Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Camera Talk

  1. #1
    18 years old
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    634

    Camera Talk

    i have been looking into cameras for snapping pics of me on the bike, and had a few questions. how many pixels is enough for a nice picture? im looking at the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-L1 for 250$ its a 4.1 megapixel with a 3x zoom, 1.5 inch LCD display, captures small videos, and shutter speeds 1/8 - 1/2000 sec. (Auto), 1 - 1/2000 sec. (Program Auto).
    Last edited by DeadlyStryker; 05-13-2005 at 05:08 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by irieness
    ...it's just that when I'm wondering what things are like head tube, seat post, cranks, flux capacitor, SS, FS, hardtail...

  2. #2
    Evil Genius
    Reputation: BikeKilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    249

    Check out these websites:

    The best websites:

    www.dpreview.com Best for Camera Review

    www.photo.net Best for general camera info/techniques and message boards

    I have a Pentax Optio S4i that has very similar specs. They now make the Optio S5i. It's 5 megapixels, absolutely tiny (I keep in in an Altoids tin) and costs about $250, the same price as the Sony. It has a stronger digital zoom ,a great Macro and super macro more, takes movies for as long as you have memory available, and almost as important, the software that come with it works VERY well. You can get one here:

    http://www.ephotocraft.com/Amazing/s...76785-ACCWARE-
    2FPVXL29

    They are very well rated. I'm just a photography/camera buff I work part-tim eas a photographer. Hope you choose one you like...

    Dan
    I'm as bad as the Worst. But, thank God, I'm also as good as the Best.

  3. #3
    old timer retro grouch...
    Reputation: Doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    228
    THis is a weekly topic it seems. Search and ye shall find.

    (Hint...you are not asking the right question)

  4. #4
    nnn
    nnn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nnn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    799
    As for how many pixels it's irrelevant, I know 6 MP cameras that can't make a decent postcard size picture and I know 2-3 MP cameras that take better pics than today's mid range 4-5 MP cameras, it really depends on many more things, pixel count being the least important one. Then again the more pixels you have the bigger you e-penis (or something like that) is

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Go Kart Motzart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,239
    Quote Originally Posted by nnn
    As for how many pixels it's irrelevant,
    Wrong. It's not the only thing that matters, but it's far from irrelevent. Doesn't matter how good a photog you are if you try and make a nice 8x10 from a 2 MP files. There is a reason digital SLR's start at the 6 MP range.

    That said, 4 MP is plenty for most consumer prints and web stuff. Without a doubt the most important component is the one that is that pushes the button. Most of the cameras out there will take some nice shots when used correctly.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    149
    the second most important part of the camera (first, of course is photographer skills) is the lens, a picture is only as good as the lens that captures it

    the simplest guideline is to look at digicams that are made by camera companies (Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, etc...) those digicams will use glass produced in the same factory as their film cameras, the Nikkor glass in your Nikon CoolPix is the same glass used in the Nikon film camera lenses

    of course a gray area are the cameras like the Epsons, Sonys and Panasonics, some of their low end cameras use Sony or Panasonic glass, ask yourself this, are Sony or Panasonic known for their film cameras?, no

    ....however

    some of the high end Sonys and Panasonics use Carl Zeiss optics, and some Samsungs use Scneider optics, Zeiss lenses are used on the medium-format Hasselblad cameras, and Schneider lenses are used on the large-format portrait cameras, both of these optics are incredibly good, arguably better than Japanese optics

    simply put, get the most megapixels and best lens you can afford, if you have to favor one over the other, lean towards the lens side....

  7. #7
    18 years old
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    634
    all you people with cameras in the low 300$ range and below, what cameras do you have and do you have any sample pictures?
    Quote Originally Posted by irieness
    ...it's just that when I'm wondering what things are like head tube, seat post, cranks, flux capacitor, SS, FS, hardtail...

  8. #8
    old timer retro grouch...
    Reputation: Doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by Go Kart Motzart
    Wrong. It's not the only thing that matters, but it's far from irrelevent. Doesn't matter how good a photog you are if you try and make a nice 8x10 from a 2 MP files. There is a reason digital SLR's start at the 6 MP range.

    That said, 4 MP is plenty for most consumer prints and web stuff. Without a doubt the most important component is the one that is that pushes the button. Most of the cameras out there will take some nice shots when used correctly.
    Not true. DSLRs used to be 3-4MP. As a matter of fact my 'new' one is a 4MP and blows away most (all?) higher resolution point and shoots. Thats because the CCD is so much larger that it captures much cleaner data.

    You may be surprised what you can do with low resolution. I have some 20x30s made from a 6MP camera that look great. My 4MP SLR can churn out 20x30s that look just as nice. Its not about the pixels, its about the sensory size/quality, image processing, and of course the lens.

