Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,299

    Our battle for tonight - Digital Cameras

    I'm stuck. I can't decide on which to get. Value, vs. Picture Quality.

    In Corner number 1, the stylish Philips 3MP Retro Style Ultra-Thin Camera
    Key moves:
    1. Extremely Stylish
    2. 3 Megapixels
    3. 4x Digital Zoom
    4. Rechargeable Battery
    5. 16 MB Internal Memory/Slot for Addon Memory

    Price: $58.84

    In corner number 2, the hard hitting, Samsung Digimax A503 Digital Camera
    Key Moves:
    1. 5.3 Megapixels
    2. 5x Digital Zoom
    3. Red-eye reduction, fill-in flash, slow sync, flash off
    4. 24 MB Internal Memory/Slot for addon memory
    5. Batteries Required: 2 AA batteries or 1 CRV3 lithium battery
    6. 12 Month Warranty

    Price: $113.99

    The $115 price of the Samsung is about what I want to spend at a max. Spending up to $150 won't kill me, but I rarely take pictures. When I do take them, I want them to look good. That's the unfortunate problem with my current UMAX camera (which has been given to my parents) ... the pictures look like crap. So ultimately while the Philips Camera is only 3 Megapixels, it does boast some impressive features and reviews do say that the quality is decent and it looks freaking cool as hell. I'd feel like a pimp pulling that camera out of my back pocket.

  2. #2
    Well if you don't take pictures much i'd say buy the philips, but if you take the samsung you won't need to upgrade fora couple of years.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    501
    Go to WalMart and spend $10 on a box camera. You'll get better pictures, it's cheaper and the only disadvantage is you have to drop it off to get it developed.
    IE7 is nine years behind the standards or wrong.
    But it works in IE!
    "IE is a cancer on the web" -- Paul Thurott
    "Avoid hacker-bait apps like Internet Explorer" -- Kevin Mitnick

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,125
    I decided to go for quality the last time I bought a camera (2 weeks ago), I got a 6MP Cannon with like 12X Optical zoom, it's one of them all in one with the longer lenses. Anyway, having had a few cheapo digital camera in the past, all I can say is spent the extra money on a good one (like $250-$400, I know you don't want to spend that much, but it's worth it) so you can get good pictures for a few years. It's better to make the investment than using the small camera.

    Also check the flash power and battery for those puppies. I found out that 2 AA camera suck, the flash on some are underpowered, and there aren't enough power to last ya the entire day. Better to carry around a slightly heavier camera with 4AA and a flash you know will be sufficient.
    Sarcasm, the 6th Ponyman of the Apocalypse.
    Please do not inquire about Tim, the 5th Ponyman.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Jackson, MI
    Posts
    1,526
    I just bought a Aiptek MPVR+ from target today. Its actually a camcorder, camera, mp3 player, and voice recorder.

    It only cost $100, and its upto 8MP

    Anyways, might be a thought, a link is here: http://www.aiptek.com/Merchant2/merc...&Store_Code=AS

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    U.S.A
    Posts
    1,463
    I camped outside of Best Buy last night.....its actually a lot of fun!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,125
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeWalczak
    I camped outside of Best Buy last night.....its actually a lot of fun!
    Question, how do people use the restroom when they do that? Do BB open 24 hours for a couple of days and let you use their facilities?
    Sarcasm, the 6th Ponyman of the Apocalypse.
    Please do not inquire about Tim, the 5th Ponyman.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,861
    I just tried a $150 kodak and a $170 cannon digital camera and I've noticed that when I take pictures inside even when the room is well light... the pictures always come out too dark! I of course do have the flash turned on but when I transfer the pictures onto my computer it's too dark. I always have to lighten them a bit.

    It's not my monitor either... I have a great samsung LCD monitor and it is not a setting awry with my monitor brightness because the pics show up dark on any monitor. The digital cameras I'm using are also 5 pixels.. I thought these were supposed to be decent cameras?

