I've been looking at digital cameras for a while now and can't decide what to get right now i have a old casio it's been dropped on the floor a few times and still works. I have no idea of what the resolution it is all the camera says is "casio liquid crystal digital camera" i don't have the manual its like 3 or 4 years old.

Does KODAK take very good pics i found one for $179 it's a 1.0 megapixel ($229 at most stores) it doesn't have a lot of features though only has 2MB internal memory but all that does is store the pics right?

I would like to get a Sony or a 4.0 megapixel camera but i can't afford 1,000. I want one that takes quality pics i don't care about the features really but the more megapixels the clearer the image right? I only want to spend 200-300 anything would be a BIG improvement over what i have now........do the new cameras eat batteries very bad? the crap one i have now you take 5 pics with it and 4 brand new batteries are dead afterwards!

Kodak makes good quality digital cameras - I don't think you could go wrong with any of their offerings.

Anything you're going to find in the $200-300 price range, though, isn't going to provide film-quality pictures. You need to get into the 3-4 megapixel range for that, and those cameras are expensive. (As you've seen.) However, do you really need film quality? I have a 1.3 megapixel Olympus, and prints from it look fine. It's a D-340 something, and you can get them most places for $299.00.

The amount of RAM (flash) included isn't really an issue as long as it's on compact flash or smartmedia, and thus removable and upgradeable. I have a 16MB smartmedia card for my Olympus, and I can take loads of pictures.

Digital cameras are still battery hogs if you use the LCD display. There's just no getting around the power draw of those things. I use rechargable NiMH batteries, and avoid use of the display unless I want to be sure about the framing of the shot.

Ditto. Kodak DC cameras are great! I gave my gf one for her birthday last year and it's wonderful.

There are more expensive professional digis but unless you're a pro the Kodak will do all you want it to. Besides, in the few years the technology will change again so there's no sense spending a lot today.

Which Kodak did you get? I was looking at the DC3200 model. Is there somewhere i can look at samples taken buy a 1.0 megapixel camera?

Thanks

I think they can do decent 5x7 to 8x10's depending on what resolution you get. Step up to a 2.1 is you want better quality.

I had an Olympus D220L and it was a bit slow to record the pictures, did use battereis (I got rechargeable Renewal though and that worked out pretty good). Overall the Olympus took ecellent pictures and the one mentioned above has even better resolution.

I recently picked up a Canon and it writes much faster, Compact Flash instead of Smart Media, and has a lithium-ion battery so the battery life kicks butt! But it comes in around $500.

HP makes a $300 2.1 Megapix camera, but I don't know how good it is. (Haven't read anything about it nor used one). But I know the Olympus is a great camera for the price also.

I currently have a Kodak EZ200 camera with me, and it takes great pics in low light or bright light. The quality's very, very good, and it's only about $229 Australian over here (which translates to about $US130 over there). I highly recommend it as a 'starter/budget' camera.

Lets put it this way .. you need about 30K pixes to have the same level as you will get with film (good film) ;)

Heh, I used to own a photography business, and loved to shoot black and white and try to make the grain as big as possible for effect. I guess the digi-defects don't really bother me, but from what I can tell, 35mm and a 2.1 megapix camera aren't oo far off for 5x7's at least.

I have a really crappy $50 digi-cam as well, and at low resolution is looks like my Tri-X days of yesteryear. :)

Your average 35mm film frame has the equivalent of about 4000x3000 "pixels", or grains. So I guess when we get 12 megapixel cameras, we're there. :)

I might get a Fuji instead are they very good? It's only 10 bucks more than the Kodak i was looking at plus it comes with more futures. It's funny how some online stores want $200 while another wants $300 for the same exact camera :)

okay i found sample pics taken buy a Fuji but why are the pics so big they are 1280 x 960 and wont even fit on my screen why would you want pics that you can't even see on your screen that's to big for a web page or to email yeah you can resize them but don't they get blurred some when you do that my old camera took pics 340 x 240 i think and that was a good size to email and all but they wasnt clear.

[Edited by JB on 01-04-2001 at 12:28 AM]

Well, 340x240 is fine to email, but not much else. The larger images can be reduced, or printed close to their size for a decent print.

It is almost like starting with a bigger negative in terms of traditional film. I used to shoot on an 8x10 view camera (negatives were 8x10), and it's obvious that it made quite lovely 8x10's :)

You can always reduce, but you can't make it bigger once it is shot. Also, you'll be able to lower the resolution to probably 640x480 (low quality mode), which you can use for quick shots, etc.

I bought a 64 MB card for the camera and just shoot everything in 1600x1200 now (108 pictures). At 640x480 it can hold 393 shots (which is plenty :)).

heres a dumb question if i only want small images but with great quality should i buy a 1.0 or 3.0 Megapix? The 3.0 takes bigger images yet and i would only make them smaller.

Originally posted by Chicken

HP makes a $300 2.1 Megapix camera, but I don't know how good it is. (Haven't read anything about it nor used one). But I know the Olympus is a great camera for the price also.

Well that one supposed to be better than mine (a HP C30 1.3 megapixel). At high quality I can print an A4 sized photo (using a HP photo quality printer), and it's as clear as anything to me. In fact most of the photos I have framed on my walls are using the same combo People are always suprised when they see them (and especially the 5x3's). To the general eye there is no difference between them and film - bearing in mind I'm talking about 'point and shoot' cameras, not megabuck pro models.

If you're taking them for the web just remember 72dpi at 800x600 is going to fill a screen. At high quality at that screen res the photos I print for A4 are about 3 screens wide and over two high. I just print them at 300-600 dpi and they look a treat :) So for web stuff a 1-2 megapixel is more than enough. Buy one of those now, and maybe a 3,4,5,6, 100 megapixel later when they finally make something you can afford that will be of greater use. :)

Greg Moore

Hey,

Since there are some good photographer here, I would like to ask your opinion regarding this digital camera, Canon EOS D30. I'm actually looking forward to get one. So, any opinion regarding the camera?

Thank you.

Originally posted by JB
heres a dumb question if i only want small images but with great quality should i buy a 1.0 or 3.0 Megapix? The 3.0 takes bigger images yet and i would only make them smaller.

JB-
Well you never know if there's one shot that you want to print. Remember, this is it. You've taken the shot and you are now back home and you aren't going to go back to wherever you were and take that picture again.

I can tell you this. They aren't all the same. I had two 640x480 resolution cameras. One is an I/O Magic $50 camera and the other was the Olympus D220L. The Olympus took *much* better pictures.

If you stay in the $200-$300 range, I don't think you can go wrong. Either an HP or an Olympus, or similar. I think Kodak and Fuji also have cameras in the 1.3-2.1 resolution range for $200-$300. The HP with 2.1 is probably a great deal (my $500 Canon is 2.1).

Andrew-
My only experience with Canon EOS was quite a bit ago, but I always loved the camera and would get another one without hesitation. It tracked better than my Nikon(s) (autofocus), and was easy to use and worked out very good. I still wish I had it. This was just the roll film variety, not digital.

Check:
http://www.epinions.com/elec-Photo-Cameras-All-Canon_EOS_D30

I got her the DC250. It came with an 4 meg card and I got her a 16 meg too. At max resolution the 4 meg holds 15 pics and the 16 meg holds 55 pics.

For her purposes the resolution is fine.