I need a new camera


F

frog

Member
Getting tired of black power flash burns on my arms!

We have a 35mm point and click but I want to take some close shots of my train layout as well as pictures at a little longer distance as well, such as some of my boat or cats.

Digital is the way to go but I know nothing much about them. I know (I think) the higher the pixil the better the quality. Do some take movies as well? I would like that if possible.

Thing is, there are SO many and I don't want to get one that is lacking in some way.

I asked the rep at the store and she said they are all good although some looked to be of low quality.

I can make a tripod if there is a mounting hole for one so that would be a big plus.

Any ideas?
 
I would recommend just about anything from Canon's "Powershot" line of digital cameras. Their styles and features differ a little from model to model, but I've found them to be well built and reliable. The two I have experience with also have a movie mode (I think most digital point-and shoot cameras do) and every digital camera I've seen has a threaded hole in the bottom for tripod mounting. If you find one you like, whether in-store or online, make sure to do a Google search for reviews on the particular make and model you are planning on purchasing, just so you don't end up with a "lemon" model.

Good luck!:)
 
I thank you for your help. I'll look into that brand and model.

I have noted that many of the pictures posted here of locos and such items look super. The camera I have now just can't take a picture that close and it is a pain to have to wait until you use all the film to get it processed then find out the pic turned out badlyl.
 
To offer my learned opinion, Canon and Panasonic are the current leaders in terms of compact cameras. Go to a store and try a few models out, compare their features and ergonomics, and find one that you like. Both Canon and Panasonic cameras have fantastic macro abilities (panasonic having a slight edge last time I checked, but nothing noticeable in what you want to do) and both have quite good image quality. Almost every single digital camera now has a movie mode. You'll probably be happy with whatever you get, but you'll be happier if you do what I say!
 
frog said:
I know (I think) the higher the pixil the better the quality.
Click to expand...


Not necessarily. More megapixels often means more noise, especially in low light situations. That's because the more pixels they cram onto the sensor, the smaller those pixels have to be which means there's less light getting to each pixel. This means the signal has to be amplified which results in the noise.

I'm a fan of Panasonic's Lumix cameras. They've got good lenses and the image stabilization is terrific.

One thing to keep in mind is that when you're shooting close up, you run into limitations of the optics. For example there's a minimum distance at which the lens will focus. This varies with the focal length (whether you're zoomed in or out.) I often see people getting too close and then complaining that they need a new camera. It's not the camera, it's the hand holding the camera.

Steve S
 
Try before you buy - not all cameras fit everyones hand. Go for the Glass - get the best known lenses you can find on the front of it - cheap lens = rubbish picture
Canon - Nikon - Fuji are all worth looking at
 
Try before you buy - not all cameras fit everyones hand. Go for the Glass - get the best known lenses you can find on the front of it - cheap lens = rubbish picture
Canon - Nikon - Fuji are all worth looking at
Click to expand...

A couple years ago I picked up a Fuji Finepix 4.1 MP off ebay. It's served me very well and has taken better pictures that cameras witha higher MP rating. I'll be looking for a new camera soon but I'll definetly be looking for a good quality lens and a good macro ability for the close-up shots
 
I'll second the suggestion for the Panasonic Lumix, it's a great camera, and also takes HD videos!
 
A good place to look is Best Buy. You can try them out side by side and the workers are somewhat knowledgeable. Once you find the model you are after, a thorough web search is in order for a good price. I am a huge fan of digital SLR cameras. They are big and bulky but you will love the pictures. All compact cameras are compromises in design. With an SLR you look through the lens which keeps the camera close to your eye and minimizes camera shake. Pocket cameras make you look at the display to focus/frame the image that moves the camera away from your body which makes camera shake almost impossible to stop without a tripod. A few years ago I bought a Nikon D60 with 28-55mm and 55-200mm digital stabilized lenses for $699.
Hope you find what you want.
-Art
 
I don't know what your budget is, but for the best pictures, a 35mm DSLR is what you want. I have a Canon Rebel, and it is easy to use, very flexible, and the latest models will take videos. They are also the best for close in work. Point and shooters are nice, and I have one of those too for family pics and so forth, and when I don't want to lug too much equipment around, but they have limits. I got my Rebel at Best Buy, and they made me a deal on a camera, two lenses and a flash, and 18 months same as cash. Tripods aren't expensive and yes, you'll need one. Canon even has a nice teaching section on their website where you can watch clinics on how to use all of those features you'll get. Battery life is also awesome. They are also very generous with their software. Canon Digital Photo Professional is very nice. Do a little research. Good Luck.
 
Thank all of you for your input. I have been doing searches and such about the types that were mentioned. There must be a thousand kinds out there!

Best Buy sounds like a good place if I can try them out first.

I do want quality glass, hope that is possible with a $150 price range.

Still a lot of tech terms on the specs that I have no idea of what they are talking about, but I am slowly learning. Plus the pros and cons of the two main types.

I am still trying to learn how to use my cell phone features, about anything that came along after cassette decks I am lost.

Once again, thanks to all of you for your help.

Allen
 
The larger sensors in DSLRs can actually be a hindrance to model railroad photography, and because of that, many would be better served with a good quality small camera. The problem arises out of the DSLR's relatively narrow depth-of-field. I won't bore you with the technical reasons for this, but it has to do with the distance from the actual lens to the sensor. The narrower the distance, the greater the depth-of-field.

Too many of the small cameras don't allow for complete control of the camera. They're 'too automatic.' I much prefer cameras like the Canon G-12 that allow the operator to control every aspect of the image, just like on a DSLR. Also, it's capable of shooting in RAW format, which (IMHO) allows me to do much more during post-processing.
 
Dollie's Dad said:
The larger sensors in DSLRs can actually be a hindrance to model railroad photography, and because of that, many would be better served with a good quality small camera. The problem arises out of the DSLR's relatively narrow depth-of-field. I won't bore you with the technical reasons for this, but it has to do with the distance from the actual lens to the sensor. The narrower the distance, the greater the depth-of-field.
Click to expand...

Tom, I don't understand this statement at all. I haven't found anything that I can't do and do well with my Rebel, and I can always do it better than with my Canon Power shot. Depth of field can be increased by cranking down the F-stop. Proficiency with the equipment is necessary, of course, and a good tripod. I've seen lots of guys running around with expensive equipment taking lousy pictures because they haven't really learned how to use their cameras. Likewise I have not seen any pros working with point and shoots. If you take the time to learn the equipment (gotta read the manual:D) You'll get great photos out of a DSLR. I have written for several of the hobby magazines over the years, and have always done the photography with SLR's, film, then digital. Now if you're intending your advice for the casual shooter who is not into photography except as a means to an end...maybe.

The original poster mentioned he wants to spend $150.00. That leaves him out of the DSLR category anyway. Maybe you can bore me with the technical details, as I'm interested in your theory here
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Espeefan said:
Tom, I don't understand this statement at all. I haven't found anything that I can't do and do well with my Rebel, and I can always do it better than with my Canon Power shot. Depth of field can be increased by cranking down the F-stop. Proficiency with the equipment is necessary, of course, and a good tripod. I've seen lots of guys running around with expensive equipment taking lousy pictures because they haven't really learned how to use their cameras. Likewise I have not seen any pros working with point and shoots. If you take the time to learn the equipment (gotta read the manual:D) You'll get great photos out of a DSLR. I have written for several of the hobby magazines over the years, and have always done the photography with SLR's, film, then digital. Now if you're intending your advice for the casual shooter who is not into photography except as a means to an end...maybe.

The original poster mentioned he wants to spend $150.00. That leaves him out of the DSLR category anyway. Maybe you can bore me with the technical details, as I'm interested in your theory here
Click to expand...

I'm an admin on a Canon photography forum, and this question comes up occasionally. I won't attempt to provide an explanation as others have already done it much better than I could ever hope to, but the answer is out there. I also shoot a DSLR, and I much prefer it, even though DoF is better with my G-11. Everything you said is true about the role of aperture on determining DoF, but with typical DSLR lenses, even f/22 is going to be narrower than a similar shot taken with a P&S.

At some point (if my modeling skills ever warrant it), I'd love to combine the two hobbies, but right now I don't have anything worth taking photos of.

Your Rebel is a fine camera. I've owned a couple of them over the years, and have not seen a bit of difference in image qualtiy from shots taken with much more expensive bodies. At present, I'm shooting full frame as much as possible because most of my photography is outdoor landscape, 1:1 trains, etc. When I do start shooting my layout, I will probably switch to by crop body (7D) and/or the G-11.

Pet peeve: why is it most lenses will only stop down to f/22? f/45 wouldn't be that much harder to make, and would be so much more useful for model railroad work.
 
Dollie's Dad said:
I'm an admin on a Canon photography forum, and this question comes up occasionally. I won't attempt to provide an explanation as others have already done it much better than I could ever hope to, but the answer is out there. I also shoot a DSLR, and I much prefer it, even though DoF is better with my G-11. Everything you said is true about the role of aperture on determining DoF, but with typical DSLR lenses, even f/22 is going to be narrower than a similar shot taken with a P&S.

At some point (if my modeling skills ever warrant it), I'd love to combine the two hobbies, but right now I don't have anything worth taking photos of.

Your Rebel is a fine camera. I've owned a couple of them over the years, and have not seen a bit of difference in image qualtiy from shots taken with much more expensive bodies. At present, I'm shooting full frame as much as possible because most of my photography is outdoor landscape, 1:1 trains, etc. When I do start shooting my layout, I will probably switch to by crop body (7D) and/or the G-11.

Pet peeve: why is it most lenses will only stop down to f/22? f/45 wouldn't be that much harder to make, and would be so much more useful for model railroad work.
Click to expand...

I've been a Canon devotee for years, back to my AE-1, which I still have BTW and my A-1. I loved those camers and actually fought going digital because of them. The fact that I had a ton invested in lenses helped too :eek: You no doubt know way more about the technical aspects of this than I do...I'm still leaning the Rebel. The true answer, I think, is that you are right, but for what I'm doing it doesn't matter. My requirements for good model photos are pretty simple at this point. They go like this: Is the Editor bitching? Yes = photo bad. No = photo good :D:D and he's fussy!

My 18-35 mm lens on the Rebel will go to F 29, but is that the actual lens doing that, or is it electronic skullduggery? I've never looked into it. I'd like to get a good macro lens at some point, but like you I've got this "one hobby" thing going on at the moment, and right now I'm spending the disposable income on trains!

Anyhow, we don't want to jack the thread and get into a long discussion on photography equipment, back to the original poster's questions: Check out the Canon Powershot series. They are in your price range, have good optics, and are easy to use.
 
I have a Canon Power Shot A720IS that I love. I bought it used on Ebay several years ago for $100. Best $100 I ever spent. I also have a Sony that I bought new that I hate. In my railroad group we have four of the 700 series Power Shots and everyboby loves them. As for reliability, one of them, a 710IS is on it's third time around on its photo numbering and the numbers go to 9999, so that's over 20,000 pictures. It looks like it's been thrown off a cliff it's so battered, but it still takes great pics.
Doug
 
Dollie's Dad said:
Pet peeve: why is it most lenses will only stop down to f/22? f/45 wouldn't be that much harder to make, and would be so much more useful for model railroad work.
Click to expand...


The September '86 issue of Model Railroader had an article by Mike Tylick about making a pinhole aperture for a 50mm lens. It involved removing the rear lens element and inserting a thin brass disc (with a pinhole at its center) in the lens just behind the diaphragm. His worked out to be f90.

I always wanted to try but it was unwilling to sacrifice my 50mm lens. Some years ago I got a spare 50mm when I bought another lens on ebay and the guy threw in a 50mm for free. All my SLR bodies are for film. I haven't used any of them for quite a while. Pentax was slow to come out with a digital SLR so I bought a Panasonic FZ-20 bridge camera while I was waiting. I liked it so much I've never bothered to buy a digital SLR. I'll have to try making this pinhole aperture some day. Either I'm going to have to splurge on a digital body, or go back to the monotony of scanning slides.

Steve S
 
Last edited by a moderator:
a few of things to consider.

For model photography make sure it has a connector for an optional remote shutter release cable. This keeps you from jiggling the camera (blur!) when you push the button on the camera body. Even if on a tripod this problem can crop up.

For our needs a high F-stop capability gives both focused foregrounds and backgrounds and looks more real. My current camera goes up to f-36 which is a big jump from old film cameras that maybe got to f-22 with some lenses. At f-36, count on long exposure times (seconds) with even 800-lux light levels. Again a tripod or bench-rest shot.

Don't be overly impressed with high pixel-count numbers. If the imaging chip is a small one, dimensionally, cramming more megapixels in is a waste of time. More pixels on a chip of the same size means smaller pixels. At some point of shrinkage they actually make the picture worse. It's just a marketing ploy in that case. Sometimes a camera with a lower pixel count has superior image quality due to proper optics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top