Packard Forum Index » General

Hi

I finally must acquiesce to reality and give up my film camera. After reviewing all the options available, I'm more confused than ever. So, what better than to ask for advice from the men who own and are satisfied with their current camera and ancillary equipment. All thoughtful responses greatly appreciated.

First, some parameters: my current film camera is used primarily at car shows, Hershey being the main event. Otherwise, casual 'snapshot' photo records at other shows, infrequently for family/friend gatherings, landscape/scenic etc. Minimal use inside and/or low-light conditions though should be capable as needed. MPS size, zoom and other image manipulation and correction features adequate to the listed purposes. Most of the images would be posted on-line or emailed, rarely if ever printed and never poster size.

Computer to receive images: Currently using Windows XP, probably will for the next five years. I have plenty of storage space and CD recording available. Currently have Picasa photo software for download and storage as well as Irfanview to refine and manipulate images. Irfanview is great, if you don't have it, get the basic freeware download on-line and enjoy.

What I'd prefer to spend: I have in mind a pocket-sized camera with necessary software, long-lived, rechargeable batteries, and a charger . Names of the camera/software, charger and battery makers will be followed. I'm thinking in terms of $150.00 for the complete package. Before anyone howls about being cheap, I'll freely admit that I am! I prefer to think of it as provident, sounds nicer. I will act on the best advice that seems to fit my purposes for my purchase and be grateful for your taking the time to advise me. All I can offer in return is a flow of posted and emailed photos from Hershey and various other events of your preferred marques......as well as mine.

Thanks!
Steve

Hi Steve: I was a fairly late convert to digital cameras and in fact still use film cameras fairly regularly, primarily an old Pentax Spotmatic for which I had amassed an extensive array of lenses over the years. I travel extensively, usually by ship, and was quite used to packing 40 or more rolls of film - that didn't seem like much of an inconvenience and certainly the Pentax and quality film produced superb images. I also used a small Leica with zoom lens and built-in flash, nearly a shirt-pocket size film camers.

But occasions arose, more and more frequently when someone wanted a detail photo of something on one of the cars and that usually required a delay for me to finish a roll of film before I could scan and post. I surveyed the digital camera field quite thoroughly a couple of years ago - and it's a staggering array of possibilities. I started by thinking what kind of camera I wanted and that meant what kind of pictures and what versatility was needed; I narrowed to something with interchangeable lens but without the weight and bulk of a DLSR. It's a bit over your budget but I finally settled on an Olympus PEN PL-1 and I must say I find it quite an excellent camera, though not without disadvantages over the film SLRs. It's not quite pocket-size due to the lens and lens mount, but it's reasonably compact and handy. A few negatives; it doesn't have a thru-the-lens viewfinder so you must rely on the display screen which is nearly useless in bright sunlight. The view screen doesn't permit you to easily see depth-of-field or the effects like those of a polarizing filter. If you're more into snapshots and not serious photography, these shortcomings won't be important to you. The camera has many features I seldom use, most ordinary shots are in "auto" format and quite excellent. Depending on how you set the resolution, about 400 pictures can be held on the standard memory card and a single battery charge usually lasts that long as well.

I never did install the Olympus software, I just connect the camera to my USB port and download to a folder, and use Photoshop for whatever manipulations are required. Downloading is seamless - I run Windows XP.

I guess I've rambled on a bit too long. But the short is that you should first think of what kind of situations you'll be taking pictures in, how much versatility in focal lengths and deviations from "auto" format that you're likely to want, and what quality pictures you want. For photos suitable for national publication you'll want at least 14 megapixel.

I'm not sure how much help this has been - happy hunting. And if you haven't there are hundred of websites and publications that can be helpful in narrowing down the choices.

Dave has good suggestions. I use an older Canon PowerShot 620 with essentially the same strengths and weaknesses. Great pictures and options but sometimes limited by the operator.

No suggestion on the XP part. On rare occasions I have used the camera on XP without problems with what was supplied with the camera and Irfanview. Normally, I use a MAC with it's built in software which pretty much does everything I need it to.