    So why are they taking dark pictures? Here's an example... I took a picture of my dog. the pic is too damned dark! This room was NOT dim when I took that pic... it had normal bright lighting. Like if you are in the bathroom at night with all the bright lights turned on, that bright.
    Last edited by Frosty; 04-13-2007 at 02:28 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,299
    That's the exact same friggin' problem I had with my old camera. No matter what the lighting was like, they always looked dark and muddy.

    And we want pictures of Juliet!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boise, ID U.S.A.
    Posts
    3,503
    It is a little bit dark. That should be correctable with software. It is also usually possible to tweak the settings to brighten the flash or to brighten the exposure. With digital cameras, just like old fashioned color slide film, it's better to be a little underexposed than overexposed. Details can usually be pulled up from the shadows (although they might be a bit grainy), but washed out highlight detail is lost.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kuwait
    Posts
    5,099
    The megapixels are a bit misleading. After 5 MP, you really cannot tell the difference unless you are doing large format prints (or you are a professional photographer). For the average shutterbug, 5 MP is the sweet spot.

    Also worth mentioning is that its more important what the size of the lens is compared to the MP that the camera takes. If you have a 5 MP camera but with a tiny lens, your pictures will most likely be converted via software to 5MP, which will lead to varying results.

    If I had the money, I would get a Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT (it retails between $500 and $1,000 depending on where you buy); in the meanwhile my 2MP camera on my cellphone works

    Sony's digital cameras are a also good, but I hear their battery life isn't that great (especially the thin slim ones).
    In order to understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.
    If you feel like it, you can read my blog
    Signal > Noise

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boise, ID U.S.A.
    Posts
    3,503
    I notice that the specifications for the Samsung Digimax A503 include 5X digital zoom, but no optical zoom. That means that you only get 5 real megapixels of resolution at the widest angle. Zooming in crops the image, but it doesn't magnify and capture more detail. For that you need optical zoom. 3X optical zoom usually covers most situations well enough. More (up to 12X) can sometimes be useful, but there is a price in money, weight, bulk, aperture, and camera shake.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boise, ID U.S.A.
    Posts
    3,503
    Here's what a little bit of software tinkering can do.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails dark-edited.jpg  

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,125
    Quote Originally Posted by fyrestrtr

    If I had the money, I would get a Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT (it retails between $500 and $1,000 depending on where you buy); in the meanwhile my 2MP camera on my cellphone works
    Mine's a Cannon PowerShot S3. It work out pretty well, almost comparable to the SLR you mention. Unless you're planning to grab about another $1000 of lenses, you can get something like this that's cheaper and does just about the same thing, only slightly lower res, 6.0 MP. It was only $350, about half the price of the other one.
    Sarcasm, the 6th Ponyman of the Apocalypse.
    Please do not inquire about Tim, the 5th Ponyman.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,861
    I know that I can of course easily edit the pictures and make them lighter. I do that all the time... but who the heck wants to do that constantly and have to edit almost every single picture you take? That would get tiring.

    Well... even though digital cameras do always take way too BIG pictures so if you wanted to put them online you'd have to edit them anyway and make them smaller... which in that case it wouldn't be a big deal to quickly lighten them at the same time.

    I don't know if the cameras I'm using are lousy (and these weren't cheapie cameras)... but the pics are too dark!

    And why on earth do they take such HUGE pictures??? When I take a picture and then open it and view it in actual pixel size the picture is HUGE. The smallest size pic the camera will take is 1200 pixels in height and 800 pixels in width. That is HUGE. It's frustrationg to have to make every picture I take samller before I can put it online! Anybody know what I'm talking about?

    inogenius,
    Nah... you don't want pics of me... I don't want to steal Foxy's (my dogs) spotlight

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,125
    That's because of the high resolution of your camera. When it print out the pixel on paper are much smaller as per the ink drop is much smaller than what your monitor can display. You actually want that high resolution for better print output. If you want to display them on the web, just do a batch convert with something like Photoshop Elements.

    BTW, how did your de-worming went?
    Sarcasm, the 6th Ponyman of the Apocalypse.
    Please do not inquire about Tim, the 5th Ponyman.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    U.S.A
    Posts
    1,463
    Question, how do people use the restroom when they do that? Do BB open 24 hours for a couple of days and let you use their facilities?
    Best Buy actually had port o potties available for use. They even hired McDonald's to come at around 230 am to hand out free hot beverages to the people waiting. People had grills setup and stereos; it was just one big party!

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,861
    FluffyTigger,
    Interesting... I've never heard of doing a batch convert. I do have photoshop elements. You mean if I have 50 new pics that are way too huge (1200x800 pixels each) I can actually convert ALL 50 pics into 500X300 size pics all at the same time?

    P.S: Oh, the de-worming thing. LOL you still remember. I've had a really rough past few months (my life has been pure h*ll) so worms have been the last thing on my mind so I haven't gotten around to ordering it yet and testing it out. I've been too bummed out. No pun intended. I will soon though

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,125
    Quote Originally Posted by Frosty
    FluffyTigger,
    Interesting... I've never heard of doing a batch convert. I do have photoshop elements. You mean if I have 50 new pics that are way too huge (1200x800 pixels each) I can actually convert ALL 50 pics into 500X300 size pics all at the same time?
    Yes, the batch convert will take an input of a folder (optionally including sub folders as well), then you can convert it to different size, format, quality, and even do some batch filename changes. Work pretty quick if you have a good processor. Just make sure you output to a different folder so it doesn't override the original print quality pics.

    Happy be the worms...
    Sarcasm, the 6th Ponyman of the Apocalypse.
    Please do not inquire about Tim, the 5th Ponyman.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,861
    Interesting, I never knew such a thing existed! I just tied it and it worked... well sort of. There is a problem... when you specifcy to change all the images size... you can't specify it to maintain proportions like you can when you change each pic size individually.

    So in order for this to work you'd have to make sure ALL the pics you are batch converting are all the exact same size and then use a calculator to make sure that when you downsize them that they still contain the correct proportions and don't become distorted. Or is there another way around this? There HAS to be a setting to contain correct proportions?

    Because the batch I just converted had 20 pics in it but all the pics were different sizes so when I converted all the pics to be a smaller size they become distorted and lost correct proportions because it forces me to choose an exact size without maintaining proportions. Opps sorry didn't mean to hi-jack this thread.

    Blame it on the worms!
    Last edited by Frosty; 11-25-2006 at 04:25 PM.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,125
    Quote Originally Posted by Frosty
    Interesting, I never knew such a thing existed! I just tied it and it worked... well sort of. There is a problem... when you specifcy to change all the images size... you can't specify it to maintain proportions like you can when you change each pic size individually.

    So in order for this to work you'd have to make sure ALL the pics you are batch converting are all the exact same size and then use a calculator to make sure that when you downsize them that they still contain the correct proportions and don't become distorted. Or is there another way around this? There HAS to be a setting to contain correct proportions?
    Yes there is, there should be a check box for keeping proportion, and as long as you only specify either a width or height, but not both, the program will output as those size for you.

    Because the batch I just converted had 20 pics in it but all the pics were different sizes so when I converted all the pics to be a smaller size they become distorted and lost correct proportions because it forces me to choose an exact size without maintaining proportions. Opps sorry didn't mean to hi-jack this thread.

    Blame it on the worms!
    I thought worms were supposed to be good for you (see the Futurama ep where Fry got wormed)
    Sarcasm, the 6th Ponyman of the Apocalypse.
    Please do not inquire about Tim, the 5th Ponyman.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,861
    FluffyTigger,

    Strange, I tried that before and it didn't work. I mean setting just either the width or height... not both. And it didn't even change the images sizes at all that way. It forces you to change both the height and the width. I wasn't able to make it do it any other way. And this way it doesn't keep the proportions. I know there must be a setting somehwere that I'm overlooking?... because this isn't any good this way.

    Yeah well these worms aren't going to have access to my 24 hour buffet that much longer. Yick

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •