Re: Digital Cameras For Beginners: When All You Want To Do Is Take ?Pictures

[[email protected]]

Rick Staddlier writes:

> When you're shopping for a digital camera, it can be very easy to
> get caught up in all the really expensive models that are offered.
> Thats because todays really expensive digital cameras do all sorts
> of things. However, if you're a beginner, chances are you don't
> need all those bells and whistles. All you need the camera to do is
> take pictures so that you can download them onto your computer.
> Isn't that right? After all, you're a beginner, not an expert, so
> you're looking for digital cameras for beginners.

http://www.smartnfun.biz>Digital Camera

I think the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS has features that appeal to most
bicyclists. It has a large view screen, plus a view lense that comes
in handy in light where the viewer is hard to see. It's battery last
a long time between charges and the camera is smaller than most.
Beyond that, its advanced features are essentially in its background
and can be ignored by the beginner.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=145&modelid=14227

Jobst Brandt

 

[Leo Lichtman]

<[email protected]>wrote: (clip) its advanced features are
essentially in its background and can be ignored by the beginner.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I keep a Canon Power Shot in my pants pocket all the time, and usually leave
my "good" camera at home. I can slip it out and get a picture or two in
less time than it takes to unzip a gadget bag, and get the neck strap
untangled. If I am in a hurry, my "good" camera often betrays me by still
having settings left over from last time. I have done copy work with my
little Power Shot and made prints indistinguishable from the originals.

If you advance beyond the beginner status, you will still have ample use for
the little point-and-shoot. On a bicycle, a big camera is just in the way.
You don't want to put it on the bike, because of vibration, so it will
probably be in a back pack. Since that makes it harder to get to, you will
miss some shots, or just not bother.

 

[Tim McNamara]

[email protected] wrote:
> Rick Staddlier writes:
>
>> When you're shopping for a digital camera, it can be very easy to
>> get caught up in all the really expensive models that are offered.
>> Thats because todays really expensive digital cameras do all sorts
>> of things. However, if you're a beginner, chances are you don't
>> need all those bells and whistles. All you need the camera to do is
>> take pictures so that you can download them onto your computer.
>> Isn't that right? After all, you're a beginner, not an expert, so
>> you're looking for digital cameras for beginners.
>
> http://www.smartnfun.biz>Digital Camera
>
> I think the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS has features that appeal to most
> bicyclists. It has a large view screen, plus a view lense that comes
> in handy in light where the viewer is hard to see. It's battery last
> a long time between charges and the camera is smaller than most.
> Beyond that, its advanced features are essentially in its background
> and can be ignored by the beginner.
>
> http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=145&modelid=14227

Good grief! That website looks like it got a case of Mavicitis... nice
looking camera, though.

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:

> Rick Staddlier writes:
>
> > When you're shopping for a digital camera, it can be very easy to
> > get caught up in all the really expensive models that are offered.
> > Thats because todays really expensive digital cameras do all sorts
> > of things. However, if you're a beginner, chances are you don't
> > need all those bells and whistles. All you need the camera to do is
> > take pictures so that you can download them onto your computer.
> > Isn't that right? After all, you're a beginner, not an expert, so
> > you're looking for digital cameras for beginners.
>
> http://www.smartnfun.biz>Digital Camera
>
> I think the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS has features that appeal to most
> bicyclists. It has a large view screen, plus a view lense that comes
> in handy in light where the viewer is hard to see. It's battery last
> a long time between charges and the camera is smaller than most.
> Beyond that, its advanced features are essentially in its background
> and can be ignored by the beginner.
>
> http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=145&
> modelid=14227
>
> Jobst Brandt

All of the Canon SD series are nice machines, with the SD1000 being the
cheap-and-cheerful non-stabilized version. It retains the optical
viewfinder, while the SD750 offers a bigger screen and no viewfinder for
about $50 more, which I think is a poor trade.

However, my father-in-law has an SD450 (430?) which is more or less the
same camera but with a 5 Mpx sensor. I haven't done the tests to confirm
it yet, but it seems like the 7 Mpx sensor in my SD1000 doesn't quite
have the low-light performance of the older camera, and the extra pixels
don't really help much, as the camera is clearly limited by optics, not
its image sensor, in terms of resolution.

Finally, there are now several mobile phones which include pretty good
cameras, notably the K790/K800i from Sony Ericsson, and one or two of
the Nokia N-series. If you carry a phone anyways, this is a great option.

The Canon A-series is practically the standard choice for serious
photographers on a budget: full manual control, surprisingly good optics
and image sensors, and a great user interface. From there, the next step
is some choice of an especially high-end compact (Ricoh GR or GX, Canon
G-series with reservations, or some of the better Lumix cameras, among
others), but if you can hack the size, entry-level DSLRs are now
flirting with the $500 mark (Canon Rebel XT, Pentax K100 (K110 is even
cheaper, but deletes the desireable IS feature), Nikon D40, etc.

Pentax makes a remarkable 40mm "pancake" lens for its SLRs that is just
tiny, and turns the camera into some sort of wildly overachieving
prime-lensed semi-compact camera.

http://www.dcviews.com/press/Pentax-DA-40.htm

Danger: not actually inexpensive.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On 15 Nov 2007 01:59:14 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>I think the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS has features that appeal to most
>bicyclists. It has a large view screen, plus a view lense that comes
>in handy in light where the viewer is hard to see. It's battery last
>a long time between charges and the camera is smaller than most.
>Beyond that, its advanced features are essentially in its background
>and can be ignored by the beginner.

That's the one I bought (well, the Canon Digital Ixus 850 IS. Same camera,
but in Europe. In Japan it's the Ixy 900, BTW). Very very shiny. The main
thing this particular elph has that the others don't have is the 28mm (in
film camera equivalent units) wide end of the 4x zoom, the others are all
35 mm wide end. That allows you to capture much more of landscapes and
architecture at a time, and was the reason I went for this one rather than
its successor.

That it has been succeeded might mean that it could get hard to get hold
of one, incidentally. But all the Ixuses (mostly Powershot SD in America,
I think) are very good cameras in the subminiature size range, and the
regular-sized compact Powershots are as well.


Jasper

 

[[email protected]]

Jasper Janssen writes:

>> I think the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS has features that appeal to
>> most bicyclists. It has a large view screen, plus a view finder
>> that comes in handy in bright light where the screen is hard to
>> see. It's battery last a long time between charges and the camera
>> is smaller than most. Beyond that, its advanced features are
>> essentially in its background and can be ignored by the beginner.

> That's the one I bought (well, the Canon Digital Ixus 850 IS. Same
> camera, but in Europe. In Japan it's the Ixy 900, BTW). Very very
> shiny. The main thing this particular elph has that others don't,
> is the 28mm (in film camera equivalent units) wide end of the 4x
> zoom, the others are all 35 mm wide end. The shorter focal length
> allows capturing larger landscapes and architecture, and was the
> reason I chose this one rather than its successor.

> That it has a successor might mean that it could become hard to
> find. But all the Ixuses (mostly PowerShot SD in America, I think)
> are very good cameras in the sub-miniature range as is the
> regular-sized compact PowerShot.

With the appropriate software on a PC, multi-frame panoramas can be
merged into a single wwwwwide angle shot. Videos can also be made
care must be taken to put something like a wool mitten over the sound
pickup for windy weather. I discovered this from making a short video
of raging storm surf. Although the picture was good, the roar of the
surf was lost in the wind.

Jobst Brandt

 

[Matt O'Toole]

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 19:34:53 +0100, Jasper Janssen wrote:

> On 15 Nov 2007 01:59:14 GMT, [email protected] wrote:

>>I think the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS has features that appeal to most
>>bicyclists. It has a large view screen, plus a view lense that comes in
>>handy in light where the viewer is hard to see. It's battery last a
>>long time between charges and the camera is smaller than most. Beyond
>>that, its advanced features are essentially in its background and can be
>>ignored by the beginner.

> That's the one I bought (well, the Canon Digital Ixus 850 IS. Same
> camera, but in Europe. In Japan it's the Ixy 900, BTW). Very very shiny.
> The main thing this particular elph has that the others don't have is
> the 28mm (in film camera equivalent units) wide end of the 4x zoom, the
> others are all 35 mm wide end. That allows you to capture much more of
> landscapes and architecture at a time, and was the reason I went for
> this one rather than its successor.

I'll put in another vote for this camera -- I'll probably buy one. I've
been looking for a good pocket camera with a wide angle lens for years.
I've been lugging around an old Kodak DC4800, just because of the wide
angle lens.

I almost bought an SD70, which is a great camera, but still too big.

Matt O.

 

[[email protected]]

On Nov 14, 8:59 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> I think the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS has features that appeal to most
> bicyclists. It has a large view screen, plus a view lense that comes
> in handy in light where the viewer is hard to see. It's battery last
> a long time between charges and the camera is smaller than most.
> Beyond that, its advanced features are essentially in its background
> and can be ignored by the beginner.

I've got the 6 Megapixel version, the SD600, and agree it's
excellent.

My only real quibble has been shutter lag, which seems to be about one
second. In Vienna this summer, we had a room overlooking a well-
cycled intersection. I spent some time trying to do what Laura Domela
did in these shots:
http://www.domela.com/photos_people/projects_fietsen/web_preview_2006.pdf

.... but I had a devil of a time judging when to press the shutter! I
had to shoot when the cyclist was just entering the crosswalk, then
pan and hope I still had them when the camera reacted, which was about
when they'd moved about twenty feet into the intersection.

The same problem cropped up at a recent wedding celebration.
Excellent potential shots of old friends hugging turned into shots of
people turning away from each other.

But for anything that doesn't require precise timing, it works very
well. And yes, the software's "stitching" of landscapes has given us
some nice panoramas.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Pat]

> ... but I had a devil of a time judging when to press the shutter! I
> had to shoot when the cyclist was just entering the crosswalk, then
> pan and hope I still had them when the camera reacted, which was about
> when they'd moved about twenty feet into the intersection.
>>
> - Frank Krygowski

Have you tried this? Figure out where the cyclist will be for the best shot
and press the shutter button halfway to "set" the focus, then move to the
side where the cyclist is and lead him just as you would lead a bird with a
rifle. Finish pressing the shutter button at the spot where you want him to
be. Since focus is already set (and you can maybe set the speed to 150th of
a second in advance) you will get him blur-free at the right spot.

Pat in TX

 

[datakoll]

check out digital binoculars. video at page's lower left:

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/techno...l=1&adxnnlx=1195173375-zYAy09x6URVKgh/LZUQybA

 

[[email protected]]

On Nov 15, 6:53 pm, "Pat" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > ... but I had a devil of a time judging when to press the shutter! I
> > had to shoot when the cyclist was just entering the crosswalk, then
> > pan and hope I still had them when the camera reacted, which was about
> > when they'd moved about twenty feet into the intersection.
>
> > - Frank Krygowski
>
> Have you tried this? Figure out where the cyclist will be for the best shot
> and press the shutter button halfway to "set" the focus, then move to the
> side where the cyclist is and lead him just as you would lead a bird with a
> rifle. Finish pressing the shutter button at the spot where you want him to
> be. Since focus is already set (and you can maybe set the speed to 150th of
> a second in advance) you will get him blur-free at the right spot.

Hmm. At this point, months later, I can't recall if that's what I did
or not.

What you're implying is that it's the autofocus that causes the
delay. IIRC, the camera has an "infinity" setting buried somewhere in
its menus. That might be another way to achieve the same effect.

I'll check those out. Thanks for the tip.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[SMS 斯蒂文• 夏]

[email protected] wrote:

> I think the Canon PowerShot SD800 IS has features that appeal to most
> bicyclists. It has a large view screen, plus a view lense that comes
> in handy in light where the viewer is hard to see. It's battery last
> a long time between charges and the camera is smaller than most.
> Beyond that, its advanced features are essentially in its background
> and can be ignored by the beginner.

Not just to bicyclists. In fact, it's the _only_ small camera on the
market with:

a) optical viewfinder
b) wide-angle lens
c) image-stabilization
d) Li-Ion battery

There are _no_ other small cameras on the market with these seemingly
basic features. Almost no small cameras have a wide-angle lens, and the
optical viewfinder has disappeared from most cameras.

What this means is that the SD800 IS is sure to be discontinued very soon.

The SD800 IS is the Olympus XA of the twenty-first century. What
self-respecting bicyclist of the twentieth century didn't own an Olympus
XA (not the XA2 or XA4)?

 

[Lou Holtman]

SMS 斯蒂文• 夏 wrote:
..
>
> The SD800 IS is the Olympus XA of the twenty-first century. What
> self-respecting bicyclist of the twentieth century didn't own an Olympus
> XA (not the XA2 or XA4)?


I didn't. I didn't have time to take pictures ;-)

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)

 

[SMS 斯蒂文• 夏]

Lou Holtman wrote:
> SMS 斯蒂文• 夏 wrote:
> .
>>
>> The SD800 IS is the Olympus XA of the twenty-first century. What
>> self-respecting bicyclist of the twentieth century didn't own an
>> Olympus XA (not the XA2 or XA4)?
>
>
> I didn't. I didn't have time to take pictures ;-)

Maybe you're not self-respecting then!

It was kind of funny to be on a bicycle tour or a backpack trip, where
nearly every participant had an Olympus XA. At least it made it easy to
let others take pictures with your camera, as there was no learning
curve, for focusing, which was a bit tricky for someone that wasn't used
to that kind of split image focusing.

 

[A Muzi]

> SMS 斯蒂文• 夏 wrote:
>> The SD800 IS is the Olympus XA of the twenty-first century. What
>> self-respecting bicyclist of the twentieth century didn't own an
>> Olympus XA (not the XA2 or XA4)?

Lou Holtman wrote:
> I didn't. I didn't have time to take pictures ;-)

Does a flash-cube Instamatic count? Mine lasted until 1984 or so
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[JG]

Canon has a very nice range of cameras: the 5XX are bargains, the 6XX
have very good picture quality; and the SD's are quite compact and
automatic. The Panasonic TZ's are also notable as being very compact
(but still medium sized) ultra-zooms and again all automatic. Some of
the Sonys are nice too.

IQ (image quality) isn't limited by the optics, but by the physical
size of the CCD. More megapixels requires dividing the chip into
smaller and smaller sensors, which means resolution is negated by
noise.

LCD's, unlike view finders, give precise image of the shot and
visibility has improved a good deal. Low light quality is still an
issue, but not for cyclists!-)

JG

 

[JG]

Oh, yeah - the Canon A6xx and A5xx range takes AA batteries which the
mini's do not. If you are going on extended tour and need to use
disposables, they are the ticket.

JG

 

[[email protected]]

On Nov 16, 1:28 pm, JG <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oh, yeah - the Canon A6xx and A5xx range takes AA batteries which the
> mini's do not. If you are going on extended tour and need to use
> disposables, they are the ticket.

I thought about that a lot before I bought the Canon. Our trip had
us in Europe for 6.5 weeks, and I worried that the proprietary battery
would run down too quickly. I worried about being in places where I'd
have trouble plugging in the charger, power adaptor, etc. I strongly
considered getting a AA powered camera, even though it would be less
compact.

It turned out to be no problem. The battery life was excellent, even
without conserving energy by using the viewfinder instead of the LCD
display. And the charger runs on either 120 or 240. All that was
needed was a cheap adaptor to convert the USA two-prong plug to the
various European styles. I was glad I didn't go with the larger AA
camera.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Lou Holtman]

[email protected] wrote:
> On Nov 16, 1:28 pm, JG <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Oh, yeah - the Canon A6xx and A5xx range takes AA batteries which the
>> mini's do not. If you are going on extended tour and need to use
>> disposables, they are the ticket.
>
> I thought about that a lot before I bought the Canon. Our trip had
> us in Europe for 6.5 weeks, and I worried that the proprietary battery
> would run down too quickly. I worried about being in places where I'd
> have trouble plugging in the charger, power adaptor, etc. I strongly
> considered getting a AA powered camera, even though it would be less
> compact.
>

Why did you think that would be different in Europe?

> It turned out to be no problem.

Yes we have electricity for a while over here... ;-)

Lou

--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)

 

[[email protected]]

On Nov 16, 3:51 pm, Lou Holtman <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > On Nov 16, 1:28 pm, JG <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Oh, yeah - the Canon A6xx and A5xx range takes AA batteries which the
> >> mini's do not. If you are going on extended tour and need to use
> >> disposables, they are the ticket.
>
> > I thought about that a lot before I bought the Canon. Our trip had
> > us in Europe for 6.5 weeks, and I worried that the proprietary battery
> > would run down too quickly. I worried about being in places where I'd
> > have trouble plugging in the charger, power adaptor, etc. I strongly
> > considered getting a AA powered camera, even though it would be less
> > compact.
>
> Why did you think that would be different in Europe?
>
> > It turned out to be no problem.
>
> Yes we have electricity for a while over here... ;-)

True, of course - but yours comes in a different flavor than ours, and
I was hoping not to have to spend another $30 for a converter.
Fortunately, the charger on the camera and the one for our cell
phone&PDA were able to handle the voltage difference. Thus, all we
needed was a simple adaptor to cover the difference in socket styles,
not a voltage converter.

Also, the variety of European socket styles is amazing! The adaptor I
bought was supposed to cover all countries "except Italy." IIRC, it
worked in some Italian sockets, but not in others. The difference
seemed to be a slight difference in pin spacing or diameter. And I
recall, while visiting friends in Switzerland, they searched around
their apartment for an adaptor that would work for us.

Here in America, there's much less confusion. Household electrical
goods will plug into almost any 120 V socket. With polarized plugs or
grounded plugs, one can get by with a tiny 25 cent adaptor, but even
that's rarely needed.

- Frank Krygowski