Norman_Clyde Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 What is everyone's opinion on digital cameras? I have not been inclined to spring 300 bucks, which all the salespeople tell me is absolutely mandatory for adequate resolution, because I figure in six months I'll be able to buy the same for 200. I'm still using a huge clunky 1980's 35 mm, which I tend to leave behind or not bother to haul out of my pack. I'm sure that some of you must know where to get a 2.1 megapixel or higher, for a reasonable price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 This is a copout - I still don't use a digital camera simply to get the pictures I want, it's not $300 bucks, it's more like $800. I want a through the lense system so I can directly control the composition. Too many digital cameras just don't get the colors right also. With prints, even if the developer fucks them up, you can perform corrections during and after the scanning process. Point and shoot cameras (print or digital) are only good for parties... Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fleblebleb Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 Pshah. Digital point-and-shoot cameras are absolutely great. Each image is free, so you can return from a trip with literally hundreds of images. Then you can throw them on the web to share with your buddies. I never use my manual SLR film camera anymore except when I shoot slides. They're just different tools, good for different things. Plus, an SLR has that clunky form factor and weighs a ton. Small digital cameras like the Nikon 775 or the Canon Elph are light, fit in a pocket and quite weather resistant. Sounds like a good deal to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
To_The_Top Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 I have a Olympus digital camera, (well actually my girlfriend stole it) and I think the camera is great. I would look for a camera that had atleast 2.1 mega pixel (to enlarge a good shot, you want a higher resoltion picture, or if you print it.) The upsides have been mentioned, to add a point it is truly a point and shoot, even in dark. Downside, it will act like the batteries are low or dead in cold temps (keep in jacket). Another thing is that I would tie in the camera, because they are slippery, with gloves on.Also, they are into price control, so I wouldn't expect the price to drop too much in a short time. It is a price regulated market.TTT [ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: To The Top ] [ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: To The Top ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 I'm in the market for a digital myself. I'm a Nikon person so it will be an 885 or the new 5000. This will be used when I don't need to shoot a whole roll of film, when I want to go light as possible, or just messing around. A five megapixel camera will give you a perfect 11x14 print without having to go to town in Photoshop (by the way PS7 beta for OS X rocks!). Of course the 5000 is very expensive, and with anything digital what is top of the line now will be bottom in a year. Digital or slide film, I will be doing all my stuff using a digital darkroom. The new consumer slide scanners are starting to rival those of drum scans. The control this technique offers you is amazing. A interesting side note. When the Bill and Monica scandle hit the streets you remember the images of him hugger her at a rally. Interesting those shots came from a film camera, because the guys shooting digital dumped their images off their media to save space not knowing how significant they would be in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icegirl Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 We have the Sony DSC-S85. Yeah, like 800+ bucks (got it for work). Although it's a 4.1 megapixel, a 35mm slide is still a better. It is good (see the boulder picts on my web site) I'm not complaining, but... My recommendation, if you are looking for point and shoot, go 35mm slide point and shoot. You may get that one in a million shot, and unless you go spend a few thousand bucks (and I'm still not convinced the technology is there yet) you will have a sub-standard photo for the mags if you go digital. You might think I'm full of it, but when I used to Scuba Dive a lot, I had a Motor Marine II, a "cheap" underwater camera (1/3 the price of a Nikonos). I bought all it's accessories, and low and behold, I actually got several pictures that were indeed published, even though they were not taken with the "top of the line" gear. BUT, I did take use slide film, just in case. Same shot with a digital, even now, 5 years later with technological advances... I don't think so. My ex-boyfriend had a reasonable point and shoot, and he had some incredible climbing pictures. I would give my eye-teeth for some of the shots he got, just because his camera was small enough, and cheap enough that he wasn't worried about taking it along and using it. I don't think I'd take our Sony on some nasty, wet, cold trip... I'd have to get it an underwater housing before I felt comfortable risking it, and that would add to the weight and I'd probable never take it anyway. (for some reason, I just don't think frozen waterfall damage would be covered by warranty) Just my .02 from taking pictures in some of the most camera unfriendly environments around for the past 12 years. Happy image capturing, Icegirl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthumbs Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 I use that funky Cannon Elf Sport (around $200) that's waterproof and built like a tank. Takes the cartridge film (forget what it's called). The pics. aren't bad, and I live on the water and am real big into slalom waterskiing, so it's awesome around the water. Whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 I do conceed point and shoots are great for there size and durability. But, a point and shoot wouldn't have been able to get me my sunset shots from Dickerman last fall, among others. Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeclimb9 Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 The Yashica T4 is a 35mm in a small (cigarette-box sized) package with a top quality lens. The downside is that the lens is fixed --no zoom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 I've climbed with my Canon PowerShot 20 (3.3M)for about two years now. It weighs 12 oz. and slightly larger than a pack of cigarettes. For summer rock climbs I keep it in a padded chalk bag and hardly know its there. In winter its kept in a breast pocket, in a ziplocked bag. I don't aspire to publish my photos, just share them with friends. There's a learning curve, as with anything. From my experience, great photos have a lot to do with angle, timing, and lighting, which makes it harder to catch if you're actively climbing or belaying. My better pictures came from 3 person climbs leaving me free to shoot. I put them on a commercial website where I can order prints and friends can visit. Problem now is this site went down several weeks ago without any word from them. I hope they're just upgrading the site, but its a sore point with me right now as I have lots of holiday shots to upload. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crack_addict Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 forget digital. forget and 35mm. what you need is a medium format rig. get yourself a $20.00, plastic fantastic Holga. it's lighter than any camera you'll find, has no batteries to keep warm and makes images that rule the universe. you can find one at pro photo in pdx orthese guys have them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman_Clyde Posted January 12, 2002 Author Share Posted January 12, 2002 the camera I would most like to use is a square format non-SLR-- I don't know the official name for these-- it is WWII vintage, one I inherited from my grandfather. This is the kind you have to look down into, but which has a ground glass instead of a viewfinder. I took it to a camera store after bringing it home, and they told me that no one makes film anymore to fit this size, because it's smaller format than the usual of this type. Major disappointment. I'd get a bigger one but they cost too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomdav Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 IMO, Digital cameras are the best thing since sliced bread... As far as how many MP to get, it depends. If all you want to do is post on the web and print 5x7's, a 2MP camera will do fine, but I would strongly recommend spending the extra money and getting a 3-4MP camera, particularly if you want to print 8x10's or need to crop. You're gonna be pretty pissed when you take that awesome shot with your 2MP toy and can't frame it as a film quality 8x10 (like you can with 4MP). As far as brand, I'd pass on Nikon. They had their day with the Nikon 9xx series and sat on their butt for the last two years only to be left in the dust by Canon and Sony. The holdout Nikon purists themselves are even panning the new CP 5000 which should tell you something. Sony is a good brand, but is known for oversaturating colors, particularly reds. I'd like Oly a lot more if they didn't use smartmedia. You really can't go wrong with Canon. Most accurate colors, uses compact flash (not dumbmedia or betamax memory$tick), microdrive capable, flip out LCD, hotshoe, minimal chromatic abberations (still a problem with the Oly's), RAW format, great rechargeable battery, remote control, and I could go on and on. As far as getting a good price, you only need to know a bargain sleuth like myself. There were some fantastic internet deals at Christmas being able to quadruple scoop with the $100 MSN Passport Holiday reward, $100 off your next purchase gift certificates at some stores, Amex Blue pricematching, cash back via ebates.com, etc. All said, I got my Canon 4MP G2 for less than $350 at Christmas (and it still can be had for < $525 tax free, email me if you want details). In my opinion, the Canon G2 is hands down the best digital camera out there right now for under $1000. If you want something more pocketable, try the Canon S30 or S40. Don't take my word for it, read the reviews on the web. The best place to get digicam info is at the reviews, forums, and links over at http://www.dpreview.com. As far as weatherproofness, I've used my Canon G2 in the rain, sleet, snow, heck, it even fell into an icy cold creek with me and was immersed! Stuck it on the food dehydrator for week and far as I can tell it still takes as good shots as the day I took it out of the bag. Check out that picture below (taken after all this abuse) if you need some convincing. Now, that's not to say you shouldn't stick it in a waterproof plastic baggie. I do now! Finally, ignore anything consumer reports or computer magazines have to say. They might be capable of reviewing dishwashers and computers but not cameras. It breaks my heart when I see a couple shopping for a camera at BestBuy or CirciutCity with at an outdated, uninformed printout from cnet.com or consumer reports. Listen to the folks who know cameras and that is NOT necessarily the folks at your local camera shop either - your mileage may vary. Canon G2, F/8, 1 second shutter, no filters, straight out of the camera. [ 02-16-2002: Message edited by: tomdav ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LhotseDreems Posted January 14, 2002 Share Posted January 14, 2002 The digital camera we have {Canon Elph S110) is so far really cool, no problems with it at all. I think my favorite aspect is that you can hook it up to the TV and use it to show your pictures... no need for slides anymore. It's especially cool on the larger TV's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon Posted February 11, 2002 Share Posted February 11, 2002 Came across this today, pretty interesting. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0202/02021101foveonx3.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.