Camera?

Picture quality depends on a number of things : lens, sensor, resolution [pixels] etc. The advances in these things is rapid ! There is for example a big difference between the Sony H-1 [which I have ] and the R-1 .The H-1 will do about anything that you would need for knife photos but the R-1 has a CMOS sensor rather than the CCD sensor of the H-1. The CMOS is many times larger than the CCD !! Both cameras have very fine zoom lenses and are Non-SLR .To refer to a Non- SLR as a "point and shoot is " foolish. While I can 'point and shoot' with my H-1 ,I can do many other things also. In fact it's going to take me a while to learn all the capabilities of the H-1...The Canon S-2 is very much like the Sony H-1 [now Canon S-3 and Sony H-2 !things change quickly !] I think you'd be very happy with either camera ,they're fantastic value at $400 list for the H-2 and similar for the S-3. For those who don't know the H-1 has a 12x zoom ,stabilized.focuses to ~ 3/4" etc ,etc.
 
Well, I just read the manual for my current camera, (novel concept, I know) and found out that it will never take a good picture of a whole knife because the macro setting is for 6.5" to 8" away, and the normal setting is for 1.1+ meter away. :( Maybe I should try standing 1.1 meters away. :) Actually, I'm pretty sure I'm just going to get a different camera and sell this one to some sucker somewhere. :D I'm leaning strongly in the direction of the Canon S2. It looks like it has everything I'll need.
 
Phillip Patton said:
Well, I just read the manual for my current camera, (novel concept, I know) and found out that it will never take a good picture of a whole knife because the macro setting is for 6.5" to 8" away, and the normal setting is for 1.1+ meter away. :( Maybe I should try standing 1.1 meters away. :) Actually, I'm pretty sure I'm just going to get a different camera and sell this one to some sucker somewhere. :D I'm leaning strongly in the direction of the Canon S2. It looks like it has everything I'll need.

Phill I'm not sure why everyone wants to get that close? :confused:
the picture I posted was taken at least 18" plus away. and it had to be reduced a lot..to fit the PC screen..
 
Exactly! I DON'T want to get that close. My camera simply won't focus between 20 cm and 1.1 meter. The S2, using different focusing modes, will focus from 0" to infinity. Sounds good to me. :)
Dan, what program did you use to add the image details in your photo?
 
Phil I use LVIEWP1B
and photo Studio 2.0
with this cool pix 3200 I get mega sized pictures from the down load,, that's a good thing, I'm not sure but my Sony automatically
did something to the pictures before I wanted it to..anyway with this one
once I get my full size picture edited, cropped ,sized and how I want it in photo Studio, use LVIEW to adjust my gamma correction and such and then compress from there , I use these two because of the ease of use,
I can do just about the same stuff with just one of the programs but in this combination it seems to work better for me
the one thing if any was what Jim said, is to do all the editing before it's saved and that helped me a lot, it's why I'd get some good and some bad pictures not knowing this..not that I'm doing all that great anyway but their looking better now..
I have PS6.0 but just need time to mess with..
 
Phil,

My old 5 mega pixel camera crapped out yesterday and I can't stand to be without a camera, so today I ordered a Canon Powershot A700 (A700 review). After shopping around using Yahoo Shopping and Price Grabber, I ordered in from 6th Ave Electronics City (6th Ave). They had the best price and good ratings on Price Grabber.

I spent several hours looking through the reviews on Steve's Digicams (Steve's Digicams) and Imaging Resource (Imaging Resource). I wanted a smallish camera, at least a 6 mega pixel, with a zoom lens. I also wanted one that took SD cards (which I already had) and AA batteries. My last camera used proprietary batteries which did not last long, were very hard to get, and were quite expensive. I wanted to avoid that hassle this time around.

Another important aspect for me is shutter lag. I have three little kids and it's hard to get them to sit still long enough to take their pictures. I've had older cameras that had so much lag that I missed a lot of good photo opportunities waiting for the camera to snap the picture or to take a second shot.

I prefer a small digital camera so that I can carry it around with me without much effort. I still have my Nikon 35mm cameras laying around if I need them, and someday I plan to get a Nikon SLR digital so that I can use all of my Nikon lenses. It was always a pain to lug around the 35mm camera, lenses and case, and there's been no real need for the big camera since I went digital. Someday, however...

I like my Nikons, so I was interested in getting one of their Coolpix models. After reading all of the review, I decided that they took too long to power up, had too much shutter lag, and most used proprietary batteries. I eventually ruled them all out.

Next I checked Olympus, but passed on those too.

