NYTimes Connections
- Coaxial - May 19, 2024 - 7:42am
Wordle - daily game
- Coaxial - May 19, 2024 - 7:36am
NY Times Strands
- Bill_J - May 19, 2024 - 7:05am
Today in History
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 19, 2024 - 5:50am
TV shows you watch
- Steely_D - May 19, 2024 - 1:13am
What Did You See Today?
- Steely_D - May 19, 2024 - 1:07am
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 18, 2024 - 6:49pm
Music library
- nightdrive - May 18, 2024 - 1:28pm
Trump
- Red_Dragon - May 18, 2024 - 1:21pm
Radio Paradise Comments
- GeneP59 - May 18, 2024 - 12:04pm
Israel
- R_P - May 18, 2024 - 11:35am
What Makes You Laugh?
- Beaker - May 18, 2024 - 10:32am
Mixtape Culture Club
- miamizsun - May 18, 2024 - 9:01am
Baseball, anyone?
- rgio - May 18, 2024 - 8:28am
The Obituary Page
- DaveInSaoMiguel - May 18, 2024 - 4:18am
Paul McCartney
- miamizsun - May 18, 2024 - 4:06am
Virginia News
- Steely_D - May 18, 2024 - 2:51am
Gnomad here. Who farking deleted my thread?
- Red_Dragon - May 17, 2024 - 5:59pm
The Dragons' Roost
- triskele - May 17, 2024 - 4:04pm
Name My Band
- jim.stimeck - May 17, 2024 - 3:18pm
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see
- ScottFromWyoming - May 17, 2024 - 1:43pm
USA! USA! USA!
- Beaker - May 17, 2024 - 1:28pm
DIY
- black321 - May 17, 2024 - 9:16am
May 2024 Photo Theme - Peaceful
- Isabeau - May 17, 2024 - 9:02am
Other Medical Stuff
- Isabeau - May 17, 2024 - 9:00am
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- Isabeau - May 17, 2024 - 8:44am
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- ScottN - May 16, 2024 - 7:00pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- RPnate1 - May 16, 2024 - 3:33pm
Your Local News
- Proclivities - May 16, 2024 - 12:51pm
Alexa Show
- thisbody - May 16, 2024 - 12:15pm
What can you hear right now?
- thisbody - May 16, 2024 - 11:00am
Things You Thought Today
- thisbody - May 16, 2024 - 10:25am
Joe Biden
- Steely_D - May 16, 2024 - 1:02am
Climate Change
- R_P - May 15, 2024 - 9:38pm
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc.
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 15, 2024 - 4:13pm
how do you feel right now?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 15, 2024 - 4:10pm
China
- R_P - May 15, 2024 - 1:40pm
What the hell OV?
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 12:38pm
Song of the Day
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 11:50am
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 11:48am
Science is bullsh*t
- oldviolin - May 15, 2024 - 11:44am
NASA & other news from space
- Beaker - May 15, 2024 - 9:29am
Artificial Intelligence
- thisbody - May 15, 2024 - 8:25am
Human Rights (Can Science Point The Way)
- miamizsun - May 15, 2024 - 5:50am
Play the Blues
- Steely_D - May 15, 2024 - 1:50am
Animal Resistance
- R_P - May 14, 2024 - 6:37pm
2024 Elections!
- R_P - May 14, 2024 - 6:00pm
Fascism In America
- Red_Dragon - May 14, 2024 - 4:27pm
punk? hip-hop? metal? noise? garage?
- thisbody - May 14, 2024 - 1:27pm
Social Media Are Changing Everything
- Red_Dragon - May 14, 2024 - 8:08am
Internet connection
- ai63 - May 14, 2024 - 7:53am
Congress
- Red_Dragon - May 13, 2024 - 8:22pm
Ukraine
- R_P - May 13, 2024 - 5:50pm
What The Hell Buddy?
- oldviolin - May 13, 2024 - 1:25pm
Surfing!
- KurtfromLaQuinta - May 13, 2024 - 1:21pm
Bad Poetry
- oldviolin - May 13, 2024 - 11:38am
See This Film
- Red_Dragon - May 13, 2024 - 8:35am
Podcast recommendations???
- ColdMiser - May 13, 2024 - 7:50am
News of the Weird
- Red_Dragon - May 13, 2024 - 5:05am
Those Lovable Policemen
- R_P - May 12, 2024 - 11:31am
Vinyl Only Spin List
- kurtster - May 12, 2024 - 9:16am
The All-Things Beatles Forum
- Steely_D - May 12, 2024 - 9:04am
Poetry Forum
- ScottN - May 12, 2024 - 6:32am
Beer
- ScottFromWyoming - May 10, 2024 - 8:58pm
It's the economy stupid.
- thisbody - May 10, 2024 - 3:21pm
Oh dear god, BEES!
- R_P - May 10, 2024 - 3:11pm
Tornado!
- miamizsun - May 10, 2024 - 2:49pm
The 1960s
- kcar - May 10, 2024 - 2:49pm
Marko Haavisto & Poutahaukat
- thisbody - May 10, 2024 - 7:57am
Living in America
- Proclivities - May 10, 2024 - 6:45am
Outstanding Covers
- Steely_D - May 10, 2024 - 12:56am
Democratic Party
- R_P - May 9, 2024 - 3:06pm
RP on HomePod mini
- RPnate1 - May 9, 2024 - 10:52am
Interesting Words
- Proclivities - May 9, 2024 - 10:22am
Breaking News
- maryte - May 9, 2024 - 7:17am
|
Index »
Internet/Computer »
Streaming/Media »
Digital Camera question
|
Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 22, 23, 24 Next |
Alexandra
Location: PNW Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 20, 2016 - 9:15am |
|
miamizsun wrote:stay safe and take/go with a friend No friends answered the call....I'll be ok. Thanks! (A boyscout troop would be even better)
|
|
miamizsun
Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP) Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 20, 2016 - 9:10am |
|
Alexandra wrote:I didn't want to put this in the prayers/good vibes thread (which seems more suitable for people-issues). Please wish me lots of luck in finding my digital camera which dropped out of my pocket on a hike yesterday. I decided it was worth going all the way back out in the Gorge to find (I wasn't given enough time to find it yesterday, since it was a group hike and they had to move on and I carpooled with people)—-because know the approximate area it happened, and feel if I do a lawnmower sweep I have a good chance. I will also notify the ranger in case of any turn-ins (although this particular area is a new park and not heavily traveled). So...any good vibes are much appreciated. Wish I knew a good boyscout troop willing to do a good deed and earn some badges. stay safe and take/go with a friend
|
|
Alexandra
Location: PNW Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 20, 2016 - 8:29am |
|
I didn't want to put this in the prayers/good vibes thread (which seems more suitable for people-issues). Please wish me lots of luck in finding my digital camera which dropped out of my pocket on a hike yesterday. I decided it was worth going all the way back out in the Gorge to find (I wasn't given enough time to find it yesterday, since it was a group hike and they had to move on and I carpooled with people)—-because know the approximate area it happened, and feel if I do a lawnmower sweep I have a good chance. I will also notify the ranger in case of any turn-ins (although this particular area is a new park and not heavily traveled). So...any good vibes are much appreciated. Wish I knew a good boyscout troop willing to do a good deed and earn some badges.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Apr 22, 2015 - 6:33pm |
|
haresfur wrote: I ended up buying a Canon Powershot SX60, Wow. 65x optical, $500. That's pretty amazing.
|
|
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Apr 22, 2015 - 4:58pm |
|
buzz wrote: Look for a camera that does Raw+JPEG. My Canon G15 does both as did the G9 before it. Learning Raw is not a terribly difficult thing if you have an interest. It is simply a series of steps most reasonably intelligent people could learn if they are willing to spend the time. I suppose it depends on how much improving your photography skills means to you.
I ended up buying a Canon Powershot SX60, although I realise it doesn't have as big a sensor as the grown-up cameras. It does shoot raw+jpeg. I think it is going to be good for me and I can always get something different if I really get to the point where the picture quality is the limiting factor instead of my skill level. The picture in the other thread was taken at maximum optical zoom handheld so I'm sold on image stabilisation. Lots of options to learn but lots that seem basically useless to me. And a few that would be nice to have but are missing. The geekiest is controlling the camera from my cell phone. Still can't get it to talk to the computer over wifi though.
|
|
buzz
Location: up the boohai
|
Posted:
Mar 30, 2015 - 8:26pm |
|
swell_sailor wrote:I've been shooting raw since 2001 and agree that to get the most out of your photos you should be shooting in raw. However, developing a raw file is not something learned overnight. Some people find they really don't have the time and are plenty happy with a jpeg. You might want to get your hands on some raw files and run them through your raw converter to see if it's something you really want to do. If your converter can batch convert based on in camera settings you can always convert to jpeg in batches while at the same time learning the craft one raw file at a time. Look for a camera that does Raw+JPEG. My Canon G15 does both as did the G9 before it. Learning Raw is not a terribly difficult thing if you have an interest. It is simply a series of steps most reasonably intelligent people could learn if they are willing to spend the time. I suppose it depends on how much improving your photography skills means to you.
|
|
swell_sailor
Location: The Gorge Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 30, 2015 - 6:52pm |
|
haresfur wrote: I was afraid you were going to say that. Seems it wouldn't have cost them any more to save raw files.
I realize that the lens gets slow, and probably the extreme of the zoom would be best avoided for artsy shots. The last time I owned a telephoto, it was a 135 mm on an all manual Minolta. Think I had a 2x converter for it - talk about slow. Frankly I'm amazed at how much camera you can get these days. One of the reasons I've stuck with my pocket camera is that I figure the camera I take with me gets better pictures than one I leave at home (helps that it is waterproof). PhotographyBlog seems to prefer the Canon Powershot SX 60 but it is nearly twice as expensive here.
I've been shooting raw since 2001 and agree that to get the most out of your photos you should be shooting in raw. However, developing a raw file is not something learned overnight. Some people find they really don't have the time and are plenty happy with a jpeg. You might want to get your hands on some raw files and run them through your raw converter to see if it's something you really want to do. If your converter can batch convert based on in camera settings you can always convert to jpeg in batches while at the same time learning the craft one raw file at a time.
|
|
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 28, 2015 - 5:15pm |
|
buzz wrote: haresfur wrote: I've been thinking about a new camera and have found one that I think may work for me, at a price I'm comfortable with - an Olympus Stylus SP-100EE. I'd like to be able to get better quality photos, particularly nature stuff. Obviously there are trade-offs but the main thing that concerns me is that it doesn't save raw format files. How important do you think that is for getting the most out of your shots? Any other opinions on these superzoom cameras? Too many compromises in the lens? Thanks.
i cant comment on the camera model you mentioned, but if you are serious about image quality, you must shoot raw. I would also be careful about superzooms. they will be very slow at the long end and probably a little soft. When I get home I will look at the model you mentioned. I was afraid you were going to say that. Seems it wouldn't have cost them any more to save raw files. I realize that the lens gets slow, and probably the extreme of the zoom would be best avoided for artsy shots. The last time I owned a telephoto, it was a 135 mm on an all manual Minolta. Think I had a 2x converter for it - talk about slow. Frankly I'm amazed at how much camera you can get these days. One of the reasons I've stuck with my pocket camera is that I figure the camera I take with me gets better pictures than one I leave at home (helps that it is waterproof). PhotographyBlog seems to prefer the Canon Powershot SX 60 but it is nearly twice as expensive here.
|
|
buzz
Location: up the boohai
|
Posted:
Mar 28, 2015 - 3:37pm |
|
haresfur wrote: I've been thinking about a new camera and have found one that I think may work for me, at a price I'm comfortable with - an Olympus Stylus SP-100EE. I'd like to be able to get better quality photos, particularly nature stuff. Obviously there are trade-offs but the main thing that concerns me is that it doesn't save raw format files. How important do you think that is for getting the most out of your shots? Any other opinions on these superzoom cameras? Too many compromises in the lens? Thanks.
i cant comment on the camera model you mentioned, but if you are serious about image quality, you must shoot raw. I would also be careful about superzooms. they will be very slow at the long end and probably a little soft. When I get home I will look at the model you mentioned.
|
|
haresfur
Location: The Golden Triangle Gender:
|
Posted:
Mar 28, 2015 - 2:33pm |
|
I've been thinking about a new camera and have found one that I think may work for me, at a price I'm comfortable with - an Olympus Stylus SP-100EE. I'd like to be able to get better quality photos, particularly nature stuff. Obviously there are trade-offs but the main thing that concerns me is that it doesn't save raw format files. How important do you think that is for getting the most out of your shots? Any other opinions on these superzoom cameras? Too many compromises in the lens? Thanks.
|
|
swell_sailor
Location: The Gorge Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 10:23am |
|
mzpro5 wrote: Well, you know, I don't want to talk you out of an SLR if that's the direction you want to go. And of course, there's more to it than what I can cover in a paragraph or two. But I really do believe that if you don't take it further than the kit lens, there are lots of better options, some for much less money, like the Coolpix you mention above. I'll check it out. Edit: We all want something different in a camera. This camera looks nice enough, but there are a few things that might make me hesitate to buy it. The lens is pretty bright at the wide end, and not so bright at the long end. That will force longer exposures when fully zoomed, which might equate to poor quality images except on a bright sunny day. The zoom (26x) is far more than I can imagine needing, especially when it's common for optical quality to suffer when we stretch technology to such a degree and put it into a rather inexpensive package. Less might be more in this case. In other words, a $200 camera with a 4x or 8x lens might actually deliver better images throughout it's zoom range than this 26x camera through the same zoom range. Also, while it's not a requirement for me, many people love an articulating LCD, which this camera does not have. Maybe you don't need one either. Some things to consider. And to correct what I was saying earlier about buzz, I think he's using the G15 now. I think I said he was using a G12.
|
|
mzpro5
Location: Budda'spet, Hungry Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 10:00am |
|
swell_sailor wrote: There are at least a couple of advantages to an SLR over a compact (point and shoot) camera. One is that they typically use a larger sensor, which can lead to smoother looking images, but this may be less true with modern sensors. The other is lens options. If you want to swap between several high quality lenses, you want a camera that takes interchangeable lenses. But there are lots of disadvantages too, which is why (I suspect) a guy like buzz who can shoot with whatever he likes, chooses to shoot (for fun) with a Canon G12 instead of an SLR. Smaller cameras with a permanently attached lens travel better. They're easier to have with you at all times, which is how you get good pictures. (IMO) Kit lenses are not typically the best quality (like the included 18-55) and images from a camera like the G12 will often better it. (again, IMO) So in my opinion (whatever that's worth) if you plan to buy an SLR and shoot with the kit lens, you'd be better off not buying an SLR. If you intend to add two or three high quality lenses to your kit, then you'll want the SLR. Keep in mind though, that in the end the body itself may be the cheapest part of the kit, and will likely influence image quality less than the lenses, so you'll want to have an idea about the lenses you'll eventually want before you pick the body to mount them to. I'm rambling......... For me the SLR body is more about feel. It's hard to find an SLR that won't take nice pictures, providing the lenses and the photographer are up to the task. What feels best in your hands, and has the controls where you want them, is likely a good candidate. Edit: Here's a review of the camera you're considering.
thanks for the info.
Well maybe it is a bit overkill. I can get this Nikon COOLPIX L810 16.1 MP Digital Camera with 26x Zoom NIKKOR ED Glass Lens and 3-inch LCD for a little less than $200 and 6 month free financing, probably more like something I should get.
|
|
swell_sailor
Location: The Gorge Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 9:34am |
|
mzpro5 wrote:Considering a new camera and thinking about getting into the DSLR world. Normally at this time I would not consider getting a new camera as I am saving funds but I can get this one for 24 months same as cash. So you shutterbugs is this a good one? There are at least a couple of advantages to an SLR over a compact (point and shoot) camera. One is that they typically use a larger sensor, which can lead to smoother looking images, but this may be less true with modern sensors. The other is lens options. If you want to swap between several high quality lenses, you want a camera that takes interchangeable lenses. But there are lots of disadvantages too, which is why (I suspect) a guy like buzz who can shoot with whatever he likes, chooses to shoot (for fun) with a Canon G12 instead of an SLR. Smaller cameras with a permanently attached lens travel better. They're easier to have with you at all times, which is how you get good pictures. (IMO) Kit lenses are not typically the best quality (like the included 18-55) and images from a camera like the G12 will often better it. (again, IMO) So in my opinion (whatever that's worth) if you plan to buy an SLR and shoot with the kit lens, you'd be better off not buying an SLR. If you intend to add two or three high quality lenses to your kit, then you'll want the SLR. Keep in mind though, that in the end the body itself may be the cheapest part of the kit, and will likely influence image quality less than the lenses, so you'll want to have an idea about the lenses you'll eventually want before you pick the body to mount them to. I'm rambling......... For me the SLR body is more about feel. It's hard to find an SLR that won't take nice pictures, providing the lenses and the photographer are up to the task. What feels best in your hands, and has the controls where you want them, is likely a good candidate. Edit: Here's a review of the camera you're considering.
|
|
Proclivities
Location: Paris of the Piedmont Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 9:16am |
|
MsJudi wrote:Ok, I've decided that I want to start shooting art tutorial videos with my camera and I have an awesome tripod but I need to do top-down shots and my tripod just won't go in that direction. Anyone have any suggestions beyond buying an expensive lateral tripod?? I guess I'm used to older (pre-digital-era) tripods, but I don't remember seeing ones where the camera base could not be tilted 90°. I guess those "Gorillapods" don't really have pivoting bases. I've seen some relatively inexpensive tripods with tilting bases (about $15.00), in Target or Walmart circulars, but I'm not sure how sturdy they are. Anyhow, I'm curious: What sort of artwork/medium would you be shooting? I had though of doing similar tutorial type things myself.
|
|
mzpro5
Location: Budda'spet, Hungry Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 9:11am |
|
Considering a new camera and thinking about getting into the DSLR world.
Normally at this time I would not consider getting a new camera as I am saving funds but I can get this one for 24 months same as cash.
So you shutterbugs is this a good one?
|
|
cc_rider
Location: Bastrop Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 8:55am |
|
MsJudi wrote:Not so crazy: I tried that, but ti didn't work LOL. I'll check Goodwill, though... can't afford a new tripod ATM, I think any expense beyond the pool right now could land me in divorce court. Maybe it's just our neighborhood, but I'm constantly amazed at what people take to Goodwill. Last week there was a UT baseball cap with Earl Campbell's autograph on the bill. Seriously? At Goodwill? But camera tripods are a common item. I bet you could find several for $10 or less.
|
|
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 8:52am |
|
buzz wrote: That may work in the Southern hemisphere, but not up here on the top of the world.
agh, right. I always forget that.
|
|
buzz
Location: up the boohai
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 8:50am |
|
NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: Have you tried putting the tripod on the ceiling, facing downwards?
That may work in the Southern hemisphere, but not up here on the top of the world.
|
|
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 8:47am |
|
MsJudi wrote:Not so crazy: I tried that, but ti didn't work LOL. I'll check Goodwill, though... can't afford a new tripod ATM, I think any expense beyond the pool right now could land me in divorce court. Have you tried putting the tripod on the ceiling, facing downwards?
|
|
MsJudi
Location: Houston, TX Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 7, 2012 - 8:45am |
|
cc_rider wrote: Okay, crazy idea here (I know, you're shocked). What if you could take the center post out of a tripod and put it back in upside down? With the camera platform on the bottom? Probably not possible with most tripods, but maybe a cheap one could work. Goodwill seems to have tripods pretty regularly.
You might still have a problem getting the camera perpendicular to your table, depending how far the platform tilts.
Not so crazy: I tried that, but ti didn't work LOL. I'll check Goodwill, though... can't afford a new tripod ATM, I think any expense beyond the pool right now could land me in divorce court.
|
|
|