- Banned
- #26
it's not digital/optical lenses it's about the zoom. Digital zoom basically only blows up the picture in a certain area thus creating a zoomed in effect, but quality is lost. Optical zoom is through the lense not through a computer chip.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Buying a digital camera..
- Thread starter leonmagic
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
leonmagic said:
Photo quailty inks range from $40-60. Printers good ones $300-600. Paper 4x6inch $13 for 20 sheets, A4 paper $17 for 20 sheets. Archival quailty paper is 60 years, Printing at home on ink jet 5-15 for standard inks. Archival inks which cost a lot more will only last 25 years. Depending on storage. If you want a long term lasting ink looking at $90-100.
Inks will do approx. 22 sheets of A4 for a composite cartridge (one with all colours). You do the sums. Printing at home is a convenience, not a money saver. Printing at a photographic lab, for 4x6in at 50cents each (most stores like myself), so your printer would have cost over 200 photos(if you brought a $400 printer already before you even start.
If people thought printing at home was saving money, labs wouldn't be printing over 10,000 digital prints a week.
Not to say printing at home is wrong, just its not a money saver.
bunsen burner said:
Optical= the lens zooming in and out pyshically (much like if you had a film camera and it had a zoom on it)
Digital= decresing the resoultion of the photo.
Most cameras come with a digital zoom, if the megapixel is large enough (4megapixel+, doing a 2x digital zoom will be comfortable, no different than zooming in on your computer screen.)
mighty mick said:i dont bother printing anymore photo cd albums are the way to go with the photo files there to be used in any printing project you want
until someone wants a hard copy. But i'm like yourself I only print photos when i'm enlarging them for my portfolio! but many many people print photos you'll be surprised, one customer i had came in with 1600 prints. I dont know what the hell she was gonna do with them all, but holidays and she wanted them.
yup, just about every dvd player out there will view jpegs. We are now burning images onto dvd's too at work. Can't keep up with it all
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
i sell the Works_espoir said:
hint therenot many of the higher price bracket in that store but have a broad product knowledge to get me through.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #31
Ok I've found another cheap one which seems ok, what can you guys tell me about the Olympus C310??
Crap? Good?
Crap? Good?
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #33
_espoir said:
It seems like it pretty much has all the features of the Nikon one, but with a larger screen - 1.8 instead of 1.6.
All in all is it a good purchase, even if it is $150 cheaper than the Nikon?
leonmagic said:
Only downfall is ... on the Olympus it has a little fall off on the lens, meaning its not as sharp on the sides of the photo, unless you use it outside on a bright sunny day where the aperture is improved and will help correct that. Otherwise its very good.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #35
_espoir said:
Is it really noticable? As in, can you see this on all pictures?
leonmagic said:
well its noticable to me.
What you should do is ask the person that is selling you the camera to take a photo in the store and print one out. I do that for my customers, allows them to see the result.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #37
_espoir said:
Cool, I may just do that.
Thanks for the help, again..
Last night I watched Today Tonight just because of a digital camera report by Choice so thought I may learn a bit as looking to get one.
They gave 6 recommendations: 3xbest cameras for under $2k, all cost about $1800. 3xbest cameras for under 1k - all cost about $900 plus.
WTF of course if I'm spending stupid amounts of $$ I will get a good camera regardless. But I want a 3-400 dollar camera - like all the other average joes out there. I mean it was talking as thought we all have $2k to splurge on a camera, but here are a few others if your budget is tight and you can ONLY afford a grand!!!
Espoir care to just say list 3 cameras I will be happy with in each of the $3-400 range, and $4-500 range.
And any slightly above that that you would say is worth the extra?
They gave 6 recommendations: 3xbest cameras for under $2k, all cost about $1800. 3xbest cameras for under 1k - all cost about $900 plus.
WTF of course if I'm spending stupid amounts of $$ I will get a good camera regardless. But I want a 3-400 dollar camera - like all the other average joes out there. I mean it was talking as thought we all have $2k to splurge on a camera, but here are a few others if your budget is tight and you can ONLY afford a grand!!!
Espoir care to just say list 3 cameras I will be happy with in each of the $3-400 range, and $4-500 range.
And any slightly above that that you would say is worth the extra?
have to agree there that was one of the most uninformative reports id seen on cameras especially if it was supposed to be aimed at the home userfunkyfreo said:
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #40
Ok, I have to admit I went against all advice today and snatched up a Cannon PowerShot A400, for $299 at Myer (with 15% cash back).
I'm loving it so far - the only downside is that it only has 2.2 zoom...I dont know exactly what that means but the other one I was considering had 3.0.
The determining factor to switch over to the Cannon was the fact that the Olympus didnt have audio when you took video footage, and I wasnt going to settle for that.
As for the quality - well it's 3.2 megapixles and it looks fine to me;
I'm loving it so far - the only downside is that it only has 2.2 zoom...I dont know exactly what that means but the other one I was considering had 3.0.
The determining factor to switch over to the Cannon was the fact that the Olympus didnt have audio when you took video footage, and I wasnt going to settle for that.
As for the quality - well it's 3.2 megapixles and it looks fine to me;
leonmagic said:
I have a Canon SLR digital, i've been very very happy with. What works for you and your happy with it! then you've made the best choice!
Also comes down to what the camera looks like, and how you hold it. Some are more comfortable to hold than others!
If you can step 2 feet close to the object you are shotting, then you've made up for the zoom you've lost.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #43
_espoir said:If you can step 2 feet close to the object you are shotting, then you've made up for the zoom you've lost.
That's exactly what I said to the guy in the shop!
Falchoon
Hall of Famer
- Feb 15, 2002
- 30,700
- 12,787
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Bluestar Airlines, Anacott Steel
leonmagic said:As for the quality - well it's 3.2 megapixles and it looks fine to me;
The detail looks fine, what percentage of maximum size is that?
Here's a 5 megapixel photo sizewise
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Feb 3, 2004
- 17,999
- 24,204
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- panthers, ukraine & broncos
Interesting that no one here has mentioned the pentax optio s range? I would be interested in what everyone else's view is on it?
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #46
Falchoon said:
I believe its either 35 or 25%...really cant remember.
Nice dog!
- Banned
- #47
here's what I'm looking at:
Sony Cybershot DSCP93 5.1 mp, 3x pz, 6x dz
Sony Cybershot DSCP100L 5.1 mp, 3x pz, 6x dz
Sony Cybershot DSCP93 5.2 mp, 3x pz, 6x dz
Nikon Coolpix 4200 4 mp, 3x oz, 4x dz
Nikon Coolpix 4800 4 mp, 3x oz, 4x dz
Nikon Coolpix 5100 5.1 mp, 3x oz, 4x dz (size of deck of card)
Canon Ixus 430 4 mp, 3x oz
Canon Ixus 500 5 mp, 3x oz
Two questions:
No one has mentioned Sony yet? Are they not as good because they don't have the technology of more experienced and traditional brands? How do they rate?
Why don't Canon advertise their digital zoom, or do these models not have digital zoom?
Sony Cybershot DSCP93 5.1 mp, 3x pz, 6x dz
Sony Cybershot DSCP100L 5.1 mp, 3x pz, 6x dz
Sony Cybershot DSCP93 5.2 mp, 3x pz, 6x dz
Nikon Coolpix 4200 4 mp, 3x oz, 4x dz
Nikon Coolpix 4800 4 mp, 3x oz, 4x dz
Nikon Coolpix 5100 5.1 mp, 3x oz, 4x dz (size of deck of card)
Canon Ixus 430 4 mp, 3x oz
Canon Ixus 500 5 mp, 3x oz
Two questions:
No one has mentioned Sony yet? Are they not as good because they don't have the technology of more experienced and traditional brands? How do they rate?
Why don't Canon advertise their digital zoom, or do these models not have digital zoom?
jim boy
Umpires Association Head
- Admin
- #48
_espoir said:
Is that the EOS 300D?
I'm looking at getting an digital SLR, although probbaly not until Feb. Is that still the best budget model around? I'm only really looking at SLR's because I take a lot of photos in difficult light circumstances, for example in dark forests but with bright patches of light, and I find the 'automatic' cameras, even in manual mode, don't really cope.
Jim Boy said:
Actually its the model before D60, the 300D is upgraded in the ISO settings. I've had no problems with it, had it for about 2 years nearlly 3 years. The body holds the image, and yes has settings to help do the lighting and all that. But get the best lenes you can. I'm finding on my camera the "L" series lenes are holding up a lot better. Sharpness wise they are jsut fantastic, pricey but fantastic.
If you want a cheap SLR camera then 300D is fantastic, don't have to spend a lot of money, therefor you can buy the best lens!
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #50
_espoir said:
Carefull _espoir, apparantly your not allowed to give advice when people ask for it...