I started looking at the Canons and was impressed by what I read in the reviews. I really liked the PowerShot SD700 IS. (SD700 IS) It is tiny! and it got very good reviews. I like the idea of image stabilization and the all weather body, but it uses a proprietary battery. The best price I found on the SD700 IS was $450 including shipping.

Next I looked at the PowerShot S3 IS. It is basically an upgraded version of the S2. Like the S2, the S3 has image stabilization and a 12x optical zoom. (S3 IS) Steve's lengthy review says in part;
Canon retained the S2's versatile 12x 36-432mm zoom lens, but increased resolution from 5.2 to 6.3-megapixels, raised the maximum sensitivity from ISO 400 to ISO 800, and increased the size of the LCD monitor from 1.8 to 2-inches. The camera's feature-rich exposure system is simple enough for a beginner, yet offers advanced photographers plenty of opportunity for creativity.
The best price on the S3 was $421 with free shipping.

After looking at the reviews for these cameras I decided to stop by my local Office Depot and take a look at them. The SD700 IS is really amazing. You will not believe how small it is, and that such a tiny camera could be so capable. Office Depot didn't have an S3, but they had the S2, which is almost exactly the same size. The S2, while not really large, is quite a bit bigger than the other cameras I had been looking at (and my now deceased Kyocera S5R). It's kind of in between the size of a 35mm and the pocket sized digitals. If I'd never had a small camera I probably wouldn't have cared, but the S2 (and S3) is just larger than I really want for my all around camera.

I left Office Depot with mixed emotions. I really liked the SD700 IS, but really wanted a camera that takes AA batteries. I didn't really like the size of the S2/S3, but the 12x zoom would be sweeeet, and it got great reviews.

When I got home I went back to Steve's list of 6+ mega pixel reviews and went through the list again (6+ reviews). This time I noticed another Canon that I had passed over before. I started looking at the 6 mega pixel Powershot A700. The camera is a little bigger than the SD700, but is still a small camera. It has a 6x optical zoom and got outstanding reviews from Steve's and from Imaging Resource. Steve's review concluded with;
Bottom line - The Canon PowerShot A700 is an awesome consumer digital camera. One that I would highly recommend to anyone in the market for a fair priced model with loads of user friendly features and outstanding image quality and performance. Its 6x optical zoom will blow away the competition's typical 3x zoom, and with 6-megapixels, you can create beautiful 13x19-inch or larger prints. With an MSRP of only US$349, it offers an excellent value and is sure to be a very popular model this year.
On top of all that the A700 can be had for $286.06 (6 cent shipping for some reason).

By then I was torn between the medium sixed,12x, imaged stabilized, S3 and the small, 6x, non-stabilized, A700. I thought how nice the 12x would be on vacations and for taking knife photos. I also considered the ease of carrying the A700, the fact that it still has double the zoom of the camera I had been using, and the fact that it cost about $135 less than the S3.

I finally made my decision after comparing the sample photos on Steve's Digicams website; two photos taken with each camera. (A700 samples -click on "Test Images" and, S3 samples -click on "Test Images") I found the A700 images to be quite a bit clearer than the S3 images. That put me over the edge in favor of the A700 and I ordered it a few minutes later.

That is my saga of selecting a new digital camera. Hopefully the information will be of use to someone else.
 
Hi Chris,
Thanks for sharing! Last night I went to wally-world because I wanted to check out different cameras in person. The two I was really interested in were the Canon S2 and the Sony H3. They both looked very nice. The S2's card was full and I didn't know how to empty it, but I did take a picture with the H3 and was very impressed. They both cost $400 at wal-mart. I ended up bidding on and winning an S2 last night on ebay. I couldn't decide between the two so I flipped a coin. :D
Shutter lag is something else I was concerned about. With my current camera, I have to wait 2 or 3 seconds between photos. :barf: The S2 can take 2.4 photos per second on high speed.
The A700 does look very nice, but the 12X zoom was calling my name. :D
I agree with you about batteries. I like cameras that take AA's. And I think they recommend NiMH for the S2.
Enjoy your A700. When you get it, post some knife pics on this thread. :)
 
Phil,

I still want an S3 with it's 12x zoom, but not as my everyday camera. I figure I'll wait untill they've been around a while and then try to pickup a decent used one.

I'll post some pictures from the A700 when it comes in.
 
Batteries - remember that the LCD, zoom, and stabilizer suck up power .I never use the LCD .I do use the stabilizer as it's necessary for the 12x [435 mm equivalent] unless you use a tripod. Though you may be able to use AAs they might not give you all the functions , depending on the brand. The Sony comes with a recharger for the NiMH batteries . Get used to always carrying at least 1 extra set of batteries . My big project now is documenting the construction of the bridge they are building here .[ I saw for the first time that one of the women { nice!} working there has a PINK hardhat I'll have to see if I can get a photo ] The Sony H-1 is perfect for this project.
 
mete said:
Batteries - remember that the LCD, zoom, and stabilizer suck up power .I never use the LCD .I do use the stabilizer as it's necessary for the 12x [435 mm equivalent] unless you use a tripod. Though you may be able to use AAs they might not give you all the functions , depending on the brand. The Sony comes with a recharger for the NiMH batteries . Get used to always carrying at least 1 extra set of batteries . My big project now is documenting the construction of the bridge they are building here .[ I saw for the first time that one of the women { nice!} working there has a PINK hardhat I'll have to see if I can get a photo ] The Sony H-1 is perfect for this project.

Which project, the bridge or the pink hardhat? :D
I almost always have batteries in my pocket, mainly for my Walkman. A couple weeks ago I had a couple batteries and a bunch of coins in my pocket together and at one point I noticed my leg getting warm. Apparently the coins had shorted out the batteries...
 
The bridge is the project ,I've got a couple of hundred photos and more to go.Of course you should always add some "human interes" photos!They'll pour in a week or two .Then of course they'll have to take down the old one ! You can get battery holders for 2,4,8 batteries .Loose ones are dangerous !!......The AA size NIMH batteries first were available at 900 mAhours . They are now up to 2700 mAhours !!! It's impossible to keep up with all the changes.
 
since it's been mentioned that most use proprietary batteries
I will say for my EL.cheepo Coolpix 3200 it takes AA's and it sucks the he!! out of them:eek: , with little warning when it's going out...
so much so, bought a set of re-charge-ables and a charger, much better now.. with the Sony proprietary battery. it is good and I've never had a problem with it..lasts long and
still using the same one, about 6 years now..
 
Hey Guys...I took this photo with an old HP photosmart camera, 3.1 mp I have found that with the correct lighting you can get by with most any camera...
SiskaSubhiltsmall.jpg

www.royknives.com
 
B Finnigan said:
I do not know any serious photographer that would even consider an auto focus lense.
Now you do! I am not a casual photographer, and I rely 100% on my autofocus lens capabilities. Frankly with the current technology, I cannot do better in manual, unless I am trying to shoot the inside of a folder well or something odd like that. The Tamron and Canon lenses I use are instantaneous and accurate.

Outside of this sentence I supported every word you remarked. :thumbup:

I use a Sony DSC-S75 3.1mp for my day-to-day shots. It is quite capable of knife photos also (Look at Rene's example with a 'cheapo' camera! :eek: ).

Digicam tip to all: on shutter lag, try focusing at your spot with the half button press. Once the camera adjusts it's focus (1-2 seconds) it is ready to instantaneously grab the shot when you depress it the rest of the way. I shot this photo of a 90mph fastball using this method. (Sony F-717 5mp digicam)

orig.jpg


Sure it's grainy and it was from about 100 yards away, but it was what I wanted to prove.

I have never heard anything bad about the Canon point & shoot cameras. I suspect you got a good one. :D

Coop
 
Rene E. Roy said:
Hey Guys...I took this photo with an old HP photosmart camera, 3.1 mp I have found that with the correct lighting you can get by with most any camera...
SiskaSubhiltsmall.jpg

www.royknives.com


Nice photo. Nice knife. Why don't they have a "drool" smiley? :D
 
Phillip Patton said:
So here's some photos. The first two are using my old camera, the last two are my new one. All were taken at the same time, in bright sunshine, with the cameras set on "auto".

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i238/ppatton/svppic2.jpg


http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i238/ppatton/svppic.jpg


http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i238/ppatton/canonpic1.jpg


http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i238/ppatton/canonpic.jpg
I think auto is just for the focus
you have some other things in the old jobby to set up to let the light in.
and maybe some white bal? just guessing here..:o
 
Auto is also for the white balance. You can set it on auto or do it manually.
I know I have a lot to learn yet, but I do think the second set of pics look better...
 
Phillip Patton said:
Auto is also for the white balance. You can set it on auto or do it manually.
I know I have a lot to learn yet, but I do think the second set of pics look better...
I wonder of mine is differant? I keep mine on auto for focus and then set the W/B for where I am shooting.. Hmmm
I agree the 2nd set is better..but mainly in brightness, just my 2 cents
 
Back
Top