digital camera questions

[Mike Parzych]

I'm going to get a digital camera. I'm not a picture taker at all, and will probably use it only, ot mainly, to take pics of projects I do for posting on a website, or emailing to prospective clients. And so I don't need the best. I saw some today....4.0 pixels, 5.1 etc. Will the 4.o work well enough for my intended use?

[Andrew Ault]

Yes, 4.0 Mp will work well for these uses. I would concentrate on the quality of the images produced and ease of use. Everyone camera enthusiast likes the one they own and there are many excellent cameras available. I like the way Nikon digital cameras work and the quality of the images they produce.

I like a camera that uses standard NIMH AA batteries so it is easier and cheaper to buy extras. You can get 15 minute chargers. I use batteries fresh from the charger when I use my camera - putting the used set in the charger for next time.

Make sure you try some cameras before buying. They all work differently and there are bound to be some that you like better than others. See how long it takes to take a picture as some cameras take a while after you press the button before the picture is taken (annoying to me).

-Andy

[Michael Perata]

Mike

4 MP would probably be at the bottom range. You can offset some of the picture quality issues with a good photo enhancing program such as Photoshop Elements. Some camera manufacturers include the previous version with the camera, otherwise it is about $100.

[Don Baer]

Mike you'll probubly get as many aswers to this question as there are posters on SMC. ...;) For LOML's last birthday I got her a Canon PC 1080 digtal camara and an HP Photosmart 375 printer. It's a great combo and since we have a new (1yrld ) grandaughter she uses it all of the time. She is not a fan of anything complicted so if it was not easy to use I would have heard about it. It has outstanding quality. I think I paid something less then $500 for everything.

[Pete Simmons]

I use a Fuji Finepix A210.

Works fine, costs < $130 - maybe way less now.


Click on my name and look at my home page. Almost every picture there and the Laser page was taken with this camera.

These pictures could be improved with a good lighting setup. I just have not gotten around to it.

Yes - you can spend a lot more and get better pictures but as you can see the low end does ok also.

[Mike Parzych]

Thanks guys.

Pete - I looked at your site and that pic quality is plenty fine for my needs.

[Earl Eyre]

Last months Consumer Reports had an excellent answer to your question. it reviewed cameras for every level of use and included printers, too. Check it out at your local library. I think it is now off the newstand.

Earl

[Tim Morton]

for web use and emailing you can get by with a 2MP camera if you can still find them...you will find the best deals on 3MP now, usually under $150 bucks.

[Wes Bischel]

Mike,
Below is a site I found helpful to narrow my selection - good info and reviews

http://www.steves-digicams.com/

Also, as a follow-up to Earl's comment, CU has a $4.95 sign-up online for a month to get some of those back issue reviews.

http://www.consumerreports.org/main/home.jsp

Good luck,

Wes

[Doug Shepard]

Mike - Ditto Tim's comments on 2MP being enough. I'm still using a 2.1MB Nikon and the pics still need to be resized and resolution reduced in the pic editing software to get file sizes down to something acceptable for e-mailing or posting on threads. It's nice to have the extra pic resolution occasionally, but in a awful lot of cases, you're going to end up discarding a lot of what a 2-5MB camera will capture.

[Tim Burke]

Mike - Ditto Tim's comments on 2MP being enough. I'm still using a 2.1MB Nikon and the pics still need to be resized and resolution reduced in the pic editing software to get file sizes down to something acceptable for e-mailing or posting on threads. It's nice to have the extra pic resolution occasionally, but in a awful lot of cases, you're going to end up discarding a lot of what a 2-5MB camera will capture.

Yet another ditto about the megapixels. Great pictures start with the quality of the optics and the experience of the person taking pictures. The pixel rating, in my not so humble opinion, is the most over-hyped, over-marketed feature. The amount of pixels only determines the maximum size of a picture that you can print without seeing pixelization.

I've seen 4+ megapixel cameras that have tiny optics that give lesser quality pictures. Like Doug, I am still using a 2.1 MP Olympus camera with a nice quality 10x zoom lense. It's cheap to manufacture cameras with more pixels, and I'm not saying that's a bad thing. It just does not automatically mean quality, and you will end up with picture files much bigger than you usually need.

[Mike Parzych]

Well this seems to answer why some digitals my brother in law took and emailed to me would hardly download, and refused to be emailed again.

Thanks again...

[Jim Becker]

If you are buying the camera strictly for web work, it's absolutely true that you don't need the higher-"megapixel" since you will not be using the "information". Optics and better white-balance logic are more important, as Tim points out. However, if you also plan on making prints for family events, etc., the extra investment is worth it. The good news is that you can get some pretty incredible hardware these days for reasonable cost that has wonderful optics (Nikon S1 or similar from Cannon, etc.), 5mp when you need it, really small size for portability (in your pocket!) and a lot more durability due to the metal cases. (Great travel cameras) The S1 sells for $379 at retail and the others are in a similar price range. That's not chump change, but again, it's the optics that make them great cameras.

[Bill Arnold]

Mike,

For reference, all of the pictures on my website were done with my Sony 2.1MP camera that I've had for several years. The optics are great; a 10 to 1 optical zoom.

I take the photos at full resolution of 1600x1200 pixels, then crop and size them down before posting. Even after some cropping, I get very good 6" by 4" prints, which are fine for my small portfolio I carry around.

Regards,