 or 6 to over 20, so I'm not sure what would actually be comperable. Right now I'm not convinced that digital is anywhere close to the detail and quality of film.

I think one of my friends said it best (he's an amateur photographer and shoots a large format camera). When I mentioned I wanted a digital SLR, he said something along the lines of:

If you want your pictures on your computer, get a negative/slide scanner. When you take a digital picture, you lock yourself into the current technology. 10 years down the road, camera technology will be significantly better, but your pictures will be stuck in this technology. With a film camera and a negative/slide scanner, you can always rescan your negatives/slides when the technology improves.

 

Regarding digital projectors, the resolution on them is absolutely nowhere near where a slide projector is, and it will be quite a while before they even come close. Right now projectors are typically 800x600, 1024x768, or maybe even 1280x1024, but even the last one is only 1.3 megapixels. If you want to show your pictures with a projector, you'll want to shoot slides rather than digital.

[Dru]

I was told by the IT guy at my old job, that a 35mm slide has the resolution of a 40MB digital image.

[Ursa_Eagle]

but at what compression? did he happen to give the resolution?

[David_Parker]

U-E, your comments are appropriate for professional photographers although even they are going digital. I don't think anyone here is looking to blow up their shots to fit on the wall in Grand Central station. They just want decent shots, light, easy-to-use camera's and the ability to share photos easily. Someone recently asked to see my shots from a recent climbing trip and I just handed him a disk. Pretty simple. I like my slr for what it can do, but my digital is the camera I grab for trips now.