The Hotly Debated Digital Camera(s)......

January 15, 2005

OK. I searched the forums and came up with some discussion about DC's, mostly advice on what to buy. This was helpful but not what I was looking for. Tomorrow I intend to purchase the fairly new Kodak DX7590 from Staples (Canada). In fact, I am going to steal it for a little over $500 CAD. Now, is there anyone out there that has this camera, or the older DX6490? I know the good points, I want to hear your gripes about it. And if you don't own a Kodak list of some of the things in your camera that you don't like. If I want to hear good things I can go to the website, I want to know the "real life" facts about our equipment.

LK

klassenl@(remove___)yahoo.c0m

Editted: sorry about the errors

Edited January 15, 2005 by tak1

3.9k · January 15, 2005

Well you just opened a can of worms...like asking what is the best GPS unit.

I personally think that unless you are an expert you prbably won't be able to tell one from the other if you were presented with a print out or a JPG. The difference is in the mega pixels. That only comes in play these days on printing. If you get a camera with at least 2 mega pixels and all you want to do is print a good photo or upload to a website it isn't going to make any difference as to the brand.

You just need to choose one that you find easy to use. Forget all the hype.

El Diablo

January 15, 2005

I would agree that there is little to choose amongst the modern digital cameras, BUT .........

What makes a camera 'better' than its competiton is the quality of the lens. The pixel count gives an indication of how 'grainy' the image will be when you attempt to print an 8X10 picture. (There will be pixelation at large image sizes.)

Also, ensure that the camera offers an OPTICAL zoom mechanism. This is where the lens assembly moves back and forth (like a zoom lens) to increase image size.

Digital zoom is simply an electronic technique which essentially magnifies the centre of the view, leading to massive pixelation and considerable disappointment.

I hope this is clear enough - trying to explain the technicalities of digital cameras is not easy.

I am a pro photographer - if you have any concerns that you want to discuss, contact me off-list by PM or email.

January 15, 2005

Wow, I am continually impressed by the speed that forum topics are replied to.

I've spent two weeks intensively researching this whole issue, and spent many hours perusing the internet looking at cam's, been in stores playing etc.... Suffice it to say that I am well informed about this particular technology.

I'll clarify the purpose of this thread. I want to know your real life experiences with your digital cameras. What you would do different if you were to go through the process of shopping and buying again.

By the way is a SCHNEIDER-KREUZNACH VARIOGON lense any good?

LK

January 15, 2005

I think it depends on what you want to do with the camera. I have a Canon Digital Rebel. It is to big and heavy after awhile for geocaching, but for good quality pics for large prints it is great. I have a Olympus C720 that is smaller, It is a 3.2 MP camera and the prints are fine. It also is wonderful to take to family events, but I prefer the Canon for quality shots.

January 15, 2005

I have a Kodak Digital that is two years old. I have not had any problems with it. It is easy to use...very intuitive menu system. It is a 3 megapixel camera and the pics are more than sufficient for posting, emailing and printing on photo paper. There are a few things I am unhappy with...one of those being battery life. It seems like I am forever buying a new battery for it, at around $7 a pop. The other thing is the pain in the neck it is to transfer pics from the camera, to the Kodak software, then into folders after cropping, adjusting brightness, exposure, etc. But that may just be my lack of enthusiasm for the task, too. I do love the convenience of the camera and it goes with me everywhere I go.

January 15, 2005

The SCHNEIDER-KREUZNACH VARIOGON lenses are up there in Zeiss country!

Excellent glassware and outstanding zoom lenses.

Good choice! Does the Kodak camera you mentioned carry these lenses? If so - excellent choice.

January 15, 2005

Went to Kodak.com, and the mid to higher priced cameras have the SCHNEIDER-KREUZNACH VARIOGON lenses. The cheapest (the CX line) doesn't appear to. At least there's no particular mention of it.

LK

January 15, 2005

I've had my Concord Eye-Q for alittle over a year now, and I think it takes great pictures. I took this pic with it:

Best of all, it only cost me $100 US

Lynx

24.7k · January 15, 2005

I would agree that there is little to choose amongst the modern digital cameras, BUT .........

What makes a camera 'better' than its competiton is the quality of the lens. The pixel count gives an indication of how 'grainy' the image will be when you attempt to print an 8X10 picture. (There will be pixelation at large image sizes.)

Also, ensure that the camera offers an OPTICAL zoom mechanism. This is where the lens assembly moves back and forth (like a zoom lens) to increase image size.

Digital zoom is simply an electronic technique which essentially magnifies the centre of the view, leading to massive pixelation and considerable disappointment.

I hope this is clear enough - trying to explain the technicalities of digital cameras is not easy.

I am a pro photographer - if you have any concerns that you want to discuss, contact me off-list by PM or email.

I agree. The only thing I'll add is that any camera should have user replaceable batteries. Preferably AA's. That way you can buy them in a pinch and recharge your own NiMH batteries.

January 15, 2005

I agree. The only thing I'll add is that any camera should have user replaceable batteries. Preferably AA's. That way you can buy them in a pinch and recharge your own NiMH batteries.

Excellent point - sorry I didn't raise it myself! This is an almost essential feature. Thanks for bringing it up, RK!

January 15, 2005

I urge you examine Nikon's Coolpix cameras before making a buying decision. There are four in my family, and four delighted owners.

1.5k · January 15, 2005

...I urge you examine Nikon's Coolpix cameras...

The Ladybug Kids have used a Nikon Coolpix 3100 (3.2 megapixels) for 18 months and nearly 4000 images. It's so easy to use that even 4-year old Mini-V Ladybug uses it to take photos of her favorite dog, stuffed animal and even scenes from "Dragon Tails" television shows .

It takes AA NiMH rechargeables, AA alkalines, or lithium CV3s, and we have used it in the field at temperatures down to -20° F. It's been dropped, rained on, snowed on and licked by the dog and still keeps shooting. It also comes with nice software for viewing, editing and filing the images.

I'm not getting paid for this, so I'll quit now, but we'll buy another Nikon when the time comes. We also have a nearly 20 year-old Nikon FE2 35 mm SLR that's shot close to 10,000 trouble-free frames, but that's a different forum topic.

January 15, 2005

I took advantage of an after-Thanksgiving sale and bought a Kodak DX4530. Of course, I’ve only played around with it for a couple of months, but so far I am impressed. It’s really easy to use and takes great pictures.

There’s one thing I wanted to mention, though. Kodak digital cameras have a built-in color saturation “feature.” If you’re a point-and-shoot type of photographer, this feature will give pictures that are vibrant and colorful without you having to do anything to enhance them. If, on the other hand, you’re more of a serious photographer who likes to have natural raw images to work with, this automatic color saturation feature (which can’t be turned off) may end up making you really hate Kodak cameras. Personally, though, I love it.

38.2k · January 15, 2005

And if you don't own a Kodak list of some of the things in your camera that you don't like.

I have a Canon Powershot A-70 (A-75 is the updated model). I purchased it because it was the only camera in its price range that allowed for manual focus, manual exposure and aperature and shutter priority.

Though I still like the camera and it takes great pictures, I find that using some of the features that I wanted to be a PITA. Aperature and shutter priority are easy enough to use, but the manual focus is not particularly easy to use as there is no ring on the lens to focus. Instead you push buttons to focus and its very hard to tell exactly when it is in focus.

I was also disappointed to discover that the aperature had a very limited F2.8 to F8 range.

Finally I'm disappointed with the somewhat flimsy construction. Way too much plastic.

If the camera broke, would I buy it again? Sure, because to get the manual features I want, I'd have to pay at least twice what I paid for the A-70 and the most of other cameras that have manual overrides are much larger than the pocket sized A-70..

Edited January 16, 2005 by briansnat

2.6k · January 15, 2005

Some years ago, in order to recommend a digital camera to be the company standard, my boss invited a vendor to bring in one of every camera brand he had in stock for a "shoot out." I was surprised that there were very definite differences in the picture quality. For example, the Sony camera was very cleverly designed but took noticably the worst images. By far the sharpest was Olympus.

I doubt you'd see anything like that much variation now; everybody's gotten better at it. But I wouldn't guarantee all cameras of the same spec at the same price would give exactly the same quality picture.

