The Digital Camera example thread

[primesuspect]

I figured this might be of some help to potential digital camera buyers. I know that when I was shopping around for one, I would have loved to see a site showing real samples taken from the actual cameras that I was looking at.

So, post a picture or two that you feel is representative of the camera, the make and model of the camera, and any other relevant information (i.e. megapixels, approximate retail cost, etc.)

[primesuspect]

I'll start.

This was taken with a Minolta Dimage 7Hi (http://www.dimage.minolta.com/d7hi/index.html). This is a 5 megapixel SLR-like camera (not true SLR) that retails around $1100 US.

This is a raw grab, I did no color correction. It was taken on macro setting with manual focus on a cloudy day, using ISO100 and no flash. The only image processing was to reduce to 500 pixels wide and some jpg compression.

[primesuspect]

These two were taken with a Kodak EasyShare LS443 (http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=9/19/487/102&pq-locale=en_US). It is a 4 megapixel camera that retails for around $400. I am quite happy with this camera, because I got it on sale for $300 and it came with a 64mb SecureDigital card. It also has 16mb of internal memory. The only gripe I have with this camera is that it has a tendency to go blue on just about everything using all automatic settings. You have to play around with it to get the macro setting to work right, and the lighting needs to be quite bright. On flesh tones especially, it washes people out a bit and I find that I must go into photoshop and tilt the blue down a bit on almost every picture that has a person in it. Also, the autofocus is worth nothing on the closeup mode.

The flower picture was color corrected a bit, I bumped up the red channel for effect mostly, but not much. I was quite surprised at the quality of the picture for a relatively low cost camera. It was taken on all automatic settings on a sunny day.

[primesuspect]

The Kodak again:

The picture of my kids was color corrected to compensate for the blue shift. I bumped up the yellow midtones and the red highlights to bring the lifelike color back. Otherwise, I'm happy with the shot.

[mcwc]

Canon A60 (http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/a70-60/index.html)
2.0MP
3X optical, 2.5 digital zoom w/ macro feature
Takes B&W, Sepia, neutral and vivid colour
Low light autofocus feature
$399.99CDN or $226.00USD

It is a point-and-shoot camera that allows manual control of shutter speeds, aperature, and focus. It has a few pre-programmed modes. For its price range, it has many features, and a excellent camera to boot. I would have paid more for another brand with similar features. I would have gone with a Nikon 2100 but there weren't available at the time I bought the A60. So far, I have no problems with the camera. Don't use alkalines. They don't last, go with NiMH.

All the pictures are uncorrected, in jpeg.
File info
File Name
108_0876.JPG
Camera Model Name
Canon PowerShot A60
Shooting Date/Time
28/05/2003 3:28:00 PM
Shooting Mode
Program AE
Photo Effect Mode
Off
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/1000
Av( Aperture Value )
7.1
Metering Mode
Evaluative
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
100
Lens
5.4 - 16.2mm
Focal Length
5.4mm
Digital Zoom
None
Image Size
1600x1200
Image Quality
Superfine
Flash
Off
White Balance
Daylight
AF Mode
Single AF
AF Range Mode
Macro
File Size
787KB
Drive Mode
Single-frame shooting

[mcwc]

It was school spirit week and it was gender bender day. And no, I did not participate in it.


File Name
102_0216.JPG
Camera Model Name
Canon PowerShot A60
Shooting Date/Time
08/04/2003 9:05:08 AM
Shooting Mode
Program AE
Photo Effect Mode
Off
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/60
Av( Aperture Value )
2.8
Metering Mode
Evaluative
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
100
Lens
5.4 - 16.2mm
Focal Length
5.4mm
Digital Zoom
None
Image Size
1600x1200
Image Quality
Superfine
Flash
On
Flash Type
Built-In Flash
Flash Exposure Compensation
0
Red-eye Reduction
Off
Shutter curtain sync
1st-curtain sync
White Balance
Auto
AF Mode
Single AF
File Size
757KB
Drive Mode
Single-frame shooting

[mcwc]

A long exposure night shot from inside the house through my bedroom window on a mini-tripod.


File Name
100_0046.JPG
Camera Model Name
Canon PowerShot A60
Shooting Date/Time
24/03/2003 9:06:55 PM
Shooting Mode
Manual
Photo Effect Mode
Off
Tv( Shutter Speed )
15
Av( Aperture Value )
2.8
Metering Mode
Center-weighted averaging
ISO Speed
100
Lens
5.4 - 16.2mm
Focal Length
5.4mm
Digital Zoom
None
Image Size
1600x1200
Image Quality
Superfine
Flash
Off
White Balance
Auto
AF Mode
Single AF
File Size
1011KB
Drive Mode
Self-Timer Operation

[mcwc]

Canon A40 (http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/a40-30/index.html)

It is a friend's camera and it is the predecessor to the A60.


File Name
phil lee 1_001.jpg
Camera Model Name
Canon PowerShot A40
Shooting Date/Time
26/09/2002 2:54:19 AM
Shooting Mode
Auto
Photo Effect Mode
Off
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/60
Av( Aperture Value )
2.8
Metering Mode
Evaluative
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
Auto
Lens
5.4 - 16.2mm
Focal Length
5.4mm
Digital Zoom
None
Image Size
1600x1200
Image Quality
Superfine
Flash
On
Flash Type
Built-In Flash
Flash Exposure Compensation
0
Red-eye Reduction
On
Shutter curtain sync
1st-curtain sync
White Balance
Auto
AF Mode
Single AF
Active AF Points
[ Left ]
File Size
604KB
Drive Mode
Single-frame shooting

[bothered]

This was taken with my Kodak LS443. I have no blue shift that I have noticed. I have never had to alter the pictures in any way. This is one of my Grandkids, Taken on auto, Just pointed and clicked.
Primesuspect, If you have to alter your pics as you describe I think you possibly were using a faulty model. I bought mine after reading a review in PC Advisor, It came top in the intermediate camera tests, Just below the profesional models. I am very happy with it

bothered.

[Bad_Karma]

I think I read somewhere that non digital cameras have a pixel count of somewhere around 20megapixels and the best digital camera is currentlly around 5megapixels. Is this right? Can you actually tell the difference between 20 and 5 megapixels visually? I personally think that digital cameras are great and it's great to see this thread here to help out those interested in digital cameras.

[profdlp]

On the news yesterday I heard them mention that last year was the first time that digital cameras outsold traditional film cameras.

Now that the digital side is the dominant market growth-wise, I think they'll get much better even faster. The only reason I still use my 35mm camera is for action shots. There seems to be a slight delay between when you press the shutter and when the capture occurs in a digital camera.

Nice pictures - I was especially impressed by the macro shots of the flowers.


Prof
(Do digital cameras "have shutterbugs" when they act weird?):D

[TheLostSwede]

This is a fantastic thread and by giving it time to grow, this will be a great library of knowledge in Digital Cameras. I am very happy to see such great interest, im a hobby photographer myself with SLR equipment.

Bad Karma,

A photo from a 35mm SLR is equalivent to around 6 true megapixels.

Canon just released an impressive camera that im just dying to get. A bit overkill, but WHAT A TOY!!

EOS-1DS with 11.1 effective megapixels. Writes images in both RAW and JPG at the same time. Costs a lot though. Dang!

[primesuspect]

Bothered:

You may not think so, but that picture has a significant blue shift. Look at the baby's shirt and the white lettering on the hat. It's slightly blue-tinged. This is exactly what I was talking about. I'll post a colour-corrected version of that picture to give you a comparison.

[danball1976]

Here's mine,
the Hewlett Packard Photosmart 850

Get brilliant photos near and far with the HP Photosmart 850 digital camera. With 56x total zoom and 4.13 MP resolution you will get outstanding close-ups and beautiful quality prints up to 20x30-inches. Use HP Instant Share to select on your camera where photos will go - including e-mail addresses and printers. Choose the automatic mode or manual controls to select camera settings for ISO exposure, white balance and more. Capture moments in sound and motion using the video clip audio feature!

• 56x total zoom (8x optical 7x digital) 4.13 MP total resolution
• HP Instant Share lets you select on your camera where your photos will go the next time you connect to your PC with up to 14 destinations
• automatic or manual controls for ISO, exposure, white balance and more.
• electronic viewfinder for enhanced framing of your photos
• record memories using the video clip and audio feature
• audio capture with still photos
• download, print, e-mail or display your digital photos on your TV in one easy step using the optional HP photosmart 8881 digital camera dock, purchase separately
• in-camera battery charging using optional HP digital camera dock (not included, purchase separately)
• easily print by connecting directly to your compatible HP printer via included usb cable (no pc required)
• store up to 16MB on the included Secure Digital memory card; purchase C8885A adapter to use secure digital memory cards with printers that accept CompactFlash
• HP memories disc creator software lets you make slide shows and more
• take great looking pictures with no guesswork with the auto exposure feature, auto flash and red-eye reduction
• save your batteries with the optional AC power adapter (not included)
• automatic focus for clear views and great photos
• supports up to 128MB SD or MMC memory cards

what's in the box?
• HP Photosmart 850 digital camera with direct-printing capability
• 16 MB Secure Digital (SD) memory card
• neck strap
• 4 AA e2 titanium batteries
• tethered lens cap
• USB cable to PC
• USB direct print cable
• user's manual
• dock insert for use with optional HP Photosmart digital camera dock (C8881A)
• CD with HP photo & imaging software, share-to-web software, HP memories disc creator software and ArcSoft FunHouse



below photo is at the 2MP setting, medium quality

[primesuspect]

Bothered:

Here's what I would consider a colour-corrected version of that picture. I've rebalanced the colour curves so that reds and yellows come back and flesh looks more natural.

Cute kid! Congrats, grandpa!

mcwc: That long exposure night shot is very inspiring. What a great picture! The cross-dressers --- ummm.. not so inspiring ;)

[mcwc]

Well, blame the student council for coming up with gender bender day. It was lame but got a good laugh from it. The guy in the pink flowery robe has a good shock factor and he does have a little problem liking to dress up as female anime characters. From what I know, he has done it at least 4 times.

Thx for the comment on the night shot. Too bad only one car came by :(. When I have time, I want to try to capture water droplets in mid fall and when it hits a pool of water.

[bothered]

Primesuspect,
My wife agrees with you but only just. The picture you did makes the baby look a bit yellow to me and the red is too vivid. Still, Food for thought.

bothered.

[jono]

The colour balance or saturation has been a little over done Prime
as you started to lose a little detail around the bottom of the red hat, but good effort as the skin tones are not as washed out.

I may post some pics with my Nikon camera, and if anyone is interested maybe some Astrophotography images with some specialised CCD equipment i have.

[primesuspect]

Yeah, looking at the picture today after stepping back for a night, the picture does look a bit yellow. Not my best work, certainly, but at least you can see what I'm talking about.

Jono: Please do post your pictures along with the specs/model/approx retail price of your camera.

[Shorty]

This is my (sub ~£200) cheap 2 MegaPixel Fuji Finepix A204...

Number of effective pixels
2.0 million

CCD sensor
1/2.7 inch

Number of total pixels 2.11 million
Number of recorded pixels 1.92 million pixels (1600 x 1,200)
1.2 million pixels (1,280 x 960)
0.35 million pixels (640 x 480)
File format Exif (JPEG)

Storage media xD-Picture Card
Lens 3X optical zoom lens
Lens focal length Equivalent to 38-114mm on a 35mm camera
LCD monitor 1.5 inch D-TFD (55,000 pixels)
Movie recording 320 x 240 pixels: 10 frames / sec, up to 20 sec
160 x 120 pixels: 10 frames / sec. up to 240 sec
without sound

Voice Memo No
Music function No
Internet conferencing Yes
PictureCradle No
Power source 2 x AA type alkaline batteries, or 2 x AA Ni-MH batteries
AC power adapter
Dimensions 100.4 (W) x 65.0 (H) x 51.7 (D) mm
Weight 185g

The only change done to these photos was to shrink to 40% of their original 2mp resolution.

<center>
http://dnpdynamic.com/shorty/camera/image1.jpg

7pm @ nite.. neighbours cat. Light is fading but ok.

http://dnpdynamic.com/shorty/camera/image2.jpg

This camera has a good macro mode. Same time, macro enabled.

http://dnpdynamic.com/shorty/camera/image3.jpg

Taken in bright light inside a warehouse. Macro again. Excuse my slightly shaky hand (this is an Opteron heatsink/CPU & mobo.. I was nervous/excited!). Note the flash reflections on the top of the caps. This camera's flash is very basic. I had a terrible time trying to photograph a metallic object recently. </center>

Although this is a cheap digital camera. It's quality is surprisingly good. I tried several others before settling on this. For those looking for a cheap but decent. The A204 is great value @ £160.

[mcwc]

Fuji makes some nice CCDs. The ones on their high end cameras are really really nice.

Shorty, if you don't want metal pieces to reflect light in your macro shots with flash, go into macro mode and go to full telephoto. Then the effects of the flash should be reduced. That is what I do when I take indoor macro shots at night.

[jono]

One little trick i use mainly when i use my Minolta SLR is to put a few layers of tissue paper over the flash, that way it acts as a diffuser and limits over exposure/light of the flash close up.

[danball1976]

Am I right when I say SLR is Single Lens Reflex?

[mcwc]

Yup, you're right.

[Khaos]

Sony CyberShot DSC-P72 3.2 MP Digital Camera

[Khaos]

Sony CyberShot DSC-P72 3.2 MP Digital Camera

I didn't do anything to these pictures aside from resize them and save them at piss poor JPEG quality settings (5 in Photoshop).

[Khaos]

Sony CyberShot DSC-P72 3.2 MP Digital Camera

One more... We had gotten a lot of rain last week. I'll get a macro example in here when I get a chance. I'm not sure what my wife did with the camera! It may be in her car. I have taken some macro shots and it can get very close in with good clarity.

My wife spent $350 on the whole package from an online retailer. It came with 1x64MB memory stick, 1x16MB memory stick, a carrying case, battery recharger and 2xAA NiMH batteries, propriety USB transfer cable and universal USB memory stick reader. I think the camera by itself costs $330 at Fry's right now.

[primesuspect]

That's another bit of good advice for potential buyers: Look for package deals.

My Kodak LS443 retails at $400 US, but I got it for $300 and it came with a 64mb SD card as well as a carrying case. Sure, the carrying case only cost $15, but the RAM is easily worth $40 retail.

[Khaos]

Those cases can be pricey if you don't go generic. A Sony case, batteries and recharger package for our camera costs $80 by itself. :eek:

[jono]

I have had this Camera a few years now and i'm not sure if its still available, but should be able to get one second hand.

Its part of the coolpix range of Nikon Cameras so the lenses are in my opinion are the best out of the rest. Even though its only 2.1 megapix the quality of the lens is more important than the size of the pixels/res.

Image below is taken in natural sun light, no flash or post work, taken in macro mode.
http://www.btinternet.com/~john.almond/images/images/_vti_cnf/DSCN00044.jpg

The last image is the same image as above, but zoomed up in photoshop 55% more as you can see not much loss of detail due to the quality of Nikon lenses.
http://www.btinternet.com/~john.almond/images/images/_vti_cnf/DSCN0004a.jpg

The link is a review of the camera..

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp800/default.asp

[mcwc]

IMO, the quality of the lens is worthless if the CCD is crap and vis versa.

[SimGuy]

Sony Mavica FD (the original floppy disk digital camera)
Model: MVC-FD97
2.1 Megapixel
SteadyShot
20x Precision Digital Zoom

Here are some sample photo's (no image manipulation at all, 1024x768 photo's):

[SimGuy]

# 2

[SimGuy]

# 3

Note: All photo's are taken in my backyard @ 8:00 PM EST on June 23, 2003. Sun was setting...

[SimGuy]

# 4 (Last One) :)

[danball1976]

This is the same camera with it it at the 4MP, medium quality setting, resulting in a 2272x1712 photo, the image I have here was the center 1506x1078 and then reduced 50% in order to make it fit in here

[primesuspect]

These pictures are good examples of outdoor stills, but I want to see how these cameras do flesh tones/portraiture and action shots. So will potential buyers :)

[danball1976]

Ok, this is my brother with that camera, 2MP, medium quality 1136x848

[Dexter]

Is there an easy way to pull the detailed info from the file, or has everyone been retyping the info from the file properties? I was going to post a couple of pics from my Kodak EasyShare DX4330...but I am too l lazy to type all the image specs....

Dexter...

[danball1976]

Yeah, right click, properties ---> summary, and then advanced button at bottom

[Dexter]

Danball:

Ya, I know that part. But, you only captured half the info. Many of the above posts have ALL the info in TEXT format. I was wondering if there was an easy way to yank that information out of the file properties as TEXT to paste into here, or if others have just typed it all verbatim.

Dexter...

[mcwc]

Doesn't you camera come with it's own picture browsing software? I just used Canon Zoombrowser EX that came with my camera to get the info from the JPEG header. If your camera doesn't come with its own browsing software, you can use ACDSee do copy the info in one step.

Here is Canon Zoombrowser EX (what I use).

[mcwc]

Here is ACDSee. So to the picture properties and go to the Metadata tab. Right click anywhere in the window and select copy all. All the info in the JPEG head will be copy to your clipboard.

[Dexter]

Thanks, I'll check that in my Kodak software, otherwise I will grab a copy of ACDSee.

[danball1976]

mcwc said
Doesn't you camera come with it's own picture browsing software? I just used Canon Zoombrowser EX that came with my camera to get the info from the JPEG header. If your camera doesn't come with its own browsing software, you can use ACDSee do copy the info in one step.

Here is Canon Zoombrowser EX (what I use).

If your talking to me, yes it does, but I didn't bother installing it

[mcwc]

Oh, I was answering Dexter's question.

[Khaos]

Here is a macro example that I shot with the Sony DSC-P72. Nothin' fancy done here, everything was on autopilot. I just put it in macro mode. This is one case where the full-sized photo actually looks even better than the reduced one. This flower just looks amazing close up. I will post the full-size picture if you guys want.

[profdlp]

Yeah, I'd like to see it!

Very nice pictures.


Prof

[maxanon]

has anyone printed any of their digital images? If so, what do you think is the minimum resolution for a decent pic?

Also, the canon camera link :http://www.canon.co.jp/Imaging/EOS1DS/menu.html

You can download some sample images (in jpeg and raw) to see the quality. I have to say, very nice.

[Khaos]

My brother in law has an Epson photo printer and it churns out some pretty sweet prints for less than $300. I mean they seriously look good - Even uses glossy paper. I think it can be had for ~$225 on NewEgg or from a similarly low-priced retailer.

Here's an enlarged view of the center of the flower. The original crop was 1280x1024 (My desktop resolution, this thing is currently my background), and then I shrunk it down to 1024xWhatever. Sorry for the 200KB filesize. :|

The little specks aren't noise or anything, they're dew.

Oh, one last note. Yesterday we used the full motion video feature for the first time, and I must say, I'm pretty impressed. The video is very clear for close range subjects, but loses clarity at around 10 feet. For close range, however, it is clear enough to watch full-screen on a 19 inch monitor. It actually looks pretty darn good. The further away the subject, the more the resolution needs to be reduced in order to produce clarity. 640x480 is probably ideal.

[jono]

maxanon said
has anyone printed any of their digital images? If so, what do you think is the minimum resolution for a decent pic?

Also, the canon camera link :http://www.canon.co.jp/Imaging/EOS1DS/menu.html

You can download some sample images (in jpeg and raw) to see the quality. I have to say, very nice.

I would not buy a digital camera below 2.11mp, you can get a decent 10x8 photo taken in tiff mode with a 2.11mp camera.

I print alot of my images scanned photo's 2d and 3d modelling images, digital camera images, i set my printer to print at the maximum dpi that its allowed and always use photo glossy film paper and never use re-fill ink type cartridges.

[Defcon_IV]

I uninstalled my picture browsing software in favor of ACDSee. It's a terrific program, the only thing it doesn't do that I'd like to see is the ability to rotate the pictures incorporated into the fullscreen browser. I do like that you can use nigh any keys you can think of to scroll, kinda like browsing a folder for files.<br>I use a FujiFilm FinePix 2800Z (http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/Products.jsp?nav=0&parent=PRODUCT_CATEGORY_235315&product=43860738). They're rather cheap now, and the newest ones (the 3800 (http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/Products.jsp?nav=0&parent=PRODUCT_CATEGORY_499950&product=43860768) and the S602 (http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/Products.jsp?nav=0&parent=PRODUCT_CATEGORY_471517&product=43860757)) are reasonably easy to find cheap through MySimon, C|net, etc.<br>I found that this camera was really, really what I was looking for. I've also used the two newer ones I've mentioned and they're amazing, but the S602 is something you may want to hold off on until you're sure it's the last camera you'll ever buy...a touch on the wallet incompatible side. You can find a bunch of pictures I took using it on my photosite (http://defconiv.deviantart.com). I'll get some pics from the other ones up soon enough.
<br><br>Overall they are resilient. I keep my camera, because of its incredibly odd and awkward shape, in my backpack. I'm a twenty-year-old college student with a rather avid outdoors interest and the bad habit of dropping things. My camera has fallen down stairs, into puddles, off a rock, and the only thing that has happened is the acquisition of "manly" nicks and pits that make for a decent conversation piece, it still works fine.<br><br>Whatever camera you decide to use I'd suggest strongly that you use Duracell Ultra batteries in it, no junk they work better and last longer.

[mcwc]

How long does Duracell Ultra last? I find plain alkaline don't last very long. I am using NiMHs and they last for a very long time. I had my camera on for about 3 hours and it still has plenty of juice. The NiMH I currently have are Energizer 1850mAh, the cheapest, high mAh brand name NiMHs I could get in March.

[danball1976]

I bought the Energizer Photo Lithium batteries, they don't last long on my camera, maybe 1-2hrs total of continuous use.

I bought the NiMH Energizer batteries, they last 2-3hrs, and thats stretching it. To save power, I turn the camera off after every photo I take, or keep the 2" LCD screen off as much as I need to. I also got an extra set of NiMH batteries to keep going if the first set runs out of power while I'm still using the camera.

[Enverex]

Canon Powershot A40
Automatic Settings (as my dad doesnt know how to use the camera or macro mode, so no close ups)
1600x1200 - High Quailty Mode

[Enverex]

2

[Enverex]

3

[Enverex]

4

[Enverex]

5 -
Taken out of a plane window, which is why its blue.
The first picture with the birds was also taken through a window.

[Enverex]

Just found this, useful if you are runing *nix -

* media-gfx/exiftags
Latest version available: 0.97
Size of downloaded files: 41 kB
Homepage: http://johnst.org/sw/exiftags/
Description: Extracts JPEG EXIF headers from digital camera photos

NS

[Butters]

Kodak Easyshare CX4230
Purchased for 149 @ Tigerdirect (Refurb)


Las Vegas infront of the Luxor
http://www.cozworth.com/images/Vegas-072.jpg


Mandalay Bay Shark Reef (Indoors through aquarium glass)
http://www.cozworth.com/images/Vegas-041.jpg

[Hawk]

Prime, Good lookin kids there man! Looks like they had fun with crayolas on the wall! I like that Kodak Easyshare. Nice all the way around for that price. And it's in my price range. Cute grandkid too bothered! Thnx all, for your input here. I'll be checkin back for more good stuff on cameras. :cool:

[mcwc]

Olympus D-390 (http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_product_lobbypage.asp?l=1&p=16&bc=1&product=911)
2.0MP
Fixed lens, 2.5X digital zoom
Also takes sephia and B&W pictures.
$199.99CDN

For the price, this is an excellent beginners camera for those who don't want to spend much to get into digital photography. The pictures comes out nice and sharp. Most of the time, the pictures come out cold (bluish hue), though it can be corrected in Rhotoshop. Hey, what can you expect from a cheap camera and most people wouldn't care unless they are really picky or professionals. For their browsing software, don't bother to install it. It can't compare to what Canon offers. Just let win2k or winxp to recognize the camera and use it like a flash drive to get your pictures.

All pictures are uncorrected, only resized.
File info
File Name
P9170083.JPG
Camera Model Name
C150,D390
Shooting Date/Time
17/09/2003 3:15:25 PM
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/196
Av( Aperture Value )
2.8
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
100
Image Size
1600x1200
Flash
Off
File Size
351KB
Owner's Name

[mcwc]

For this picture, you can see that it can out cold. Notice the bluish hue on my hood which is gold colour.

File Name
P1010073.JPG
Camera Model Name
C150,D390
Shooting Date/Time
01/01/2003 12:02:26 AM
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/172
Av( Aperture Value )
7.0
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
100
Image Size
1600x1200
Flash
Off
File Size
381KB
Owner's Name

[primesuspect]

Yeah, that's my only complaint about my Kodak as well -- look at the letters on the stop sign and you can see that it tends towards blue. My camera does the same thing.

[mcwc]

What can you expect from a cheap camera. Looking at the lens, it only has a blue coating. Comparing it to my Canon, it has a green, magenta, and yellow on multiple lenses. So, it seems to be an issue with just using 1 coating on the lens.

[primesuspect]

Yeah but mine was ~$350 ... I don't consider that cheap... ;)

[mcwc]

I'd expect a bit more for a $350 camera. What coatings are on your lens? Look at your lens with a light source (desk lamp) near you.

[Camman]

got this for christmas last year, great little camera, I love it! takes beautiful pics!

HP Photosmart 320

Product type Digital camera
Digital zoom 4
Effective sensor resolution 2,062,500 pixels
Gross sensor resolution 2,141,928 pixels
Optical sensor size 1/2.7"
Optical sensor type CCD
Light sensitivity ISO 100
Still image format JPEG
Digital video format AVI
Min shutter speed 1/1.5 sec
Max shutter speed 1/1000 sec
Shooting modes Frame movie mode
White balance Automatic
Lens aperture F/4.5
Focal length (35mm camera equivalent) 38mm
Min focal length 5.9 mm
Focus adjustment Focus free
Min focus range 29.5 in

[Camman]

#2

[primesuspect]

Are they grainy because of high jpeg compression? Or are these untouched?

[madmat]

This is a pic I took with my Toshiba PDR 3300 3.2 mega pixel camera with everything at auto using the remote it came with.

[Camman]

primesuspect had this to say
Are they grainy because of high jpeg compression? Or are these untouched?

these are unmodified....are they grainy? :(


EDIT: ya now I see it in the sky, hmm, wtf.....the native picture format of the camera is JPEG (or so it says in the specs)

[Camman]

here's another pic from when I first got my 9700 Pro and I was trying to pimp it everywhere, doesnt look as grainy..

[a2jfreak]

I haven't seen it mentioned here yet: DO NOT BUY VIVITAR. I repeat: DO NOT BUY VIVITAR.

I have had nothing but trouble from my vivitar. It takes HORRIBLE pictures. It eats batteries like they're going out of style. It's VERY picky about media brand. It doesn't seem to support the full capacity of my memory: 256MB. All in all, this vivitar is a pile of crap. Perhaps I just got the lamest model they have, but It isn't like the camera was cheap or anything.

[primesuspect]

Thanks, A2J -- that's exactly what I was hoping to achieve with this thread --- when you're gonna spend $200 + for a piece of gear, you want it to actually work... :)

[primesuspect]

Cam, I hate to crap on your camera, but those pictures look awfully noisy.. Are those taken at the highest quality level?

[a2jfreak]

Pleased I could oblige.

I'd hate for someone to waste money on a vivitar like I did. Let my lesson be a lesson for all.

primesuspect had this to say
Thanks, A2J -- that's exactly what I was hoping to achieve with this thread --- when you're gonna spend $200 + for a piece of gear, you want it to actually work... :)

[mcwc]

My dad was about to buy a Vivitar but he chose not to and got an Olympus. Lucky he didn't get a Vivitar. There aren't even any reviews of a Vivitar digital camera or any sample pictures.

//Edit: Mind posting a sample picture, settings, and camera model a2j?

[a2jfreak]

The pictures of my truck in the vehicle thread (can't recall the actual thread title) is taken w/ the camera. Those pictures don't look "bad" but they aren't great and the hassle of getting the camera to work is just horrible. Sometimes it's as if it freezes during the "boot-up" process. It won't extend the lens, it just freezes. No way to unfreeze it except take the batteries out, which still doesn't work but about 15% of the time. Then I have to reset the date on the stupid thing so most of my images all have the same date. It's just a piece of crap. I'll get the model # for you later on . . . it's in my truck ATM and I don't feel like walking outside to get it. :)

[Camman]

primesuspect had this to say
Cam, I hate to crap on your camera, but those pictures look awfully noisy.. Are those taken at the highest quality level?

yeah, they're taken at the highest quality setting.

[csimon]

...resolution reduced 50% from original and then image adjusted to grayscale ...I don't think this camera takes b&w unless I'm missing something.

[csimon]

thanksgiving 2003 orange beach alabama

[csimon]

MJ consider yourself :Pwned:

[ishiii]

Hey guys
Anyone got a Fujifilm FinePix S5000 Z ???
I am thinking of sellen the kodak dx4330, and moven up.
They both have the same MP but the fuji has 10X optical and more manual control.
Comments, suggestions??

[keto]

I have a Canon A70. I'm not much of a photog but it has lots of user adjustable options and settings and is widely considered to be the best in its price range, based on the reading I've done. Looks like it's a few bux more (~$50US + on Yahoo shopping, ymmv) than the Fuji so it may not work for ya but just thot I'd throw in a recommendation on the Canon. There are a kazillion reviews out there on the Canon if you want to do some comparison reading.

[ishiii]

Well I sold the old kodak dx4330 3mp camera.
Just got a olympus C-750. 4mp and 10X optical zoom. Great camera so far. You can ajust every setting which is cool, still tryen to learn it after only haven it for a few days.
Here are some pics from day one:
Budest temple and beach pics. The swaztica like image is actually a buddist symbol and is reverse of the nazi one.
All I did was resize them...................................

[ishiii]

Last night I took the new cam to the beach and tryed to get some night shots.
Did some playing with the settings.
Which of the three pics below looks the best????
Forget the photgraphy skills or what is in the pic, both kinda suck.
Or do all three look like crappy night pics??? There are still a few settings I can tweak in attempting good night pics.

[ishiii]

Guys;
I would really like some feed back on them three night pics.
I personally think number 2 is the best of the three.

[primesuspect]

Number 1 is decent, it has a more artistic quality to it, but #2 is more authentic-feeling, I guess. They're both good (3 is too dull), but good for different purposes, I guess is what I'm trying to say.. ;)

[Straight_Man]

ishiii, the first is just slightly overexposed for the bright areas, but shows the tent nicely. The third is way underexposed, not enough time for exposure to CCD. The second is nice for the buildings, but the foreground is underexposed.

See if your camera has a multi-exposure sense mode, ok??? It looks like a center exposure guess was used based on a single brightness metering in auto mode, and you played with F stops. The darker the place in middle of shot,the longer the camera exposes the CCD and you get washing like in photo on left side, assume that to be photo one. Let the silly thing use the flash with center of focus on a white object, and it will underexpose the rest. If the tent had a flashlight in it and you focused on the bright tent, you would get the metering adjusted for that glow adn brightness level, and with a scattered multi-area brightness sense you would get a more average level.

Night panoramics are a PITA to get right, and actually I woudl edit this pic with Paint Shop Pro and impse and alpha mask on it to dim out the brights in photo one which has the most workable data. Try smaller things, closer shots. Focus unless inifinite will be harder at night, the digitals use a distance reflectivity measure for objects to focus and wioth scattered dim objects it is hard for the cam to even focus.

The only cams I know that are good at all for flashless night panoramas are those with an ASA equiv rating of 400 and the only ones I know that come close are in the $900.00 and up range (USD)-- they are SLR digicams, worked with filters off, bare lense. Work with mid-lit and brighter lit shots, you will get better focus and metering and have less complex editing ahead of you. Cheaper cams are typically ASA 100, and unless you have tripod and can let them expose for several seconds to minutes depending on sensitivity, you will get a mess and night focus will be off unless you can fully manually focus the thing (SLR style focusing also).

In general I like the building lightings in 2(less splash from overexposure) and the foreground in 1 with 3 way underexposed all over imho. But that has to be imho. What you see as professional digital cam art is rarely raw pics, it oftne has been editted a lot or is two photos joined-- foreqround from 1 with the tree and city skyscrapers of 2 would be best imho.

You asked for opinion, there is my nickel's worth.

John.

[ishiii]

Thanks allot guys
Ageek, great input.
Thank you

[Straight_Man]

Welcome, ishiii. I THINK I will switch boxes and doctor a pic I took at Christmas tiem with the Camedia 4000, it illustrates auto-brightness problems pretty well.....

John-- back in 10 or so.

[Straight_Man]

PIC 1: Look at the window(reflecting lights) and candle flame and slight splash in lights on tree. This is my nephew Hunter.... Picture 1 had to compress, it went a bit bluey due to color levels and density changes and I lost the bright pinpoint light relfections I can see here. It was a lower res pic than pic 2 to start.

PIC 2, editted for brightness, I had to draw drapes to get rid of too much contrast, and offcenter the focus and brightness levels a bit, then brighten the whole thing up by 15% to get the right side of tree from being way too dark to just too dark..... Picture 2 got trashed by a compression algorithm in part, it was a 16 MB TIF. If we had TIF support here, LZH compression subtype, it would be neat-- real neat!

Camedia 4000Z, mostly auto mode, for both.

John.

[morfeu]

Shot taken with my old Canon PowerShot A200 (wich i already selled to a friend)

2.1mp

[ishiii]

The first pic is nice.
But that night shot is real grainy. Grainy night shots is why I upgraded my digital camera

[morfeu]

The first pic is nice.
But that night shot is real grainy. Grainy night shots is why I upgraded my digital camera

yes, that's why im going to buy a new one! :)

[FormFactor]

Last night I took the new cam to the beach and tryed to get some night shots.
Did some playing with the settings.
Which of the three pics below looks the best????
Forget the photgraphy skills or what is in the pic, both kinda suck.
Or do all three look like crappy night pics??? There are still a few settings I can tweak in attempting good night pics.

I would say pic 1 is best. 2 is slightly more washed out, and less detailed.

[KingFish]

Pic 1 is definitely the best. Look at the ground in the pics. In picture 2 the ground is grainy to the point that it looks pixelized. It's nearly completely dark in pic 3. Pic 1 also appears to be sharper than the other two. Night shots are quite hard with digital photography. The best ones I ever saw with a digital are ones taken from a nikon d100. Pic 1 is good work in my opinion. The rest are quite good too (beaches, temples, etc).

KingFish

[KingFish]

I've always been a huge fan of digital photography. I've been keeping a digital with me since mid 2000 and taking many pictures while on the job with it. Here's three of an 18 wheeler that lost it in a curve on I-10.

[KingFish]

I've always been a huge fan of digital photography. I've been carrying a digital camera with me since mid 2000 and taking pictures of most everything I come across on the job. Here's three of an 18 wheeler that lost it in a curve on I-10 last march.
camera: Fujifilm 3800 3.2MP

KingFish

[profdlp]

Good eye, KingFish. I hadn't noticed, but in ishiii's night shots pic 3 you could cut the bottom 1/4 off and lose nothing.

[KingFish]

When I was part of the crime scene team I was fortunate to be able to take a forensic digital photography class. It was excellent. It also made me want to junk my fujifilm and get a nikon d100. That camera is absolutely amazing. We did stuff like expose someone for 50 seconds, painted them with lights in different places, and made "ghosts" by moving the sub with lights set up in different places (all within that 50 seconds). Pretty neat stuff. My hardest pictures to take are those at night, especially of housefires at night. The lighting is awful, the contrast is off the scale, the camera has fits with the autofocus, and there is only a limited amount of time to get the shots and fiddle with the camera. I've taken a few good ones luckily but mostly bad ones. I'll post some of each. The first series below is of a guy's shed that caught on fire. They aren't too bad yet aren't the best. They were taken with my old Epson 850z 2.1MP.

KingFish

[KingFish]

The second series is from a radio station fire that I happen to drive up on. It was huge. The fire department never really got a handle on it. The nearest fire hydrant was about 3/4 of a mile away (was right on the outskirts of town). These were also taken from my old Epson 850z. These pictures were all resized down.

KingFish

[ishiii]

Thanks Kingfish
I have had allot of people say pic one is the best and some people say pic two is the best.
I like both myself. Ill know better when I take some in to get printed.
Again thanks for your two cents

[KingFish]

Good deal ishiii. Keep 'em coming, I love pictures. I don't think I've seen that many pictures of the countryside of South Korea and the common people, architecture, etc. I believe a picture is definitely worth a thousand words.

KingFish

[ishiii]

oh ya
Carnage
I dont even need to slow down and rubber neck as I drive by.
Sweet

[Madball]

From my 2 year old Fuji FinePix 2600 2mp. It has been a good camera. I takes great outdoor pics. Only thing I don't like about it is it give bad red eye.

[GnomeWizardd]

D00d kingFish I am like mezmorized by those pics of ACTUALY avents! you should start a thread and post all you pics of ON THE JOB pics!

[KingFish]

D00d kingFish I am like mezmorized by those pics of ACTUALY avents! you should start a thread and post all you pics of ON THE JOB pics!

I'm glad you liked them. Those are just a small slice of what I have. I have plenty of freshly killed people, etc but it wouldn't be in my best interest to put them here. I do show them to people as each one has a good story behind it but I don't give copies out and let them view the pics on my monitor only. I'll keep the appropriate ones coming if you want.


Great pics Madball. I'd love to go visit those places. I've owned two digital cameras and they have always taken great outdoor pics. Those are gorgeous views.

[primesuspect]

Morfeu:

Pic #1 just became my new desktop bkg.. .Excellent shot!

[ishiii]

wow that pic of the canyon is sweet. Nice shot dude

[Al_Capown]

Morfeu:

Pic #1 just became my new desktop bkg.. .Excellent shot!
yep, me too.

[morfeu]

Morfeu:

Pic #1 just became my new desktop bkg.. .Excellent shot!


Thanks m8! u can check some other photos over here http://morfeu.deviantart.com/ Check gallery! :)

Taken with this Canon wich i've selled (waiting for Kodak DX6490 10x zoom with 4.1mp) and an Old Pentax ME super.

[primesuspect]

:eek: holy crap, you are an excellent photographer! That's a very impressive gallery!

[morfeu]

:eek: holy crap, you are an excellent photographer! That's a very impressive gallery!

Thanks! ) :bigggrin:

[KingFish]

Here's a vehicle from july 2001 in which the driver didn't know the road was a dead end into a bayou or was a stolen vehicle dumped off. When I come across it in the early morning hours nobody was around it and I never found out how it got there. Resized down.

KingFish

[morfeu]

Taken a while ago with my new 4.1Mp cam Kodak DX6490, just arrived today by Fedex! :rockon:

Here's a pic of my 18y old cat! :)

[fudgam]

thanksgiving 2003 orange beach alabama
Dude, thats an incredible shot.

[csimon]

Dude, thats an incredible shot.
Thanks fudgam ...my wife grabbed the camera and started taking pics of the sunset so I took over to see if I could get a better shot. We had just missed the feeding frenzy of flippers so we got a little trigger happy. Except for the red-eye I have no complants about this camera.

[KingFish]

Here are some scenic shots from the (almost) top of our I-210 bridge in Lake Charles, Louisiana. In one of them you can see our other large bridge, the I-10 bridge, as well as shots of our (in)famous chemical plants and larger downtown buildings off in the distance.

KingFish

[NeoFX]

...I only checked out the first page but those shots are very sharp! My dad just bought an Olympus C5060 5.1MP camera w/ Wide Zoom. We haven't used it much but he took a few practice pictures at a medium res. and it looked amazing! Much much better than our old Olympus digi camera.

[DogSoldier]

Anyone have a Kodak CX7300? It's a new budget model and I can't find any sample pics anywhere. Futureshop is having a promotion, $179.99 Cdn will get you a 3.2MP ccd. I'd like to get one to take to the Lan. So if noone has anything bad to say about it, I'll pick one up on thursday.

BTW, Beautiful pic of the beach csimon.

[KingFish]

The hands down winner IMO is www.dpreview.com . They test digital cameras like no other site. Check there for any questions about how good a model is. Hopefully they have the model reviewed you want to know about.

KingFish

[DogSoldier]

I checked that site out yesterday. No joy.

[Jaketh]

I take my amateur shots with an Olympus Camedia C-700. No additional photoshopping etc. The version I have is 2.1 megapixels (bought in 2001) and the newer versions have ramped that number up significantly. The pictures are hosted at http://jaketh.deviantart.com/

[DogSoldier]

I didn't pick up the Kodak but I did get a deal on a HP Photosmart 320 ($97.50 Cdn at Radio shack). I love it! The thing doesn't take great pictures - colours are oversaturated - but it does what it does well enough. This is a picture of a church undergoing renovation, notice the 2 different brick colours. This pic was sized down in PS from 1632 x 1232 to 800 x 604 and Saved for the Web at %90 quality. Also picked up a Lexar 256 MB SD card and a 4 pak of NiMHs + recharger, so I'm all set for the Lan. hehehe

Strangest thing, we had a cattle call today and our client director forgot his digital cam, so I went and got mine to take model snaps. I'd never even used the thing before but it was so easy, pure plug and play. XP detected it off the usb and transferred the photos almost automatically. :cool2:

[profdlp]

...Strangest thing, we had a cattle call today and our client director forgot his digital cam, so I went and got mine to take model snaps...
So naturally you post a picture of a brick building...

Where are the MODELS fer crying out loud... :rant:

J/K - Looks like a nice pic for an easy-on-the-wallet camera. ;)

[ishiii]

Went out and took a few shots last night
resized

[KingFish]

Those are all great pics. I'm really surprised at the sharpness of the $100 or so camera. I think that range of camera is good enough to finally splurge on the wife for her birthday. Ishii, love the pics of the city. Keep 'em coming. Dogsoldier, you can email privately the nude models if you don't mind.

KingFish

[DogSoldier]

King, what if your wife reads the e-mail before you do?!?? The price was so low because 1. It was a display model, and 2. they were having a 25% off sale on certain items. I just lucked out I think. This is actually an older model camera, the date on powerup said 2002 and the manual says 2001. If I had any patience at all, I would have gotten the Kodak. But hey, it's good enough for government work!

[ishiii]

Well here is another one for ya
Taken with our old kodak3mp cam
Very hazy but still a nice shot I think

[ishiii]

And this is how U kill mosquitoes and give yourself cancer all at the same time.

[DogSoldier]

ishii, you take some excellent shots. I guess it helps to live in such a foreign place, but still.... Been meaning to ask, your alias, does it have any meaning?

[KingFish]

Both are excellent shots. The night shots of the city, is that Seoul or Busan? I find the asian cultures quite intriguing. I find them fascinating even though you are used to those surroundings every day. Keep 'em coming.
Dog, wife doesn't have access. Plus, she's barely computer literate. It's like oil and water for her. She views computers as her competition. I don't understand it.

KingFish

[ishiii]

Thanks guys.
Dogsolider: the name ishiii was a typo that I been using for three years or more. I was told it was a family name, japenesse. And in ummm Kill Bill, Lucy Lu has that name, which is fine by me.

King: All the pics are of Busan, we only went to seoul once and that was the same weekend we sold the old kodak cam and got a new olympus. So no Seoul pics and I have to say that weekend was enough for me. Too many people,it is like triple Busan.

[ishiii]

They call it a junk for a reason.

[ishiii]

And a few more taken with the old kodak
A good overview of the city, HAZY
A dragon, not centered, the view finder was crap on the old cam
And a shot from an ocean temple, where the dragon was

[KingFish]

Awesome, totally awesome. About the junk. Have you ever heard of a place called Hackberry, Louisiana? They have some junks there even lousier than that. Asian engineering > Cajun engineering. The pics are absolutely outstanding.

/me now prepares to duck flying objects coming from muddocktor's side

[ryko]

Here are some shots with an OLYMPUS E-20n 5.0MP. This camera is freakin awesome---I steal it from my girlfriend every chance I get.....the best thing is that she got the extra high powered 8400mAh lithium polymer battery so you can shoot forever. These could go in the babe thread, but technically it is an exaple of digital photography, so... :rockon:

[KingFish]

Keep 'em coming. I'm even more intrigued with blonde and cleavage culture than asian culture.

KingFish

[Black Hawk]

o...m...g

/me faints

[DogSoldier]

woah.. what a thing to see with your morning coffee.. lol

[profdlp]

The damn railing's in the way...

That's my kind of brick house!

[ryko]

Check it out, this camera actually takes pictures of other things too! Here's a lanscape of someone's backyard in florida if anybody is interested......I am still trying to dig up some better nightlife shots as well. :cheers:

[profdlp]

...someone's backyard in florida if anybody is interested...
Did you use a long exposure time to get the effect in the waterfall? Looks nice. :smiles:

[ryko]

No special tricks that day---it was raining a little though. Some details on my settings...

[ryko]

Here it is..........swimsuit contest at Chromium! :D

[FormFactor]

Very nice eh-um cam there ryko. Where were those shots taken?

[ryko]

the pics were taken in chicago at a couple bars/clubs. the first few were taken at white star lounge and blu, with the last one at chromium.

[KingFish]

/me makes plan to visit Chicago and go partying with ryko

[DogSoldier]

I took the HP back to Radio Shack, it was corrupting first shots and timer shots. Went and got the Kodak CX7300 I was looking at originally. This camera is much better, the compression algorithim is waaay better. I can Save for The Web at much higher compression and the image loss is much less noticeable than with the HP. This is the front foyer at the office, flash off. Slightly blurry because it was hand held. Downsized from 2080x1544 to 800x594. Saved at 50% using Photoshop.
http://www.planetfortress.com/tfa/stuff/sample-kodak-office.jpg

http://www.planetfortress.com/tfa/stuff/pic-settings.gif

[KingFish]

Good shot and thanks for the info Dog. I'll steer clear of that original HP you bought. I've been leery of HP digital cams as they've almost always get mediocre reviews.

KingFish

[dak125]

For my sister's graduation I got her the Canon A80. I was very impressed with it. It's very user friendly and is super easy to maneuver around the menus. Setting it as "Auto" results as great pictures as well as changing all the manual settings. The menu system is much simpler to understand than my camera's (C-4000). To see an example pic of the A80 go here (http://digitaluprising.org/onlinepics/IMG_0125.jpg). It's quite big so I figured some wouldn't appreciate making the whole forum "shift" with the picture.

[profdlp]

Nice looking pic, dak. My dad got one of my nieces that camera for her birthday last month. It is everything you say it is. :)

[dak125]

Nice looking pic, dak. My dad got one of my nieces that camera for her birthday last month. It is everything you say it is. :)

Thanks man. I was tempted to get one for myself and sell my camera, but didn't happen. I looked through all the pictures I had and couldn't really come up with anything except with my car in it :werr:. So, here's a picture that was unedited (except for the license plate). I think it's at 1024 res. I'll be sure to take a picture without my car involved soon. I'm a big fan of the Olympus C-4000 once you get the settings the way you like them. You really do need the owners manual in front of you to figure out what everything means.

[dak125]

I found this one but I think the scope had a smudge on it in the upper right. Nonetheless this is a picture from my buddy's house in FLA...his backyard :eek2:. C-4000 again at 1024 res.

[Madball]

Can you find the sheep?

[csimon]

very cool pic dan!
you sure those are sheep?

[DogSoldier]

Interesting pic, thought I had to cross my eyes to see a 3D image.. lol. Yeah, you sure those are sheep? Look like mountain goats to me.

[Nomad]

Yeti!

[Madball]

Bighorn sheep. Mountain goats are white, not brown like these.

[Madball]

This is a goat.

[Madball]

This is a sheep.

[csimon]

deja vu ...no itsa shark ...no itsa porpoise!!! LOL ;D

thanks for the clarification madball!

[Geeky1]

Here we go, these are some shots taken with a Canon PowerShot S30.

The maximum resolution (and the resolution I took these pictures at) is 2048x1536 (~3mp); rather than scale them down and loose detal, I simply took 1024x768 squares of the images. They were saved at quality level 8 (high) in photoshop, and as far as I can tell, suffered no loss of quality from the originals.

[Madball]

A little touch up.

[Gargoyle]

This is from a HP 733 camera. (3.2 MP)
I'm not all that happy with it. The auto-focus isn't impressive. I'm going to try to return it and get a Kodak or Fuji, I think.

This is actual pixels - an 800x600 selection from the 2048x1536 image. The original image size is 1.63mb. It was saved at Photoshop JPEG quality setting 6. I didn't notice any reduction in quality until it was lowered below that level.

[mcwc]

My dad got a new digital camera, an Olympus C-740UZ (http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_product_lobbypage.asp?l=1&p=16&bc=2&product=909). This is the "fun" camera between my Canon A60 and his Olympus D-390 because of the 10X optical zoom and the ability to use 55mm filters from his Contax 139 Quartz.

The images comes out very nice. The images are sharp, and the colours come out neutral, compared to the warm images from the A60 and the cool images from the D-390.

Only got it for a few days and haven't taken too many pictures with it, but here are a few.

First pic, resized: Night scene mode, F4.0, 4.0sec, flash off, ISO64, 380mm.
Second pic, cropped: Program mode, macro, F3.2, 1/200sec, flash off, ISO64, 81mm, expousure compensation 1.3.
Third pic, resized: Shutter priority, F4.5, 1/400sec, flash off, ISO100, 38mm, polarized filter.
Fourth pic, resied: Program mode, F3.2, 1/160sec, flash on, ISO100, 141mm.
Fifth pic, resized: Program mode, F3.2, 1/13sec, flash off, ISO100, 198mm, close-up filter No. 1.

[leishi85]

Sony cyber shot P92

took this with everything on auto, and flash on.

[primesuspect]

Canon EOS 300d (Digital Rebel): Full auto mode, F/5, shutter speed 1/50, ISO400, autofocus.

Subject: Snuffie, as per the usual :D

[primesuspect]

Same settings as above, except manual focus.

Subject: annoying dad with camera, always taking pictures of his kids.

[Black Hawk]

Canon EOS 300d (digital rebel): Full auto mode, F/5, shutter speed 1/50, ISO400, autofocus.

Subject: Snuffie, as per the usual :D
A pose for profdlp? :crazy: ;D

[primesuspect]

This camera almost almost makes him look like a noble hound ;D

[Geeky1]

He needs a better makeup artist tho. :-/

[Paul]

Thanks man. I was tempted to get one for myself and sell my camera, but didn't happen. I looked through all the pictures I had and couldn't really come up with anything except with my car in it :werr:. So, here's a picture that was unedited (except for the license plate). I think it's at 1024 res. I'll be sure to take a picture without my car involved soon. I'm a big fan of the Olympus C-4000 once you get the settings the way you like them. You really do need the owners manual in front of you to figure out what everything means.

I guess ill have to post my Z too..... T-tops are a bitch in the rain eh?

Taken on an HP433 3.2 megapixel. 400 ISO speed

[Paul]

Same camera

[Ioana]

Made with SONY.. don't know any other details.. just that I made them :D

[Leonardo]

Here's my first posting of a digital photograph from me. I just now have become proficient with the camera, having purchased it just a couple weeks ago.

Nikon D70, Nikkor 18-70DX AF lens
1/320th second
F 1/4.5
ISO 400
Location: northern Virginia
Photo resized to fit browser window (1024 X 681)
(shot through a smudged window)

[danball1976]

Here is my new Kodak EasyShare DK7630 6.1MP camera. I got it on sale from Circuit City online for $283 ($308 With tax). I like it alot. 3x optical zoom, 4x digital zoom - 12x total zoom. Battery life is outstanding. It can take up to 350 pictures on one charge on the included 1700mAh battery. Thats probably like a days worth of continuous use. My old HP850 couldn't get any better than 4 hours of use on one battery charge. Below is a picture of the inside of my car using the 1.7MP setting and standard compression. I intend on getting a 1GB SD memory card so I can use the 6.1MP setting all the time.



Specifications

Standard Features

Sensor
CCD resolution 6.2 MP (2872x2160 pixels)
Image resolution 6.1 MP (2856x2142 pixels)
Picture quality
6.1 MP -- best (print, poster)
5.4 MP -- best (optimized for 3:2 aspect ratio)
4.0 MP -- better (print, poster)
3.1 MP -- better (print 11"x14")
1.7 MP -- good (small prints)
Compression standard and fine

Lens
Zoom
3X optical zoom, 8-24 mm (35 mm equivalent: 39-117 mm) Lens threads for 37 mm lens adapter
4X advanced digital zoom
12X total zoom
Aperture f/2.8-8.0 (wide), f/4.8-8.0 (tele)
Shutter speed automatic: 1/8-1/1400 seconds; manual: 64-1/1000 seconds

Creative Performance Controls

Still
Scene modes auto, 16 scene modes, program auto, aperture priority, shutter priority, manual, custom setting mode
Color modes color settings (high, natural, low), black and white, sepia, sharpness (high, normal, low)
Click to capture 0.3 seconds
Shot to shot 1.8 seconds

Video
Movie mode audio recording during video capture; audio playback on camera
Movie image resolution
320x240 pixels at 24 fps
Movie length continuous based on memory capacity; or 5, 15, or 30 second clips
Movie file format Still: JPEG/EXIF v2.2; Video: Quicktime

Focus
Auto focus High-speed, low light auto-focus with continuous, single and selectable modes, including multi-zone, center-zone, left, center, right
Focus distance wide: 60 cm (23.6 in.) to infinity; tele: 60 cm (23.6 in.) to infinity; wide macro: 7-70 cm (2.8-27.6 in.); tele macro: 28-70 cm (11-27.6 in.)

Exposure
ISO equivalent 100-200 (auto) and 100, 200, 400, 800 (manual)
White balance auto, daylight, tungsten, fluorescent; can be controlled in any manual mode
Light metering method auto: TTL-AE matrix metering; selectable: multi-pattern, center-weighted, center spot
Exposure control programmed AE; apperature priority: AE: f/2.8-8 at wide; shutter priority: AE: 64 - 1-1/1000 seconds at wide; manual exposure: f/2.8-8, 64-1/1000 seconds; ISO 100-800
Long time exposure 0.7 - 64 seconds
Exposure compensation +/- 2.0 EV in 0.3 EV steps
Exposure bracketing automatic 3 images with user-selectable brackets +/-0.3, +/-0.7, or +/-1.0 EV
Burst modes
First Burst Mode -- 2 fps, up to 4 pictures in sequence.
Last Burst Mode -- up to 30 frames at 2 fps, with last 4 frames saved

Effortless Operation

Flash
Flash mode auto, red-eye, fill, off
Flash range wide: 0.6 - 4.2 m (2-13.8 ft.); tele: 0.6-2.5 m (2-8.2 ft.)
Flash compensation +/- 1.0 EV in 1/2 step

Review
Viewfinder real image optical viewfinder
Display 2.2", 153,000 pixel resolution indoor/outdoor hybrid display
Review mode limited and full-picture information, multi-up, slide show, protect, Share button to print email, album, fast magnify with zoom control, full frame fast scroll, select favorites
Favorites mode on-camera picture sharing
Auto-orientation auto picture rotation - orientation sensor

Additional Features
Storage 32 MB internal memorySD/MMC card expansion slot
Dedicated buttons display/info, delete, Share, review, menu, first burst/last burst/exposure bracketing, close-up/landscape, jog dial for manual settings, flash
Interface power input (5 VDC), A/V output (NTSC or PAL, user-selectable), exclusive KODAK Camera Dock/Printer Dock interface, digital (USB 2.0) connector
Self-timer 10 seconds
Power options optional KODAK EASYSHARE Docks with Li-ion rechargeable battery pack (in-camera charging); KODAK EASYSHARE Li-ion (1050 mAh) Rechargeable Battery or KODAK EASYSHARE Li-ion (1700 mAh) Rechargeable Battery (supplied), DC-in jack on side of camera for 5V adapter
Lens protection lens cap
Tripod mount 1/4 in. standard
Weight without batteries: 219 g (7.7 oz.)
Dimensions WxHxD: 100.3x69.2x40.2 mm (4.0x2.7x1.6 in.)
Warranty 1 year

Package Contents

* KODAK EASYSHARE DX7630 Zoom Digital Camera
* USB and audio/video cables
* Battery 1700mAh (Li-ion)
* Battery charger
* Wrist strap
* Lens cap
* KODAK EASYSHARE Software
* Getting started kit

[danball1976]

Here's another taken with the lights off and the camera on a stable surface (again 1.7MP and standard compression)

[TheGr81]

Canon Powershot A400. A fairly cheap beginner's camera I think. No really advanced options for focus and shutter length, just a handful of presets.

3.2 MP, 2x optical zoom

This picture was taken in Orlando. The original size is 2048x1536. The quality of the shot really impressed me. This picture was my desktop background for a while. None of that fancy color correction stuff, a raw shot shown here at half it's original size.

Same deal for this second picture, taken at Epcot as you can see.

[danball1976]

Ok, the Kodak DX7630 on the 32MB internal memory can store the following number of pictures:
1.7MP Standard - 46
1.7MP Fine - 36
3.1MP Standard - 26
3.1MP Fine - 20
4.0MP Standard - 21
4.0MP Fine - 16
5.4MP Standard - 16
5.4MP Fine - 12
6.1MP Standard - 14
6.1MP Fine - 11

To get the number of photos on a 1GB memory card, times that number by 32.

[TheGr81]

This picture was taken from the other side, at night with the night time setting. I couldn't manage to hold the camera still enough with the increased shutter time.

[danball1976]

Here is a outside pic (1.7MP Standard Compression), Image quality reduced in order to fit here (file size was 640KB, now 395KB - used setting #8 in Photoshop)

Top photo is the Kodak DX7630
Lower photo is the Hewlett Packard HP850 4.1MP camera taken two years ago (1MP setting). The HP850 has a noticeable curvature due to the lens they used. Kodak using Schneider - KREUZNACH variogon 39mm-117mm (equivalent) 3x zoom lens doesn't have it nearly as bad.

[NiGHTS]

Greatone, that sunset picture is badass. That's the favorite (and only) thing I take pictures of. :)

I prefer it at the beach, however.

[danball1976]

Same settings, photo taken on a cloudless day (file size reduced from 785KB to 486KB)

[csimon]

wifey breaks every rule when it comes to photography ...I'm just partial to the photographer and the photgraphee!!!

[profdlp]

Nice shot, csimon. That boy's getting to be pretty big. :)

[csimon]

Nice shot, csimon. That boy's getting to be pretty big. :)thanks prof I appreciate that.
Yes he's one handsome little fellah for sure ...good thing he looks like his mom!! :thumbsup:

[Leonardo]

Leo needs to throw in some mountains. This shot taken during rain in the valley and facing mountains.

[Leonardo]

Early August, mid-morning, cloud creeping up Eagle River towards the glacier.

[Kwitko]

Canon EOS-10D, my boss' camera. Taken with an 80-200mm lens at ISO1600, auto aperture. Various focal lengths between 90mm and 178mm, all 1/180 shutter speed. Hockey is a tough sport to take pictures of.

[Kwitko]

Part 2

[primesuspect]

It sure is hard to take high speed pics at ISO1600. The noise is a real problem :(

I wish I could pull it off, but I must be missing something, cause all the low light or high speed pics I take that are sharp are proportionately noisy.

[airbornflght]

anybody have a panasonic lumix fz-30? thats what im wanting to get. well, actually im wanting to get a good prosumer camera with a big zoo, and manual focus and a small point an shoot, like a a80 or something.

what would you recomend for a point and shot, around 4mp that takes good picture in pretty much all light. and doesnt have any problems with exposure and such? id like an slr. but they are so expensive and not to mention the cost of lenses.

[Leonardo]

It sure is hard to take high speed pics at ISO1600. That's why I like mountains, they don't move when you're composing your shot. These seaguls weren't too difficult. They were pacing the boat looking for fish scraps.

ISO 200
F6.3
1/1000th

[Gravite2090]

haha. Just loekd through this thread. Your kids are cute as hell prime, cracks me up. Maybe I'll post some shots from my Sony DSC-P200 soon.

[Loaded Swipester Skillz]

This one was taken by my with
5.0 MP digital camera
640 X 800
single shot

[Enverex]

Erm, Swipester, you didn't actually attach a picture to the post, heh.

[Kwitko]

It sure is hard to take high speed pics at ISO1600. The noise is a real problem :(

I wish I could pull it off, but I must be missing something, cause all the low light or high speed pics I take that are sharp are proportionately noisy.

You need the high speed otherwise the white of the ice washes everything out. It's a tradeoff between no washout and extra noise.

[primesuspect]

I'm talking about in general though. I've never shot a hockey game, so I can't say... but I'll take that advice to heart when Mackanz gets his big nordic ass over here so I can take him to that wings game I've been promising him.

[csimon]

I'm talking about in general though. I've never shot a hockey game, so I can't say... but I'll take that advice to heart when Mackanz gets his big nordic ass over here so I can take him to that wings game I've been promising him.
I wish I could be there when a good fight breaks out just to see the expression on that big nordic ass!!! :thumbsup:

Well ...you'll have the camera brian! ;D

[Loaded Swipester Skillz]

this picture was taken at the park the image was too hgih in resolution so i had to resize it to make it a lot smaller actually.. the Dpi is out of this world..
5.0 MP 3x optical zoom how did that guy out the specs up hmm print screen

[GnomeWizardd]

Ill be shooting at a hockey game Tom night with my Fuji S5100 WE will see how it comes out

[GnomeWizardd]

Here are Some from the Hockey game in Tampa tonight Fuji S5100

[primesuspect]

nice seats! ;)

Great shots, guys.

[Leonardo]

Gnome, those turned out pretty goodl.

[Kwitko]

Nice seats, Gnome. But where are the action shots?

[GnomeWizardd]

coming tom at work now

[profdlp]

nice seats! ;) ...
The three major food groups:

1) Beer
2) Tape for when you fall down after one (or fifteen) too many
3) The Finger, for when your friends give you a hard time about falling down

Looks like a fairly complete evening. :)

[danball1976]

Here's my Kodak DX7630 (Photo reduced 50% from 2304x1728), from a rest area on Highway 287 near Fort-Worth, TX

[Kwitko]

I snapped this one of my niece today.
Nikon D50, 52mm, 1/1000th shutter, f5

http://www.kwitko.net/pics/CK.jpg

[csimon]

awesome quality ...it helps when you have a photogenic subject as well!
Adorable neice you have there kwitko!

[profdlp]

awesome quality ...it helps when you have a photogenic subject as well!
Adorable neice you have there kwitko!
Honestly. That would make a nice magazine cover shot. :thumbsup:

[Kwitko]

awesome quality ...it helps when you have a photogenic subject as well!
Adorable neice you have there kwitko!

Thanks! She's the love of my life. My girlfriend understands that my niece comes first before any other female in my life.

Honestly. That would make a nice magazine cover shot. :thumbsup:

Prof, thanks as well! What's interesting is that I took the shot while not even looking through the eyepiece. I put the camera low to the ground and just started snapping. When I reviewed the shots, my jaw dropped when I saw this one. Just captures the innocence and wide-eyed wonderment of a child so well.

[Leonardo]

Very nice Seth. Composition, framing, contrast, color compliments, lighting - it all came together. Of course, Nikon optics help also give an edge.

[Kwitko]

A few macro shots I took, color corrected in Photoshop. Nikon D50. 70mm focal length, 1/60th shutter, f4.5, with flash (-0.33eV). It's hard to tell, but in the third pic, the spider's eating a bug it just caught in the web.

http://www.kwitko.net/pics/DSC_0031.jpg
http://www.kwitko.net/pics/DSC_0035.jpg
http://www.kwitko.net/pics/DSC_0040.jpg

[TheLostSwede]

Time for a thread revival.
This is a lightbulb in a coffeymug, reflected by the light. Handheld macroshot, extremely closeup. The lens is almost inside the actual mug. Taken in Raw, auto levelled, slighly cropped to be smaller size and converted to .jpg.

F10, 50mm, 1/13 shot, ISO 200.
Canon EOS 30D, Sigma 50mm.

Man, handheld macros really takes the fatigue out of you fast.

http://icrontic.com/images/prime/126162633447b7f1a472686_thumb.jpg

Link to full size (http://icrontic.com/images/prime/126162633447b7f1a472686.jpg)

[Kwitko]

I'll be taking some pics with this peni-- lens soon.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/largeimages/397525.jpg

Sigma 170-500 APO DG. Definitely has to be tripod mounted and requires 86mm filters, which sucks. Since my camera is not a full-frame sensor, it's the 35mm equivalent to a 255-750 lens. That's some serious magnification.

[primesuspect]

That's some serious c-peen there.....

[TheLostSwede]

I hope you will be more lucky with your Sigma than i am. I can't get a sharp keeper even if my life depended on it. On all focal ranges too. I need to stop it down to like F11 for a decent crisp shot. That is not why i bought a f2.8 70-200 lens. I pretty much have the same issues with a 17-50 f2.8 from Sigma too. I just got a 50mm Canon prime f1.4 and the difference is enormous. TACK sharp at 1.8 and after that and very good at 1.4 as well.

I wish i could afford some L glass with reach.

[Kwitko]

I've heard people mention that Sigmas are kind of soft. I hope to put the lens through its paces today. Of course you're going to get better results with primesN but that's why they're so expensive. I'm not sure why I went for Sigma over Tamron considering my favorite lens is my 70-300 Tamron I took the dragonfly pic with. We'll see how the lens does today and if it's a bust I'll trade it in for a Tamron.

[TheLostSwede]

Can't wait for a little review bro.

[Kwitko]

You cannot hand-hold this thing under 1/1000th shutter speed. There's a reason why there's a difference between $700 glass and $7000 glass.

[TheLostSwede]

I agree. I even struggle with the 70-200. Sigmas go well with beanbags though. The regular walmart tripod is useless. A fat Manfrotto is whats needed on these glasses.

[Kwitko]

I've got a Gitzo with a ball head. Works wonders.

[shwaip]

canon digital rebel xt + 17-85 ef-s lens with IS.

taken in zee backyard.

http://icrontic.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=25306&stc=1&d=1209236941

[Nomad]

Nikon D50, 18-55mm, f/5.6, 1/1600, ISO 400.

http://icrontic.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=25307&stc=1&d=1209265964

[shwaip]

I'd forgotten I took this picture skiing. Taken with a canon point-n-shoot.

http://icrontic.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=25494&stc=1&d=1212213897

[erichblas2005]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/erichblas2005/DSC00344.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/erichblas2005/DSC00377.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/erichblas2005/DSC00363.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/erichblas2005/DSC00371.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/erichblas2005/DSC00351.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/erichblas2005/DSC00358.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/erichblas2005/DSC00348.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/erichblas2005/DSC00332.jpg

[primesuspect]

Mondi brought a big boy camera to the LAN. I have camera envy.

Canon EOS 40D:

http://icrontic.com/images/prime/iclan08/IMG_0212.jpg

[MrBill]

My son is getting a new Canon 12.2mp digital SLR and I think I'm going to buy his old Canon Rebel XT 8.1mp. I've never owned a digital SLR, but I want one. I don't know anything about photography but this camera might give me reason to actually learn something. There are some many lenses and stuff available that it's mind-boggling. I would really like to take some nice photographs from the porch of the wildlife that visits our pond about 300 feet away.

[MrBill]

Okay, I saw Seth mention Tamron lenses as being a good thing. Any thought on these lenses (http://cgi.ebay.com/Tamron-2-AF-Lens-Set-for-Canon-EOS-Digital-Rebel-XT-XTi_W0QQitemZ200295774067QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item200295774067&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1234%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A0%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50) for the Canon Rebel XT? Knowing pretty much nothing about it, this seems like a good deal on a couple of good lenses. There are pictures at the bottom of the eBay listing supposedly taken with these lenses.

TIA for input.
Bill

[Kwitko]

These are big, so just the links. Took these on two separate occasions at the Bronx Zoo. If anybody can ID the bird from the first two pics, let me know.
http://karpinc.com/pics/_DSC0823.jpg
http://karpinc.com/pics/_DSC0825.jpg
http://karpinc.com/pics/_DSC0840.jpg
http://karpinc.com/pics/rawr.jpg