PDA

View Full Version : New to the camera scene


CosplayerGabi
06-09-2005, 09:32 AM
What a perfect time for this catagory to be made by c.com. Thank you guys.


Now that my digital camera has been stepped on and is deemed inoperative it's time to finally get into a better camera. The resolution of my last two cameras was just not cutting it. They were only 2 and 3.1 megapixel respectively.

I believe I would like to take a step foward from the point and click but not so far forward that I am changing lenses and shutter speeds five times at a con to accomodate for lighting. Digital clean looking shots, the ability to focus on an object, nice flash. Spend about $200-300.

I've seen a couple of candidates at the compUSA and such but would like to get a cosplayer's take on what they like to use before I listen to any salespeople about it. Cosplayers have a better mind of what I need more than anything else.



Disclaimer:
I already feel like a newbie cosplayer asking what pattern, what color, what stich size, to use before they experiment. :untrust: I wish i could take these cameras on test drives before I buy them. $200 is too much to just experiment with.

Jeg
06-09-2005, 10:15 AM
My first question for you is how big are you planning on making these pictures you are taking? Everyone wants great High Res pictures, but the truth is that unless you are going to make poster size prints then the absolute most Mega Pixles you are going to want 4. Your 3.1 should do you just fine less you gots a low quality camera but even then you shouldn't be to bad off.

Now I myself if you count my brothers camera (which I use from time to time) I have 3 digital and 1 film camera. First I would like to say that Digital is great and there are alot of things you can do with one but I would still keep a film camera cause they have their advantages to them, but thats another topic. I personally have a prefferance towards the Cannon brand. They are relitivly simple to use and they have the other controls should you want them, while still giving you great shots if you have it do everything for you.

First I have a Cannon Power Shot 75 point and shoots that is I beleave a 2.5 or a 3 MPX Its is a great little camera that is not to expencive and while you can have some creative control, it comes with several modes you can use that will help you with most situations. Now this camera is 5 years old and I know there are new modles out but thats something to look at.

Next is my Cannon G3 this I beleave is a 4 MPX and is the equivelance of a digital 35mm. It can be real easy to use but at the same time if you want to have total contorl they it can do that as well. This one is only about 3 years old.

Lastly for my digital cameras is my brothers, Power Shot S1 IS. Its only a 3.2 but is does a wounderful job. Its simple and easy to understand (I know this cause my brother is not a Photographer where as I Majored in it for sometime). It also comes with a VERY helpful feathur called Image Stablization. This allows the camera to compinsate some for camera shake and the like. I have seen it take a crystial clear hand held 2.5 second exposure (this may not sound like much to the untrained photographer but to anyone that knows what they are talking about that is no easy feet). This camera was bought just last fall for $400, but it is well worth it.

I hope this helps you out and good luck.

CosplayerGabi
06-09-2005, 11:27 AM
Thank you for the advice. I really needed a starting point and now I have a good bit of info to go on so I am not out there blind.
The 3.1 camera took bad to decent pictures. They were always a little grainy it seemed. I must have had a low quality camera. It's an Argus which I have never heard of.
I am looking to have pictures of the 400 x 650 variety. Don't need anything bigger than that really.

Rynn
06-09-2005, 12:23 PM
Hmm well I have a Nikon "Coolpix" w/ 4.0 mega pixles and I really love it. I don't do any hardcore photography, I just pretty much use the camera for pictures of friends, family, and cons and it hasn't let me down yet. I'm really happy with the pictures it takes, here are some examples of the quality...

Picture 1 (http://images.cosplay.com/showphoto.php?photo=340055)
Picture 2 (http://images.cosplay.com/showphoto.php?photo=347524)

I just picked mine up from Best Buy for $199 and it has lots of different flash options and "scene" adjusters and (if you care) it's really tiny and cute ^_^

My friend also has a Nikon (her's is a 5.1MP) and she's had her's for about 2 years. She has never had any problems with it and loves it to death (And it takes GREAT pictures!) Like Jeg, I've also heard good things about Cannon. I say just keep looking, but I'm VERY happy with my Nikon and you shouldn't need anything much higher than that for good quality photos. *Feels like a salesperson* XD

Lyulf
06-09-2005, 01:09 PM
You can check out http://dpreview.com for an un-biased look at the camera's out there. Just remember to get extra batteries with your camera, as digitals go through power quickly.

Parasaurolophus
06-09-2005, 03:01 PM
Lastly for my digital cameras is my brothers, Power Shot S1 IS. Its only a 3.2 but is does a wounderful job. Its simple and easy to understand (I know this cause my brother is not a Photographer where as I Majored in it for sometime). It also comes with a VERY helpful feathur called Image Stablization. This allows the camera to compinsate some for camera shake and the like. I have seen it take a crystial clear hand held 2.5 second exposure (this may not sound like much to the untrained photographer but to anyone that knows what they are talking about that is no easy feet). This camera was bought just last fall for $400, but it is well worth it.


MMmmm I love the Powershot S1 IS!! Its pricey, but for nice quality photos, is soooo good. Admittedly, I'm not a student of photography, so it might not be the best out there, but its really easy to make your shots look good. I only got to keep it for my field season last year, so I don't have cosplay pics with it :waaaah: .
Here's the pros I've found:
10 x optical zoom- so nice- I can't go back to measly point and shoots after getting better optical zoom.
Image stablilization. I put a few pics up in my photobucket acct to showcase what I could do. This picture (http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y54/Parasaurolophus/Petrified%20Forest%20and%20GC/040723_28.jpg) was taken from a car driving ~30-45 mph.
I put a few other photos up too- none have been altered, so they're the original size I took them, and have no color modifications. The washed out colors at the GC and behind the Raven are more from the high sun and desert conditions than the camera.

Cons:
It doesn't have a manual focus, which is a little annoying, but you can kind of tell it what to focus on- like the raven (http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y54/Parasaurolophus/Petrified%20Forest%20and%20GC/040707_14.jpg) here.
The size is bigger than the normal point n shoots, but only slightly larger than the old film cameras, and it fits (snugly!) into Walmarts medium sized camera bag. The optical zoom has a lens that protrudes out.

I don't have inside pics, but I was really happy using the Powershot. Once I scrape together enough money, that'll probably be the camera I'll buy. And as a disclaimer- there may be better cameras out there- I was just really happy with this one.

The links above shrink down the image- to see the original sizes (though it can get blurry at that size) see my photobucket page (http://photobucket.com/albums/y54/Parasaurolophus/Petrified%20Forest%20and%20GC/) -- I apologize that there's no anime cosplaying, though there are some traditional Native American outfits on there.

Jeg
06-09-2005, 08:29 PM
Thank you for the advice. I really needed a starting point and now I have a good bit of info to go on so I am not out there blind.
The 3.1 camera took bad to decent pictures. They were always a little grainy it seemed. I must have had a low quality camera. It's an Argus which I have never heard of.
I am looking to have pictures of the 400 x 650 variety. Don't need anything bigger than that really.

As far as resolution goes most cameras come with 3 settings (Low, Mid, High) you can find those in the menu of the camera. The thing is that naturally the higher the resolution the more space on the memory card it will take up. I have over 12 memory cards of verying sizes cause I don't see the point of shooting in low quality so I have my cameras set for the Highest quality. The reason I do this is cause I can always shink the picture once on the computer. As far as how big the picture is on the computer that I can't say for sure but i know that I can pint a good 8x10 off of my Power Shot 75

TomodachiFriend
06-10-2005, 12:53 AM
For 200-300, I'd go with the Fuji F10 if I wanted to take lots of indoor pics (many cons have awful light). It's much easier to get a good natural looking shot with only available light than messing around with flash settings.

I use a Canon G5 most of the time (it's not pocketable but it's much smaller than my other camera). You can get what I consider decent interior shots as is but only a third of the time. You'll need to invest more money on a flash and time learning to get close to 100%. There's a huge difference between a small on-camera flash and the real thing.

Having said that, I go to cons and meetings without any accessory on my G5 for the same reason I don't bring my bigger Minolta and plenty of good pictures can be taken by staying in well litted areas.

Most stages have enough light for clean looking pictures (http://www.sushicorp.com/cosplay/cn2004/IMG_4463.jpg). But dark areas (http://www.sushicorp.com/cosplay/cn2004/IMG_4382.jpg) don't look as good as light (http://www.sushicorp.com/cosplay/cn2004/IMG_4403.jpg) areas in a con setting with my camera (results are about the same with most other cameras). The F10 will give you much better results in the darker areas than most other cameras, except for bulky SLR's. That's why I recommend it in this situation.

Eriol
06-10-2005, 01:14 AM
Besides dpview.com, also check out http://steves-digicams.com/.

Canon and Nikon are often considered the best camera manufacturers by photographers and enthusiasts, so you probably want to start your search with those two brands.

yukitoLeonheart
06-10-2005, 01:54 AM
I am just asking for it getting involved in this forum, lol.

As far as cameras, I can't be more adamant about this

Megapixels do not necessarily have a correlation with picture quality.

One of Nikon's flagship cameras used primarily for sports has a very similar sensor to their new D2X camera (which is the first Nikon camera to use a CMOS sensor) is only 4 Megapixels. Its image quality is absolutely astounding and it is a fast camera. Also, the one camera I mentioned earlier which is Nikon's flagship model, the D2X, uses an upgraded CMOS sensor (CMOS sensors are used in canon) using an advanced color spacing with Sony technology.

I recently read an article saying women are most inclined to buy a Kodak digital camera. They aren't bad, but you can't go wrong with any of the Canon powershots. They have a lot of decent features made easy for beginners. Nikon Coolpix aren't that bad, but I think they can be overpriced, unless you catch a decent deal which they do have a lot.

raye
06-10-2005, 03:12 AM
I am just asking for it getting involved in this forum, lol.

As far as cameras, I can't be more adamant about this

Megapixels do not necessarily have a correlation with picture quality.

One of Nikon's flagship cameras used primarily for sports has a very similar sensor to their new D2X camera (which is the first Nikon camera to use a CMOS sensor) is only 4 Megapixels. Its image quality is absolutely astounding and it is a fast camera. Also, the one camera I mentioned earlier which is Nikon's flagship model, the D2X, uses an upgraded CMOS sensor (CMOS sensors are used in canon) using an advanced color spacing with Sony technology.

Hi. Good point about the fact that pixels do not equal image quality. But I think you are referring to the D2H(s) being the 4MP camera. The D2H(s) actually uses a Nikon CCD sensor. The D2X uses the Sony CMOS sensor.

yukitoLeonheart
06-10-2005, 04:39 AM
I said it has a very similar sensor, I should of elaborated. It uses a Nikon one vs the D2x which uses the upgraded CMOS and is the first Nikon DSLR to use a CMOS. I am refering to the D2Hs for the 4 mps. I pointed out that there was a camera with a similar sensor (D2Hs) and then went on to point out that there was another camera I mentioned earlier and that was the one that isn't just a flagship model, but the flagship model that actually uses the CMOS sensor and it was the D2x.

Rereading my paragraph, I should of proofread as it is late. Still, you basically just slightly clarified what I said myself. I definately referred to 2 cameras, and I stated the information about the D2X at the end clearly. Thank you, though, as you made it easier to understand.


BTW, it says you are new to the site?

Might you be a fellow photographer, you seem to know your stuff as well on equipment.

raye
06-10-2005, 05:32 AM
Yes, I am indeed new to posting in the forums. I have been viewing the pictures for at least a year it seems.

And yes, I am amatuer photographer. Been shooting Nikon P&S digitals for 5-6 years and recently moved up into DSLRs. Time for me to get serious about this hobby! It is interesting to see a greater focus on photography on a cosplay website but I do think they are rather complementary pursuits.

the only vash
06-10-2005, 09:47 AM
Hi, sorry if this question sounds amateursih. But what are are some of the advantages of digital SLRs compared to the regular point and shoot digi-cams. I heard that SLRs are far way better, just wanted to see if that was true. Also, I am looking into getting one. Can any of you recommend a nice SLR for a newcommer?

Super No 1
06-10-2005, 11:14 AM
Hi, sorry if this question sounds amateursih. But what are are some of the advantages of digital SLRs compared to the regular point and shoot digi-cams. I heard that SLRs are far way better, just wanted to see if that was true. Also, I am looking into getting one. Can any of you recommend a nice SLR for a newcommer?

For a newcomer, you should look at the DSLRs in the $1000 or less range. These would be the Nikon D70, D70s, D50 and the Canon Digital Rebel or Digital Rebel XT. Right now, it just depends on availability because last year's cameras are currently being replaced by newer models.

DSLRs have a lot of advantages. Depending on the lenses you have, it's a very versatile camera and you can take photos of a wide variety of things. They also have better performance at higher ISOs, which means clearer action photos and better performance in low light situations. They also are better at continuous shooting than P&S cameras. Current models have virtually no shutter lag.

The disadvantages are that getting the variety of lenses that you want can be expensive and they are big and bulky. I currently have 4 lenses that I use at conventions. That's a lot of stuff to carry around. I've been to 4-day cons and at the end of the con, my shoulders hurt like you won't believe.

jtnishi
06-10-2005, 12:40 PM
The thing about D-SLRs, though, is that the curve is going to be steep in learning them, and the shots probably aren't going to look as good as you'd expect to get from a point-and-shoot until you do at least some post processing on the image.

If you're serious about photography, they make a nice investment. But be prepared for a lot of work to make your pictures shine. The good news is that once you do get good with them, there's some nice stuff you can do with an SLR that you can't do with a point-and-shoot.

yukitoLeonheart
06-10-2005, 01:52 PM
SUper Numer 1, I have the same thing with my back. After a full day of carrying around a bunch of primes besides the lens I have on, my back and shoulders hurt.

The disadvantages of D SLR's are pretty much the price, the amount of studying and practice, and they aren't toys. I have seen people treat them like point and shoots and hold them up in front of them and try to take a photo.

The reason why point and shoots can do that is the way they are set up and they start out at really wide angles. I have an old one that starts out at 8mm.

An advantage, as well as a disadvantage to DSLRs is the multiplication factor. Nikon cameras have a 1.5, Canon's have a 1.6. This means that if you have a 70 - 200 lens it turns into a 112 - 320. This is actually very helpful for a lot of photographers, like myself, who are out and about. It is also very useful for masquerades because it doesn't affect the sharpness or increase the f stop like a teleconverter. Problem is, you need something wider then normal to carry around for conventions as you are usually cramped.

Another disadvantage I find for a lot of DSLRs (for people who do this) is that the lighting is inconsistent and if you are trying to not use a flash you will need something around 2.8 or faster and have your ISO on 1600. You can't really keep it on a manual setting in a convention, also, because you are always on the go and you can't adjust the apperature, manually focus, all that stuff. If you just put it on priority or one of the automatic settings you are money. Also, you can just use a flash if you aren't into buying a low f stop lens.

they do weigh more, and you need to be more careful, but I like the bulkier camera's. A lot of the zooms and some really amazing glass weighs just as much as the camera. One lens, I Know Kyle has it (the 85 1.2) weighs more then most camera's almost. AMAZING prime. When you are using a non heavy camera with a lens like that it feels kind of awkward.

BTW for those thinking of getting a DSLR, Canon and Nikon are having amazing sales.

Right now you can get a D70 for $750 from ritzcamera and I think you can get a Canon 300D, digital rebel, for around $600 if you look around.

dmk26
06-10-2005, 03:04 PM
Anyone wanting to invest in an SLR / DSLR should definitely take into account the fact that if you get one, you'll probably be stuck with the brand for a long time. The simple reason is that once you get a camera, you're going to end up investing a little bit in different lenses. I currently have 3 lenses for my Canon. That makes moving from Canon to any other brand difficult, coz I can't simply buy a new Nikon body. I'd have to replace all my lenses as well, which ain't going to be cheap.

Lenses in general are pretty expensive. The 85mm 1.2 runs around $1500. However, most places have shops that rent out lenses. If you're in the sf bay area, Keeble and Shuchat has a nice collection of lenses that you can rent.

eron
06-16-2005, 10:25 PM
I just want to add to dmk26's post, that one great photo-related facility that anyone considering buying a piece of gear within range of a medium-sized or better city is a photo rental store. Here in L.A. Samy's Camera (for example) will rent you basically any piece of gear you might possibly consider buying, from a point & shoot digital to a Hassleblad, for a fairly reasonable rate (depending on the model, a camera/lens kit will run you $40-100, *great discounts for students* and also usually ghetto cheap weekend rates). Sounds like a lot of money, but if you're going to blow $1500 on a system, $100 isn't much to find out if you lke it in advance.

Renting isn't all that much money either if you have one photographer and a couple of cosplay friends who want to go together for a geek-out weekend marathon photo session. Scout locations in advance while spiffing up your best costumes, un-snarl the wigs, and do an hour of makeup each morning and for like $33.33 each, you can spend a couple of days getting pro gear treatment.

Me, being a bit of a neo-ludite, I'd just go buy a couple Kodak High Definition disposables for $8 (they work great), pay the extra $3 for a picture CD, $10 worth of gas to get to a great location, and $5 for a national park pass to go run around in the pretty woods. ^_~

CosplayerGabi
10-10-2005, 02:00 PM
Well I think I'm going to go with a Canon Powershot. I've experimented with all my friend's cameras and 3 of them have a type of Powershot. After playing with them each of them took great to outstanding pictures. I played with a couple other types and I got weird color overlay and odd graininess on black items. So we are going this weekend to look for Canon Powershots of the 4 MP range.


All of these were taken with an A29 Canon Powershot.
http://photobucket.com/albums/y183/viberaphon/Photo%20Walkabout%20in%20Central%20Park/


I'll fix this for the hugeness later: A29 Powershot, no flash, daytime, macros on
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y183/viberaphon/Photo%20Walkabout%20in%20Central%20Park/100_1266.jpg

JadeCat
10-10-2005, 06:36 PM
Hi, sorry if this question sounds amateursih. But what are are some of the advantages of digital SLRs compared to the regular point and shoot digi-cams. I heard that SLRs are far way better, just wanted to see if that was true. Also, I am looking into getting one. Can any of you recommend a nice SLR for a newcommer?

Ermm. Better? If you want to do a bit of post processing, and have more control. Yes, it is better. However, you're not only going to invest in the DSLR, but the lenses, and the computer equipment & software to do things with those photos.

If you want pictures straight out of the camera, then NO, they are not better. Get a P&S.

JadeCat
10-10-2005, 06:39 PM
Well I think I'm going to go with a Canon Powershot. I've experimented with all my friend's cameras and 3 of them have a type of Powershot. After playing with them each of them took great to outstanding pictures. I played with a couple other types and I got weird color overlay and odd graininess on black items. So we are going this weekend to look for Canon Powershots of the 4 MP range.


No matter what camera you get, you're going to enjoy it.
I'm a Canon-phile myself, and I think the powershots are good cameras.

Happy photo-taking!