I've stuck with Olympus happily ever since, three or four cameras later. But my last Oly has just croaked, and I'm going to depart the trend. I identified the things I really wanted this time around, mostly based on things that really irritated me about the camera I had before. I wanted

cheap -- under $200, so I wouldn't lose my mind if I dropped it down a cliff

small -- fit-in-my-pocket small, so I don't have to dig through my bag for it

quick -- both to start up, and to cycle between shots

good in low light -- I hate flash. I also wanted a physical button to force flash off, so I didn't have to dig through menus every time

standard AA batteries -- see previous commenters

USB interface -- okay, they all have this now. My poor, dead Olympus was that old

I think I've settled on the Canon Powershot A-75. In addition to the above, it has a really easy to navigate LCD display and more manual features than most cameras in its class.

Needless to say, I'm buying this one entirely with geocaching needs in mind

1.5k · January 15, 2005

I've got two that I bring with me. An older model Sony, CyberShot, which, while on 2.1 Mp is small, and takes excellent pictures, ideal for tossing in the 'caching bag. For taking photographs I've purchased a Nikon D70. A little pricier, but IMHO, the top end of the pro-sumer digital SLR line today.

To echo what others have already said, the lens quality is just as critical as the "megapixel count". Also important to look for is optical or non-digital zoom. The 10, 20 and 100 times digital zooms sound very impressive, but digital zoom is just a pixel interpolation algorythm. ALWAYS look for the highest level optical zoom you can afford!

2.6k · January 15, 2005

For taking photographs I've purchased a Nikon D70. A little pricier, but IMHO, the top end of the pro-sumer digital SLR line today.

Oh, beauty! Uncle Badger got himself one of those for Christmas, and he took some fantastic shots with it. He asked me to crop and shrink them for cache logs, and I felt like a vandal.

January 15, 2005

OK. I searched the forums and came up with some discussion about DC's, mostly advice on what to buy. This was helpful but not what I was looking for. Tomorrow I intend to purchase the fairly new Kodak DX7590 from Staples (Canada). In fact, I am going to steal it for a little over $500 CAD. Now, is there anyone out there that has this camera, or the older DX6490? I know the good points, I want to hear your gripes about it. And if you don't own a Kodak list of some of the things in your camera that you don't like. If I want to hear good things I can go to the website, I want to know the "real life" facts about our equipment.

LK

klassenl@(remove___)yahoo.c0m

Editted: sorry about the errors

Great camera! I have the DX6490.

The only two gripes I have, which are minor for me, is that this camera has a difficult/long time auto-focusing in darker environments (low light). The auto focus feature is always trying to auto correct which makes it difficult to "capture that Kodak moment". This can be remedied by switching off the auto-focus feature into manual.

And I have had a difficult time trying to find a suitable camera case for it. It seems the lens is awkardly restricting a proper fit into many bags/cases. Since Halloween, I am still looking for a protective case with no luck.

But then again, I am not actively seeking for it either.

1.2k · January 15, 2005

You can't beat the Canon Powershot A-75 at 3.2 mps. For cameras in this megapixal range, it is the best reviewed on the market. A great big plus is that you can add wide angle and telephoto lenses plus filters. Not too many in this price range can do that. There is even a add-on telephoto of 8x which with the built in 3x gives you a whopping 24x.

January 15, 2005

Let's have some biased opinion....

sure

I am biased towards Fuji

I have a Fujifilm S1 Pro SLR, and a Fuji 2650

I also have a Kodak DC260 'dinosaur'

I echo what some have said about focusing (pun) on the lens;

I just referred my coworker to this:

FUJI S5100 4.0MP with Travel Kit
4.0MP

10x Optical Zoom

3.6x digital

Pictbridge Technology

Digital movie mode with sound

ISO range 64-4000

$380 at Sams Club

includes 4 AA nihms, with fast charger and 12v adaptor

I also recommend the new Canon Digital EOS Rebel. ~900

If you have room for an SLR, the expandibility and quality of Canon Lenses is hard to beat for the price.

1.7k · January 15, 2005

I use a Canon Powershot A80, 4.0 MP I believe a now discontinued model. The replacement is A-85. Great all purpose digital. Canon also makes a digital single lens reflex that uses the EF series lenses. I have a Canon SLR, and if I were going to upgrade to digital slr that would be the way I would go, just to preserve the lens value. I bought Canon A 70's for Christmas for son and wife, and they are very similar to the A-80 except without the movable viewfinder. As an alternative you might look into the Pentax Optio series, they make a very compact 4.0 MP Waterproof Camera, of very compact size (shirt pocket) that would be a very sound choice for outdoor general purpose. This camera has similar zoom capability to the Canons. Pentax has always had lenses that are the top. The waterprood feature is a draw. I can recommend B&H Photo website for a very comprehensive listing of all types.

January 15, 2005

For years I was a pretty hard-core amature semi-pro photographer - but I was, and still am, old school - I like film. This is mostly due to the fact that I used to shoot black and white almost exclusively, and print my own stuff.

BUT, for caching and computer uses, I have had to admit that you can't beat a digital - it does satisfy that instant gratification problem I have.

I don't know much about the brands in terms of digital, and even my film cameras have been "rebel" choices because I often look for something different than the average consumer - I have tiny hands, and need SMALL equipment (hence my ownership of certain Pentax cameras with high end aftermarket lenses).

So, to that end, and also because at heart I am a GIRL who's a sucker for a cute package, I was THRILLED when I received a Canon ELPH for Christmas this year. Tiny, cute, not too too expensive, and takes nice pictures. The size makes it a bonus if you are going to use it primarily for caching and on hikes.

But I agree with most everyone - most mid to high end cameras/brands offer something just right for you, depending on what your picture needs are.

January 15, 2005

For great quality and price along with easy/intuitive usage there is but one brand, Nikon's Coolpix line of cameras. If you're looking for something thats compact and used for point-and-shoot this is the camera. The Cannon digital Rebel and the like are overkill for most people and more expensive. If your looking for something to just pack along while caching with a pretty powerful built in zoom and is really easy to upload your pics, then Coolpix is for you. JMHO of course.

January 15, 2005

I recently purchased the recently released Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20. My previous camera was a Nikon CoolPix750, and it did a fairly good job, but developed burnt pixels in the CCD after about 1000 pics. However they weren't too bad, and I ended up taking almost 5000 pics before getting my new camera.

The Lumix is FANTASTIC! It has a 12x Leica lens that is equivalent to 36-342 in 35mm Besides the massive lens, it also has a hot shoe for external flash. However the built in flash is satisfactory for most situations. I have never seen a more powerful integral flash, this one is good to 23+ feet!

The only drawback is that it does take a proprietary Li-ion battery, but I bought a high capacity spare, and that is good for around 400-500 pics if I were to use the flash every pic. Li-ion batteries have much greater density and last so much longer than alkalines that I don't mind not being able to use them.

I did find it hard to find an online dealer that wouldn't strip the camera of it's manufacturers accessories, which include the battery and charger. Many of the NY dealers will open the box and sell these separately, so BE CAREFUL!! I purchased my camera below the $599 list price at 42photo.com for $369. I don't think there is a better camera for this price on the market, this camera easily competes with cameras that are $1000+

January 15, 2005

The Lumix also does not accept any other lenses, but who needs another lens with this monster! The Leica lens will take accept all the various filters etc.

January 15, 2005

I don't consider myself a pro, but I have been employed as a photographer in the hazy past and even made money at it. Asking ten photogs which is the best camera will get you ten different answers. Just like GPSes, pickups, and brands of beer. The camera discussion is usually more civil than any of those others, though.

For years, I've carried Pentax film cameras and I have a fair assortment of goodies that fit them. Many a film photographer has started out with the Pentax K-1000, a sturdy manual camera that is great for learning the ropes. I have the one that I bought new in 1975 and it still works. I've gone on to sexier models, but I keep film in the K-1000 and keep it in my pickup, waiting for the day that another tornado crosses my path. Pentax and Canon owners harp on each other that the other model is junk, but most grudingly concede that Nikon is the best of breed of the consumer-grade SLR cameras.

I bought a Sony CyberShot and I've taken some nice snapshots with it, but it aggravates the hell out of me. I don't like digging through the menus to find the equivalent of an F-stop when I'm about to take a picture. It has a 1 second delay from the time I push the release until it takes the picture. When I am trying to get a kid to smile or act nice, that's just enough time for them to look the other way or make a face.

I've been lusting after the Nikon D70 for some time. You can find it, with lens, for under $1000 if you look. It feels real nice and you will never be embarrassed around a pro photographer if you are holding onto one.

The Pentax IST-D has been out for some time, but it hasn't gotten below $1500 and that's above the point where I bail out. Pentax just came out with the IST-DS, which is a scaled down 6.1 MP version. It's going for around $899 on the internet with a 50mm lens. I played with one last weekend and I'm very impressed. It weighs less than the D70, but it still feels very solid. The only problem that I'm finding is that some of my older K mount lenses won't work. They are supposed to, so I'm going to have to do a little more research on that.

One of the features of a dSLR is "bracketing". This is where the camera will take the same photo at several different F-stops or speeds around your current settings. This way, if you don't like the photo exactly how you had the settings, there are a couple of alternatives. Another great feature is the ability to take a number of photos in a very short time frame by holding down the release button. In the film world, we called this "auto-winding". Most dSLRs will take 2-3 shots per second for up to 3 or 4 seconds. These features also exist on some of the better non-SLR digital cameras (generally, those over $600US).

The difference between a "point and shoot" digital camera, like the HPs, Kodaks, FinePix, CoolPix, etc. and a digital SLR (dSLR) is a world of difference to someone who cares. You can find yourself getting drawn into photography if you have nice equipment and a desire to learn how to use it. If all you care to do is record the moments in your life and you don't want to get drawn into the world of photography, a "point and shoot" is the way to go.

Sorry to drone on, but as you can tell, this is a subject that is dear to me. Best of luck in whatever you choose.

January 15, 2005

Throwing in my $.02.

I also have a Nikon Coolpix, and I also love it....but that's not what you asked.

Obviously it depends on what you want to do, the Coolpix can record short video pieces, which I really like. I took a short clip of my son the first time he wore skis. If I could change one thing, I'd love it to be able to record sound along with the video.

Other than that, you almost can't go wrong with any "known" brand.

DANG! I got to get me one of them avatar things!

January 15, 2005

Well, I started this last night and got some really good information from the kind people that frequent this forum. Since I started it, I'll end it.

I boughtthe DX7590 from Staples (Canada). Their list price is $599.99 CAD, I got them to match a quote from another store and got it for $439.99 CAD.

The batteries aren't charged yet (it uses proprietary battery packs, kind of sucks but I'll live with it) so I haven't snapped any pictures with it.

It sure looks good sitting on my desk.

LK

January 15, 2005

I also have a Nikon Coolpix, and I also love it....but that's not what you asked.

Obviously it depends on what you want to do, the Coolpix can record short video pieces, which I really like. If I could change one thing, I'd love it to be able to record sound along with the video.

Many of the Nikon Coolpix cameras now record sound, such as the Coolpix 4200

4-megapixel, for about $350.

Edited January 15, 2005 by DNK in CC

January 15, 2005

Congrats on your pick! I'm with the Nikon D70 users when it comes to digital. It handles like my F100 so I can learn more with the instant feedback that I can apply to black and white that I always load in the F100.

January 16, 2005

I'll tell you in a few weeks. I just bought a Nikon Coolpix 8700. I went for the 8x optical nikkor zoom, the 8mp resolution and the manual functionality. The size was also important.

I liked the D70, but the zoom (35-285mm) sold me on the 8700.

January 16, 2005

this thread has profound, valuable, and thoughtful information in it. i have enjoyed learning from your comments. thanks all. sis

2.6k · January 16, 2005

this thread has profound, valuable, and thoughtful information in it. i have enjoyed learning from your comments. thanks all. sis

It was a good thread, wasn't it? After finishing a multi unexpectedly early this morning, I dropped by my local Best Buy to check out what digital cameras were on offer. Man, there were dozens of them. I was especially struck by all the expensive, very cool and very tiny ones. Bewildering. In the end, though, I fell back prior research (and, of course, resolved again to buy online).

For camera reviews, Uncle Badger swears by Steve's Digigams. Ugly site, good reviews.

5.3k · January 16, 2005

There's a saying I remember often as I take great pictures my friends miss:

"The pretty-good camera you have with you takes much better pictures than the awesome camera you left at home."

For geocaching, I think a camera that you can always have with you is ideal. I've gotten many incredible pictures of unexpected things that come up on my adventures.

I have a Canon S410. Before that, I had a Canon S110. Loved 'em both.

January 16, 2005

Hands down, the best online camera review site is dpreview. The forums on dpreview are also very active and useful (though not as warm and friendly as Groundspeak).

I've been very happy with my Canon G3 for about a year and a half. Though I am jealous of the above poster with the Panasonic FZ-20. 12x Leica lens with F2.8 all the way through the zoom - now that's what I call fun factor.

Ben

Edited January 16, 2005 by ebengreene

4.5k · January 16, 2005

I agree with Fizzy. I've got traditional 35mm single lens reflex, underwater (which is good in all kinds of weather) and medium format equipment that does grainless blowups to poster size - all of which have been sitting in the closet for years because I'm tired of carrying stuff. I now use a digital Canon S-400 with 4 MP and 3x optical zoom that allows blowups to 8 1/2 x 11". The best part is that when I'm caching or doing other things, it's always there because its worn on my belt.

Check Gallery section for sample caching shots taken with the S-400.

Edited January 16, 2005 by Alan2

January 16, 2005

I have the Nikon D70 and love it for times when I can pack it and carry it safely then have time to compose my shot and make various exposures to get the best shot. For me, this does not include geocaching. It's too big to carry with all of the other equipment I use (tripod, speedlight, lightmeter....). It's also just too expensive for me to feel comfortable carrying it into places I fall, get wet..etc like happens when caching - it's too much of an investment for me to risk - not to mention too much bulk and weight. I used to use an AIPTEK pencam ($60) for caching, but broke it recently and have now purchased a Canon SD 300. Smaller than a deck of cards, only 4 oz. and with 3x optical zoom and movie capability. I love it. I carry it in a small,waterproof, hard plastic case for protection. It has a small Lithiom Ion removable battery pack good for about 350 flash shots before recharging, and you can carry a spare if you think you'll really be taking a lot of shots before being back for recharging. Another thing to consider is that whatever camera you have - it's no good to you if you don't have it with you when you need it. If you carry a PDA or cell phone when caching you should consider one with a built in camera. I didn't have my Canon with me yesterday when I stopped to check out some of my flooded cache sites. But my Clie PEG-TJ37 pda has a built-in camera so I used it.

January 16, 2005

We bought a very nice expensive Oly digital camera, and used it for a few months until my husband fell on some rocks. The camera was in a padded case, as was the GPSr unit, and we didn't think anything about its survival. We kept geocaching that day, since the GPSr was working just fine. We just didn't pull the camera out to take any pictures.

A few weeks later, my husband got the camera out to take some pictures, and it wouldn't wake up. Apparently something vital got a bit jiggled when he fell.

Moral? Something cheap (under $100) if you will be caching where damage could happen, as is often the case when geocaching. We have bought several Minolta DimageX cameras from e-bay for less than $100, (these have been given to our daughters) and love the portability, plus it won't spoil the day if it gets dropped or broken somehow oh the hiking trail. We haven't broken one yet.

We did replace the other camera with another Oly digi so we can take very nice high resolution photos when the occasion calls for it, but the Minolta has all the features we need for geocaching most of the time.

Have fun with your new camera!

January 16, 2005

I've been using a Cannon PowerShot A20 camera for a couple of years now, and I'm very happy with it. At 2.1 Mp, it's not anywhere near as good as the newer cameras in the line. The pictures it does take are fine for quick snapshots or web usage, just don't try to print them out in any format much larger than about 4x6.

Minuses for this camera:

Low light sucks. The exposure time is so long that any motion at all will blur the picture. Nighttime shots beyond the range of the flash just aren't possible. There are a number of city skyline shots I'd love to get, but simply can't.

