Hey peeps,
im in the market for a digital camera. Im looking for something that is of good quality and not to expensive. Looking to spend around $200.00 or so. I would like something that i can use to take pics of "screen shots of my projector". By this i mean it should take good pics, i used a HP camera (cheap) and when i went to go take pics of the screen they came out all blurry and out of focus.
What do you guys recomend? Brand, style, features, price...
thanks,
ap0
im in the market for a digital camera. Im looking for something that is of good quality and not to expensive. Looking to spend around $200.00 or so. I would like something that i can use to take pics of "screen shots of my projector". By this i mean it should take good pics, i used a HP camera (cheap) and when i went to go take pics of the screen they came out all blurry and out of focus.
What do you guys recomend? Brand, style, features, price...
thanks,
ap0
I have used a Minolta F100 (F300 available now) and it's quite OK. Minimum object is 40 mm in order to fill the picture. The lens has some distortion (you can see it at my amp pictures). Every picture with white background is taken with the Minolta.
Here you have some cactus pictures taken with the Minolta
http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-50719/kaktus/mprolifera.html
The cactus is 15 mm in diameter.
Bad things:
Somewhat slow from pressed trigger to actually taking the picture, 1-2 secs
Switching white balance all the time in "Auto".
Lens distortion, but the lens is very sharp though.
Have difficulties to focus in low light.
Everywise I like the camera, easy to learn
Here you have some cactus pictures taken with the Minolta
http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-50719/kaktus/mprolifera.html
The cactus is 15 mm in diameter.
Bad things:
Somewhat slow from pressed trigger to actually taking the picture, 1-2 secs
Switching white balance all the time in "Auto".
Lens distortion, but the lens is very sharp though.
Have difficulties to focus in low light.
Everywise I like the camera, easy to learn
My new camera
Fuji S602 Zoom, Smart Media and Compact Flash slots. Great images, versatile (but will be buying the wide angle and telephoto add on's) learning curve is fairly high. I'm just scratching the surface on it's functions and have owned it for a few months. Slow "recharge" between flash's (need to use external flash of good quality)
Over all I'm impressed with it...it's a big step up from my Sony Mavica FD7 floppy camera.
zardoz
Fuji S602 Zoom, Smart Media and Compact Flash slots. Great images, versatile (but will be buying the wide angle and telephoto add on's) learning curve is fairly high. I'm just scratching the surface on it's functions and have owned it for a few months. Slow "recharge" between flash's (need to use external flash of good quality)
Over all I'm impressed with it...it's a big step up from my Sony Mavica FD7 floppy camera.
zardoz
Digital camera
I'm trying to get rid of this one:
http://www.photogon.com/cgi-bin/cl.pl?dgtlcamr&1051243683&class&3&4&
I swear its mint--it's still got the sticker and tags on it. I'm flexible on the price. I'm not a camera guru but I was impressed with the quality, although a film-based would still be better, I think.
If interested just email. Hope this doesn't violate forum rules.
I'm trying to get rid of this one:
http://www.photogon.com/cgi-bin/cl.pl?dgtlcamr&1051243683&class&3&4&
I swear its mint--it's still got the sticker and tags on it. I'm flexible on the price. I'm not a camera guru but I was impressed with the quality, although a film-based would still be better, I think.
If interested just email. Hope this doesn't violate forum rules.
I bought a camera for my wife for Christmas and the Nikon Coolpix 2500 was the best choice I could find.
Pros:
- Very cool swivel lens system. Protects the lens when you aren't using it.
- Very compact, easily fits in shirt pocket. I use a cell phone case to hold mine (they are really that small).
- Decent quality images (2 M-Pixels)
- Zoom lense.
- Lots of scenes (picture taking modes). Makes it easier to get a good picture under different conditions.
- Compact flash (least inexpensive memory card), comes with 16 Meg card.
- Rechargable battery
- Macro mode (great for taking pictures of PCB's)
- Consumer Reports Best Buy (if that matters to you)
Cons:
- Flash is right next to lens so Red eye can be a problem (you will get practice removing red eye with your photo editor).
- 2 Mega pixels pretty much limit you to max 5" x 8" enlargements.
- No optical view finder, you have to use the LCD as a finder.
Local retailers are selling this for around $280 now, I bought mine on-line for $240 plus $10 shipping.
One big warning about buying cameras on-line. There are a number of retailers that are scam artists (most of them seem to be in the New York City area). They will have the lowest prices (I saw as low as $210 for the Nikon I bought). The problem is these are grey market goods and do not have a US warrantee. Plus they open the box and take out the compact flash card which they will then try to sell you to as an accessory. And after you order they will often call you up on some pretext and use high pressure tactices to try to get you to buy some very expensive accessories. Do you homework, is there a real address and phone number posted anywhere on their website? Check them out with some of the on-line retailer rating services.
These bad apples tend to reopen as new companies on a regular basis. If you notice several companies that have the same contact info (address, phone number), be wary.
Phil
Pros:
- Very cool swivel lens system. Protects the lens when you aren't using it.
- Very compact, easily fits in shirt pocket. I use a cell phone case to hold mine (they are really that small).
- Decent quality images (2 M-Pixels)
- Zoom lense.
- Lots of scenes (picture taking modes). Makes it easier to get a good picture under different conditions.
- Compact flash (least inexpensive memory card), comes with 16 Meg card.
- Rechargable battery
- Macro mode (great for taking pictures of PCB's)
- Consumer Reports Best Buy (if that matters to you)
Cons:
- Flash is right next to lens so Red eye can be a problem (you will get practice removing red eye with your photo editor).
- 2 Mega pixels pretty much limit you to max 5" x 8" enlargements.
- No optical view finder, you have to use the LCD as a finder.
Local retailers are selling this for around $280 now, I bought mine on-line for $240 plus $10 shipping.
One big warning about buying cameras on-line. There are a number of retailers that are scam artists (most of them seem to be in the New York City area). They will have the lowest prices (I saw as low as $210 for the Nikon I bought). The problem is these are grey market goods and do not have a US warrantee. Plus they open the box and take out the compact flash card which they will then try to sell you to as an accessory. And after you order they will often call you up on some pretext and use high pressure tactices to try to get you to buy some very expensive accessories. Do you homework, is there a real address and phone number posted anywhere on their website? Check them out with some of the on-line retailer rating services.
These bad apples tend to reopen as new companies on a regular basis. If you notice several companies that have the same contact info (address, phone number), be wary.
Phil
Pass DIY Addict
Joined 2000
Paid Member
Be sure to ask about shipping costs before ordering from the lowest priced vendor on the Internet. Often the place that beats everyone else's price by $50 will charge up to $30 to ship!
Also, nearly every point and shoot camera (digital or film based) will produce red eye. The 'red eye' feature on many cameras is next to worthless. Red eye is caused by the flash bouncing off of the subject's retina back onto the film due to the close proximity of the flash and lens. The only effective solution to this is to move the flash farther away from the lens - typically only possible with SLR or pro-format cameras with a flash mounted on a flash bracket. The nice thing about digital is that you can manually correct red eye using your photo software!
Eric
Also, nearly every point and shoot camera (digital or film based) will produce red eye. The 'red eye' feature on many cameras is next to worthless. Red eye is caused by the flash bouncing off of the subject's retina back onto the film due to the close proximity of the flash and lens. The only effective solution to this is to move the flash farther away from the lens - typically only possible with SLR or pro-format cameras with a flash mounted on a flash bracket. The nice thing about digital is that you can manually correct red eye using your photo software!
Eric
Red eye is driven by a optical law!Eric said:
When the angle between the flash and the lens is under a certain value, then you will get red eyes! That's it!
How to reduce?
1 Use wide angle lens, the object near (object for away and/or use tele lens not good)
2 Move the flash away from the camera!
This is facts. Red eyes "reducer" is tjurbajs, only marketing BS.
Pass DIY Addict
Joined 2000
Paid Member
Under *some* circumstances, the red-eye feature *may* make a differece. They typical ways this feature works is to shine a light at the subject or to flicker the flash a dozen times before the picture is actually taken. If you subject is 2 feet away, it might be effective. The point is to shrink the subject's pupil by shining the light, thereby reducing the chance of reflecting light off the subject's retina. If you are taking a picture of a group of people at some distance, this feature is worthless as you are probably too far away from the subjects for the pre-flash light to effectively work. Remember that light output falls off (approximately) relative to the square of the distance- quickly limiting the effect of any red eye feature and often the flash itself, too.
In a great many cases, you will get red eye with a point and shoot camera (red eye feature or not) - its simply a design limitation of the type of camera. This is just one of the many reasons I own a high quality SLR with the flash mounted far away from the lens. Using this camera, I've never taken a single picture with red eye.
The bottom line is that if any two cameras spec out the same and you are trying the choose between them, it makes little difference if one has a red eye feature and the other does not...
In a great many cases, you will get red eye with a point and shoot camera (red eye feature or not) - its simply a design limitation of the type of camera. This is just one of the many reasons I own a high quality SLR with the flash mounted far away from the lens. Using this camera, I've never taken a single picture with red eye.
The bottom line is that if any two cameras spec out the same and you are trying the choose between them, it makes little difference if one has a red eye feature and the other does not...
For close-up shots...
Close-up shots of electronics are difficult. Electronics tends to be silver and shiny, so auto-focus has trouble. Depth of field is small because the lens is inevitably close. Combine these two problems, and you're in real trouble. Flash just bounces highlights off the shiny bits. You need lots of (carefully directed) light.
Close-up shots of electronics are difficult. Electronics tends to be silver and shiny, so auto-focus has trouble. Depth of field is small because the lens is inevitably close. Combine these two problems, and you're in real trouble. Flash just bounces highlights off the shiny bits. You need lots of (carefully directed) light.
Re: For close-up shots...
To a large extent the quality of the cameras pictures is dictated by the lens... don't expect the number of pixels to be a determiner. My 2 Mpixel Canon ate a 4 MPixel Fuji for breakfast.
Lighting is critical, and moving objects are a pain -- delay between pushing the button and getting the picture seems built-in.
Close-up quality is quite lens dependant -- and if you don't have the object being shot well enuff lit to disable the flash, you will get a big hotspot.
As to brands, Canon & Nikon are fairly safe. $300 is about as little as you can spend and get decent lens.
dave
To a large extent the quality of the cameras pictures is dictated by the lens... don't expect the number of pixels to be a determiner. My 2 Mpixel Canon ate a 4 MPixel Fuji for breakfast.
Lighting is critical, and moving objects are a pain -- delay between pushing the button and getting the picture seems built-in.
Close-up quality is quite lens dependant -- and if you don't have the object being shot well enuff lit to disable the flash, you will get a big hotspot.
As to brands, Canon & Nikon are fairly safe. $300 is about as little as you can spend and get decent lens.
dave
Hi everyone.
It just so happens that selling digital cameras is what I do.
For around $200 (US I presume) your choices are pretty wide, but the big problem is going to be the close up capability. Someone mentioned the Minolta F100, now F300. This will be well in excess of $200.
Someone else mentioned Canon. Good cameras, but not particularly good at real close up. You will get a tight shot of something about the size of a cigarette pack. If this is as close as you need, then great!
There is one exception in the canon range, they do (did) one called an A200. Much better close up, but no zoom. Nice and cheap with very good image quality. This one might fit the bill.
As to the Nikon 2500, also pretty nice, but no optical viewfinder, so you use the battery pretty heavily, and the screen can be hard to see in bright sunlight, otherwise also not bad.
If you want to get _really_ close, I would advise the Nikon 4500, but this will be way above the $200 range. The alternative would be to pick up one of the earlier generations second hand.
The range was:
4500
995
990
950
In order of newest to oldest. These cameras will all focus extremely closely, tight shots of coin sized objects are possible.
I guess it all depends on just _how_ close you need.
Don't forget to budget for some rechargeable batteries (unless they're inluded, of course), a case, and some extra memory.
Hope this might help.
Mark
It just so happens that selling digital cameras is what I do.
For around $200 (US I presume) your choices are pretty wide, but the big problem is going to be the close up capability. Someone mentioned the Minolta F100, now F300. This will be well in excess of $200.
Someone else mentioned Canon. Good cameras, but not particularly good at real close up. You will get a tight shot of something about the size of a cigarette pack. If this is as close as you need, then great!
There is one exception in the canon range, they do (did) one called an A200. Much better close up, but no zoom. Nice and cheap with very good image quality. This one might fit the bill.
As to the Nikon 2500, also pretty nice, but no optical viewfinder, so you use the battery pretty heavily, and the screen can be hard to see in bright sunlight, otherwise also not bad.
If you want to get _really_ close, I would advise the Nikon 4500, but this will be way above the $200 range. The alternative would be to pick up one of the earlier generations second hand.
The range was:
4500
995
990
950
In order of newest to oldest. These cameras will all focus extremely closely, tight shots of coin sized objects are possible.
I guess it all depends on just _how_ close you need.
Don't forget to budget for some rechargeable batteries (unless they're inluded, of course), a case, and some extra memory.
Hope this might help.
Mark
i agree 100% with what planet10 and bikeman have said. all good facts and advice.
i have a canon powershot S30 and it's a great camera, pretty good lens for such a small camera, but as bikeman says macro capability is not a strength of canons. it's also well over $300. as planet10 said, you may not find a decent lens in a camera below $300. avoid the very compact models (e.g. canon Elph) if you don't really need them, as the folded optics come at the cost of image quality.
there is actually a new cheap canon model coming out that looks very promising, the powershot A300:
http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/a300/index.html
the lens doesn't look so good compared to my S30 but the MSRP is only $299, and i have seen it listed at amazon.com for $199. it should be available in a few weeks. again, close-up capability will not be a strength, though they claim a min. distance of 5cm which is not that bad. the CCD sensor appears to be the same one in my S30, which i can attest to being excellent in quality.
i would avoid olympus and fuji models, they seem to have more chromatic aberration than canon/nikon and in general the image quality doesn't seem to be as good.
again, www.dpreview.com is one of the best resources for any digicam info.
i have a canon powershot S30 and it's a great camera, pretty good lens for such a small camera, but as bikeman says macro capability is not a strength of canons. it's also well over $300. as planet10 said, you may not find a decent lens in a camera below $300. avoid the very compact models (e.g. canon Elph) if you don't really need them, as the folded optics come at the cost of image quality.
there is actually a new cheap canon model coming out that looks very promising, the powershot A300:
http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/a300/index.html
the lens doesn't look so good compared to my S30 but the MSRP is only $299, and i have seen it listed at amazon.com for $199. it should be available in a few weeks. again, close-up capability will not be a strength, though they claim a min. distance of 5cm which is not that bad. the CCD sensor appears to be the same one in my S30, which i can attest to being excellent in quality.
i would avoid olympus and fuji models, they seem to have more chromatic aberration than canon/nikon and in general the image quality doesn't seem to be as good.
again, www.dpreview.com is one of the best resources for any digicam info.
If the upcoming canon A300 uses the same lens as the older A200, (and I would think it will) it will be pretty good. The close focus ability will be the best in the canon range, good enough for shots of most electronics, except perhaps SMT
Don't forget that the higher resolution will let you crop the picture a _lot_ and still have something more than high enough pixels for online work.
They're not the fastest cameras on the market, but I can't complain about the image quality, especially for the price.
Mark
Don't forget that the higher resolution will let you crop the picture a _lot_ and still have something more than high enough pixels for online work.
They're not the fastest cameras on the market, but I can't complain about the image quality, especially for the price.
Mark
Below a pic (cut out from the original size) from a quick shot with my Olympus Camedia C-2500L. It was taken autofocus at a distance of approximately 2cm without the built in flash (but with a desktop lamp).
I took the pic below fast and did not play much around, the shutter time was quite long and therefore the pic is not so sharp as it could be with a little more effort.
With the flash I have to increase the distance to about 5cm as otherwise it would through a shadow because of the physical size of the camera body
I have also some cheap ($15) Hama close-up lenses which are pretty good but don`t need them most of the time as I can go close enough without it usually. With the lens the pic below could have the same size while being much sharper from even further away using the flash and shorter shutter time .
Well it`s not a $200 camera and it`s obsolete meanwhile (too cheap for the quality as a camera-dealer told me) but You can get it used on ebay sometimes for around $300-400.
My boss has bought a Qlympus E-10 ($2000) and we directly compared them and the Camedia is not at all any worse. Quite the opposite, the Camedia is more easy to handle and You get almost the same results but easier and quicker.
I borrowed mine a friend for some short time because he has lost his Digicam. He has been so inspired that he bought one second hand from ebay for about $325 and he is still highly satiesfied with it. He had quite some different models/brands before and he says that`s the best he ever had and that he wouldn`t know for what he would change it.
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.