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.
Olympus D-390
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
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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...
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...
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?
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.
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??
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.
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...................................
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.
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..
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited January 2004
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.
Comments
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
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
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
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)
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.
I'd hate for someone to waste money on a vivitar like I did. Let my lesson be a lesson for all.
//Edit: Mind posting a sample picture, settings, and camera model a2j?
yeah, they're taken at the highest quality setting.
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??
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...................................
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 really like some feed back on them three night pics.
I personally think number 2 is the best of the three.
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.