I've used a Canon Digital Elph and Canon Power Shot cameras for many years with great results. But in the last 2 years, the camera on my phone has been good enough as it's 8mp with flash and all the other basic camera features for regular shots. This picture was taken with it as were all the pics in my project blogs in recent years:

Attach file:

---

  (146.57 KB)

Hi Gentlemen

Thanks for your considered and helpful responses, all very good advice and much appreciated. I am making a list of parameters based on your input as well as that I glean from responses from posting the question on the SDC Forum. I'll post that list once I've digested all the information.

Thanks!

Steve

Hello Steve:

Yes, you are cheap. But, I can work with that. BTW, your $150 limit is about the same price as what you used to pay to buy and process 10 rolls of film. Normally, you should expect to pay $350 for a nice advanced amateur camera.

Anyway, if your main topic is car photos, then you will NEED a camera with a wide angle lens. This keeps you close to the car and prevents people from walking in between you and the car at car shows. You want to see a camera with a lens that gets down to at least 28mm - i.e. equivalent in 35mm film cameras - 24mm would be even better.

Take a look at this Canon and it has 14 MP:
usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cam ... meras/powershot_a2200_blue#Overview

But really, if all you do is very occasional photography, then I would consider putting your $150 towards a cell phone with a better built in camera. Advantage: you will always have it with you. You cannot save that special moment if you do not have any camera.

My older son has an I-Phone and the camera in it produces stunning 8x10s.....

Being able to correct exposure/color with appropriate software is a wonderful plus for your photography, even if you have all your prints made by Costco. Costco is as good as it gets for inexpensive, decent prints in most sizes....

What you won't normally find in a cheap point and shoot is a fast responding camera; most have to think things over after the button is pushed, It's hard to get peak of the smile.

Other drawback is poor flash and low light performance.

fredmiranda.com is a good resource, but possibly too into it for you.....

Steve, I have been very satisfied with my Canon PowerShot SD990 IS. It was not inexpensive, but worth the money. It was recommended to me by a professional photographer. It is a bit heavy and large to place in a shirt pocket, but it will go in there.

I believe that for things we use regularly, or irregularly for that matter, one should buy the best product one can afford. Amortizing the cost difference of something that will 'just do' over one that is preferred, over the life of the product, is usually very little. Once you go to digital, you will never look back.

(o[]o)

Pentax makes a waterproof shock resistant camera. It can be used under as much as 40 feet of water. So, it is easy to take care of.It is 14 MP also it should be available for about $300 or if you want with GPS it is about $349.

Steve, I come from a professional photographer family; my dad was a portrait photographer, he started his studio in 1947 in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Needless to say, I grew up in a darkroom. My brother took over the business after my dad died in 1985, and just closed the studio a year ago, although he still does photography.

I switched to a DSLR about ten years ago, choosing an Olympus E-1. I still use this as my main camera, even though there are two more generations since the original. My brother was reluctant to switch, buying his first DLSR in 2009. He started with an Olympus 620, and progressed to an E-5 shortly thereafter. This is now his main camera.

I like the Olympus mainly because of the four-thirds format. This gives a perfect image ratio that translates into an eight by ten, sixteen by twenty, and so on, without any loss of image due to cropping. The other format, adopted by Canon, Nikon, and others is the same as a 35mm film image, which is more rectangular. As an artist, I prefer the four thirds format. It's kind of like the VHS-Beta format battle that went on when videotapes came out. The only reason we have the 35mm format is that it was adopted from 35mm movie film, which was a standard at the time. The digital camera is not limited by these constraints, and Olympus, Leica, and some others decided to use a more perfect sized CCD for image capture.

Of course, all of this is useless information if you don't need the flexibility of different lenses and focal lengths. You just need an inexpensive point and shoot camera. So my recommendation would be an inexpensive Olympus, or really any other brand for that matter.

Another interesting development is the improvement of image capturing ability in most smart phones today. Personally, I could get by and actually prefer to use my iPhone 4 for most of my images that I post online. If you go to my blog, you will see nothing but iPhone images. I always have it with me, it automatically streams my images to my MacBook Pro, and it makes for some surprisingly good images!