  9. #9
    old timer retro grouch...
    Reputation: Doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by MacTech
    the simplest guideline is to look at digicams that are made by camera companies (Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, etc...) those digicams will use glass produced in the same factory as their film cameras, the Nikkor glass in your Nikon CoolPix is the same glass used in the Nikon film camera lenses
    ......


    simply put, get the most megapixels and best lens you can afford, if you have to favor one over the other, lean towards the lens side....
    So a $70 35mm is as good as a $900 one? Not all glass is created equal. And the glass used in point and shoots is most definitely NOT the same quality as the good glass used in premium optics. It may be produced in the same factory, but so what. Abercrombie is made next to off brand WalMart stuff. Does that make them equal? I agree that the lens is VERY important, probably most important. But don't think that canon, Nikon, et al are putting their best stuff in every camera. They use some coke bottle lenses too in some of their cameras.

    Look for Leica too. I think the new Lumix from Panasonic uses a Leica lens. Thats a great camera. I think its probably oneof the best in its class, Nikon and Canon not withstanding.

  10. #10
    Evil Genius
    Reputation: BikeKilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    249

    Optio S4i

    Here's some pics. It does have some vignetting in dark situations in the corners. But I like it anyway...
    Attached Images Attached Images
    I'm as bad as the Worst. But, thank God, I'm also as good as the Best.

  11. #11
    Rep Power: Infinity
    Reputation: NateHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,531
    I have a 2MP Fuji Finepix 2650 (it's a few yrs old now) that puts out some very nice pictures. I've printed several very nice 8x10 photos with it. I wouldn't go larger than that, but they're still wall-hanging quality. The camera is best when taking pictures close-up, and fairly good at landscape shots. It is a point and shoot, so I can't do any decent wildlife photog. with it...but that's the nature of the beast.

  12. #12
    Evil Genius
    Reputation: BikeKilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    249

    Optio S4i

    Here's some pics. It does have some vignetting in dark situations in the corners. But I like it anyway...

    The problem becomes downloading full res pictures. My camera goes to 4mp, but the highest resolution the site allows in 195 kb, only 1/20 the original file size. Also, you have to look at what you are using it for. Are you going to be taking shots of sunsets and blowing them up to 20 by 30 inches? Are you going to be carrying it around in a special camera bag? I have my big SLR camea that weighs three pounds and and takes fan-****ing-tastic pictures. I shoot weddings with it. But I can't really bring it to the ball game or a bar and take pictures of my buddys with it. In this situation, small is key. I wanted a camera that was small enough to literally fit in my pocket with my cell phone. That's how small this camera is. You miss 100% of the shots you don't take when don't have a camera with you. I put it in my pocket and bring it with me almost everywhere.
    You don't use a cresent wrench to turn the screw in your glasses. You need the right tool for the job. For me, small is the most important factor. Everything else was secondary. It just happens to take great shots. Check out Amazon.com reviews and well as the camera websites I pointed out above. If you want to do art shots, By all means, get a Nikon D70 or a Canon Digital Rebel XT. I PERSONALLY prefer camera makers to make my cameras, and for them to use universal media, like SD or compact flash. If I had to choose another small, great camera, I would like the Canon S500, but they go for about $500. You can also check out this review of a Casio that's in the same class:

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/casio/s100.htm

    It's supposed to be a great camera, and in the same class as the S500 and the Optio S5i. The guy is a concieted blowhard windbag, but he is usually pretty close on the mark with his reviews.
    I'm as bad as the Worst. But, thank God, I'm also as good as the Best.

  13. #13
    Evil Genius
    Reputation: BikeKilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    249

    Pics didn't take

    My pics didn't take. Here they are:
    I'm as bad as the Worst. But, thank God, I'm also as good as the Best.

  14. #14
    Evil Genius
    Reputation: BikeKilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    249

    Pics didn't take

    My pics didn't take. Here they are:

    They were taken on the lowest resolution setting, so I don't think they show what the camera can do. The file sizes are only about 90 KB, 1/40th of full size. But here they are, take them with a grain of salt.

    Dan
    Attached Images Attached Images
    I'm as bad as the Worst. But, thank God, I'm also as good as the Best.

Similar Threads

  1. Biking + camera = what case?
    By ettore in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-18-2004, 04:40 PM
  2. Need quick camera advice Problem: Blurry pics
    By Banshee Rider in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-23-2004, 08:16 PM
  3. More camera threads
    By DJrider04 in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 09-20-2004, 09:24 PM
  4. Looking for a camera
    By WeekendShogunWarrior in forum Passion
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 07-14-2004, 04:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •