PDA

View Full Version : 1st time buying digi...Need help?



kaykay
07-18-2004, 10:57 PM
I am on th look out for a digital camera. This will be my first digi, so I really don't have a clue where to start. Any help you can give would be great.
I am a scrapbooker, so I take tons of pictures. Here are a few things I would like:

1) doesn't have to be professional/top of the line, just want nice sharp good quality pictures.

2) Would like a zoom lens.

3) Would prefer no delay, I think it's called lag time(time between pushing the button and the picture actually taking.) I really need something that takes the pic. as soon as I click the button,(if that's possible)

And what about the amount of pictures it will hold? I heard someone mention theirs will hold something like 300 pictures at a time. What would I need to buy seperate to have this?

This is my 1st time posting here so hopefully I did this right. Thanks :)

John_Reed
07-19-2004, 07:05 AM
I am on th look out for a digital camera. This will be my first digi, so I really don't have a clue where to start. Any help you can give would be great.
I am a scrapbooker, so I take tons of pictures. Here are a few things I would like:

1) doesn't have to be professional/top of the line, just want nice sharp good quality pictures.

2) Would like a zoom lens.

3) Would prefer no delay, I think it's called lag time(time between pushing the button and the picture actually taking.) I really need something that takes the pic. as soon as I click the button,(if that's possible)

And what about the amount of pictures it will hold? I heard someone mention theirs will hold something like 300 pictures at a time. What would I need to buy seperate to have this?

This is my 1st time posting here so hopefully I did this right. Thanks :)
Don't despair, but there's a lot to be gained by first educating yourself on the ins and outs of this relatively new medium of photography. Dennis Curtin (http://www.shortcourses.com/choosing/contents.htm) offers a very good way of "learning the ropes;" try that, and then you'll be able to focus on what you really want.

kaykay
07-19-2004, 11:02 AM
Wow lots of information! It has defiently gave me a whole new outlook. I thought I could just ask "what's the best camera" and go out and but it. But there's a whole lot more to it. There's not just one single "best camera".
So I'm off to continue my research to find the best camera for me :)

One thing though, I pretty much understood all the reading material, but a little confused on the image format, or compression ration. I want really good pictures, or at least the quality of a film camera. But if I understood correctly, The highest quality is almost impossible to send & slow to open, edit, & save. And wasn't quite sure about the compressing and recompressing
lossing picture quality after opening and closing.

I know this is very ameture of me but the #1 thing I like about the digi, is that I can see the Picture after it's taken and can delete it if I wish to. Other than that I love my regular camera. And when I have the film processed I can either scan photos to my computer to edit, send, & save, through my own photo editing software. Or get a digital photo album back with my prints. So I guess my next question is, in your opinion with much more experience & knowledge than I, which do you think I would be better off with a digi or a film camera. Would I be better off with a film camera? The idea of just taking the negatives in for reprints if I need a good quality photo fast for my scrapbooking, just seems easier to me.

Thanks for your help, keep it coming :)

John_Reed
07-19-2004, 11:58 AM
But if I understood correctly, The highest quality is almost impossible to send & slow to open, edit, & save. And wasn't quite sure about the compressing and recompressing
lossing picture quality after opening and closing.

When you speak of the "highest quality," you may be referring to cameras that save images in RAW or TIFF format. These image files are very large, but for the scrapbooking you say you do, you probably won't need a camera of this level of sophistication. Most consumer-level cameras compress images using JPEG compression to much smaller files whose quality is still entirely acceptable (in fact, measured against TIFF files, a high-quality JPEG compressed file loses practically nothing) for printing. Because JPEG is a "lossy" process, it's recommended that you always save your original image file, and when you edit it, don't write over the original.

I know this is very ameture of me but the #1 thing I like about the digi, is that I can see the Picture after it's taken and can delete it if I wish to. Other than that I love my regular camera. And when I have the film processed I can either scan photos to my computer to edit, send, & save, through my own photo editing software. Or get a digital photo album back with my prints. So I guess my next question is, in your opinion with much more experience & knowledge than I, which do you think I would be better off with a digi or a film camera. Would I be better off with a film camera? The idea of just taking the negatives in for reprints if I need a good quality photo fast for my scrapbooking, just seems easier to me.

To me, the ability to immediately review what I've taken is the best reason for having a digital camera. When I shoot, I use "quick review," which flashes my shot back at me through my viewfinder for a second before moving on to the next shot, and in that second, I can tell whether or not I need to re-frame the shot, or adjust the exposure, or whatever is needed. It absolutely makes a better photographer out of you. When you shoot a photo with film, to get this kind of feedback takes you days instead of seconds!

kaykay
07-19-2004, 01:34 PM
Okay, I see. Thanks :)

I have only seen photos from a digi printed from a computer printer, and it may have not been the best printer, but the pictures were nothing like that of even a disposable(1 time use camera) I know they will be better if processed at a photo lab, I guess I'm just worried about the way the pictures will look from a digi vs. pictures from film.

I'm not real smart about computers, but if I save the photos to my computer before deleting them on the camera, will that be kind of like the negatives? I just want to be able to make reprints at a photo lab if needed.
Or what if some thing happens to the computer, just don't want to loose the photos.

John_Reed
07-19-2004, 01:43 PM
I have only seen photos from a digi printed from a computer printer, and it may have not been the best printer, but the pictures were nothing like that of even a disposable(1 time use camera) I know they will be better if processed at a photo lab, I guess I'm just worried about the way the pictures will look from a digi vs. pictures from film.

I'm not real smart about computers, but if I save the photos to my computer before deleting them on the camera, will that be kind of like the negatives? I just want to be able to make reprints at a photo lab if needed.
Or what if some thing happens to the computer, just don't want to loose the photos.
There are many photo-quality printers on the market right now, and their prints can easily match or exceed the quality of photo labs. The good ones use inkjet technology or dye sublimation to get really beautiful results. Prices for these printers start in the ~$100 range, and work up from there. I personally use an Epson 2200, and you'd have a hard time even equalling its print quality from a photo lab.

Yes, the computer files you save are "kind of like the negatives." You can back them up onto separate hard disks, DVDs, or CDs, something that's separate from your computer, for safety.

kaykay
07-19-2004, 05:29 PM
Wow, if you don't mind me asking what price range was your printer in? What's the price like for ink?

I currently have a hp psc1210v all in one/printer, scanner, copier. I have scanned a few pictures on it, seems to be reasonable good.

Jake Conner
07-19-2004, 06:08 PM
An Epson 2200 costs about $650. However, the new R800, available under $400, actually has better print quality, though it's letter sized while the 2200 prints up to 13" wide.

Jake