It's slow. There's a very noticable, and annoying delay between when I press the shutter button and when it takes the picture. Even if I get the camera to do the auto-focus work ahead of time, there's still a delay.

Pluses for the camera:

It uses standard AA batteries, and works well with rechargables. A set of NiMh batteries was the first accessory I added to the basic camera.

The second accessory I purchased was 128M additional memory. Running out of 'film' has become a thing of the past, no matter how many tries it takes to get the shot perfect.

With the addition of an adaptor ring, the camera will accept any of the standard camera lenses made by Cannon. (or others) The adaptor ring simply gives the clearance needed over the built in lens assembly.

There's a waterproof case available for it. It's designed for scuba use, so I have no fear of taking it right into the water for those unique viewpoints. I've even used it to take a 'mermaid' picture of my daughter swimming underwater in the swimming pool.

It's small enough to live on my belt whenever I go out anywhere, so taking it with me isn't a problem. That way, I have it with me for those 'Kodak Moments'

Chris-Mouse

January 16, 2005

We just got a Kodak for Christmas (DX7630) - LOVE IT! Have already taken hundreds of pictures with it (we end up posting pics with a lot of our logs). The Schneider-blah-blah-blah lens is great - have taken some pretty good pics, considering the amateurs on the back side of the camera.

January 16, 2005

unless you're willing to go 5 mp's or better, you should stick to your camera phone.

January 17, 2005

Now, is there anyone out there that has this camera, or the older DX6490?

I've had the DX6490 for 14 months and love it. Took it to Portugal last year with a 126 card and a spare battery. Took over 350 pics, over 15 days, and didn't even use the spare battery. Great machine.

January 17, 2005

unless you're willing to go 5 mp's or better, you should stick to your camera phone.

I assume you forgot to stick <sarcasm> or a few smileys in there, so I'll do it for you.

38.2k · January 17, 2005

unless you're willing to go 5 mp's or better, you should stick to your camera phone.

Kindly explain why.

January 17, 2005

i just got the Kodak DX6490 for christmas and love it. you can find it online for around $325 now. here is my understanding about the digital seen....i went for more optical zoom than megapixels. optical zoom is true zoom. digital zoom takes the original image and crops it down so, if your camera is a 4 mega pixel and you digital zoom 4x you are really seing 1/4 of the original picture. and only getting 1megapixels in that picture. Hope that makes sence. i could have gotten a 6.31 megapixel camera with only 3x digital zoom but like i said optical is better

steve

January 17, 2005

I think you got a great camera and looks like a terrific buy, congratulations. I would advise getting an extra battery right away. We have an older, smaller Kodak (DX 4530) and are very happy with it, but then I wanted the fewest manual settings possible.

Do you know about this site? It's a very good place to check out digital cameras etc. There is also a good forum to discuss every kind and model of camera.

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/dx7590.html

good luck, I'm sure you'll be happy with it.

4.5k · January 17, 2005

i just got the Kodak DX6490 for christmas and love it. you can find it online for around $325 now. here is my understanding about the digital seen....i went for more optical zoom than megapixels. optical zoom is true zoom. digital zoom takes the original image and crops it down so, if your camera is a 4 mega pixel and you digital zoom 4x you are really seing 1/4 of the original picture. and only getting 1megapixels in that picture. Hope that makes sence. i could have gotten a 6.31 megapixel camera with only 3x digital zoom but like i said optical is better

steve

I believe digital zoom is worse than you've indicated as you're dealing with the square dimensions. 4x optical zoom is not 1/4 but 1/16th of the area or about 250K if you start with 4megs

January 17, 2005

I believe digital zoom is worse than you've indicated as you're dealing with the square dimensions. 4x optical zoom is not 1/4 but 1/16th of the area or about 250K if you start with 4megs

There is a good description of digital zoom at dpreview.com. It's a little technical, but he shows a concrete example of why it is bad. You might also look at the description of "Interpolation"--it explains the difference in nearest neighbor, bicubic and bilinear interpolation, which is an option you can use in Photoshop to enlarge photos.

edit: messed up URL.

Edited January 17, 2005 by TresOkies++

The Hotly Debated Digital Camera(s)......

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment