Oct 29, 2002 11:48 AM
|I need digital camera advice!
I want something that I can take along on scenic rides and also use to take pictures at races, etc. Also, it should be small enough so that I can easily carry it while I ride. And finally, it shouldn't even come CLOSE to costing as much as a 105 equipped bike!
I've borrowed a friend's Kodak before (I forget the model), and it has an awful delay that has me worried about trying to take motion related pics. Is this a problem with all digital cameras? I want digital because of the ease and convenience of sharing, but I realize it might not be the right choice. Any advice is appreciated.
|re: Digital Cameras||spookyload|
Oct 29, 2002 12:03 PM
|A lot of newer digital camera's have a function that is an endless shutter, like the fully auto camera's sports photographers use. It is only limited to the size flash card you are using. My samsung camera cost ~$200 and has lots of features like this, and it also takes movies too. If you are looking for cheap, look at the 1.3 mega pixel camera's. Those should be around $175 by now. Also check ebay.|
|re: Digital Cameras||Juanmoretime|
Oct 29, 2002 12:14 PM
|Sutter lag is one of the problems with digital photography. It's getting better. I have an Olympus c-4040 and was using it to take photographs at one of my daughters cross country meet this past weekend. I find I get the best results prefocusing on an area, holding the shutter release half was down, then pushing the shutter release all the way as the action comes into the frame. I think you want a least 2.1 megapixels and a camera that initially uses optical zoom verses digital zoom. Having both is definitely OK. I like the Olympus line and they do have some that meet the criteria and they are pocketable or jerseyable might be a better term. My camera is too bulky to carry on the bike. The model I've been looking at, to be able to take it with on the bike, is the 520 and you can find it on the net for about $200. Read the reviews on Roadbike Review's sister website, pcphotoreview, then decide. LoL|
|Ixnay on the D-520, it is obsolete...||RhodyRider|
Oct 29, 2002 1:11 PM
|Get the D-550 Zoom, which took the place of the 520 in the Olympus line. Just got mine last week at Best Buy, $349 (but 12 months same-as-cash makes it a no-brainer). It is very nice, 3 megapixel, loaded with nice features, typical excellent Oly optics, good zoom capabilities, extremely user-friendly & flexible. Reviewed pretty favorably at the following sites:
I'll post pix one of these days, to support my choice!
Oct 29, 2002 2:37 PM
|The D-520 is not obsolete, nor has it been replaced by the D-550. The D-520 replaced the obsolete D-510. The only real differences between the 520 and 550 beyond the price is that the 520 is 2 megapixel vs the 550's 3 megapixel, and is smaller and lighter than the 550. If someone really needs the 3 megapixel and doesn't mind the larger size and price, by all means it is a wonderful camera.
I went with the 520 Zoom for the above stated reasons. Check out some of the eBay camera stores for some great deals, like Choice One http://www.stores.ebay.com/id=13780441 . They have the 550 ( http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1392857393 ) for a "Buy It Now" price of $361, including extras like a 64 MB smart card card, a smart card reader for quicker uploads, and a travel case. Auction prices can be $20-30 lower.
For $265 I bought a brand new, never out of the box Olympus D-520 Zoom with a battery charger, 4 NiMH batteries, a 64 MB smart card, a smart card reader, and an OK (nothing special) travel bag. The photo below was one of my first pictures with it. I plan on taking it for tomorrow's ride and hopefully posting some good pictures.
Like on all digital cameras, don't waste your time with digital zoom (they all suck). Buy something with a good OPTICAL zoom. I disabled the digital zoom on mine.
|I must have been given some bad info, I was told||RhodyRider|
Oct 30, 2002 6:15 AM
|that the D-550 was replacing the D-520 in the line. Regardless, obviously you are happy with your choice (as evidenced above, nice shot!) and I am happy with mine. I took a macro shot of some flowers myself this past weekend, even captured a nice fat busy bee in the middle of the frame. The detail & color are outstanding, I'm really taken with my new camera.|
|Can't lose with Olympus||Tig|
Oct 30, 2002 1:43 PM
|Maybe the 550 replaced something like a 510 or 520. The number are easy to confuse!
I always buy Nikon for my 35 SLR's, but the quality and features of the Olympus line of digitals pulled me away from everything including Canon and Sony.
|Canon S40. I take mine along on all my rides. Compact. (nm)||onespeed|
Oct 29, 2002 12:28 PM
|That shutter lag is driving me back to film cameras...||Silverback|
Oct 29, 2002 12:43 PM
|I got a Kodak 3700 digi for Father's Day, and it's fine for 90-plus percent of the photography I do. I carry it on rides and take it on daytrips, all those kinds of things where you glance at the pictures a few times, then stick them in a drawer. Also works very well for scenics when I'm not going to blow them up, as reminders of vacations etc. But for anything involving moving subjects, people or animals or my kids' sports teams, that shutter lag drives me crazy. I shot for a newspaper and a couple of magazines when i was in my 30s; I'm an experienced photographer, but I still have a lot of trouble with it. You can't always anticipate the action.|
|re: Digital Cameras||Film No More|
Oct 29, 2002 12:51 PM
|I am a huge fan of digital photography, as long as it is at least a 3 megapix.
I have found that my $60.00 Minolta 35mm pocket camera does a far better job of capturing "on the road" shots than my $200.00 Fuji finepix does. The draw back, no instant gratification of downloads.
On the pro side, the benefits are huge. First, the cost for a good camera. You may already have a pocket camera around the house. If so, your investment is almost done. The cost of getting a photo cd these days is quite reasonable. I currently get a cd with up to 160 pictures on it for $7.00 at Ritz Camera. There is a trick to this, so if interested, let me know.
I suggest that the cost/function ratio is still not here yet, but getting closer everyday. I vote, wait on the digi camera. Stick with the tried and true for a while longer.
|Everything I have posted here is from a Canon S300.||MB1|
Oct 29, 2002 1:02 PM
|Probably a bit of overkill but my results are fine and it is easy to carry and use while riding.
About $350-400, shop around.
|My digital camera....||aliensporebomb|
Oct 29, 2002 1:16 PM
|My camera is a Fuji Finepix 4700 zoom. When I first
bought it, it was fairly expensive but I've seen
refurbs for about $200-300.
Another thought is: a friend just bought a Sony Mavica
that was a $1200 camera that writes to 3.5 inch CDs.
He got it for $400. "Obsolete" digital cameras can
make a great value.
Back to the Fuji Finepix 4700 zoom:
Specs are pretty darn good - by some trick of their
software you can do 2048x1912 pictures, effective
3.4 megapixel. It also has an mpeg movie mode.
Some examples (bike riding related) of pictures taken
with the camera are here:
Check them out - they were all taken with the camera.
It uses little rechargeable AA batteries. Great camera.
|re: Digital Cameras||fbg111|
Oct 29, 2002 1:19 PM
|Was in Best Buy yesterday looking at DC's. Canon 3.2 Megapixel Elph looks very nice for $399. I only got a cursory glance and don't know much about it, but it was the smallest one on the shelf. Had a CF 32MB memory card.
I can also vouch for the quality of Olympus optics, as I have a compact Olympus 35mm. They're some of, if not the, best small-camera optics.
Oct 29, 2002 1:27 PM
|The S30 is a great camera - if you want something smaller try the new S230. The zoom isn't that great, but it's a very good 3 megapix ultracompact camera - pick it up for about $375 to $400.
I like this site for reviews of digi cameras:
|re: Digital Cameras||aliensporebomb|
Oct 30, 2002 8:46 AM
|Someone mentioned shutter leg - definetely an annoyance.
Some are faster than others, but for shots where you have
limited time you have to be quick and prepared.
We were in the south in Georgia somewhere on vacation
and a strange looking black air force plane flew a low
pass overhead - no markings that I could see and it was
not a design I'd ever seen.
I saw my chance to get a scoop photo for Aviation Week
and Space Technology and actually got two shots but they
would have been much better shots had it not been a
digital camera since one of the shots is in the clear
and the next is the plane barely visible behind some
Oh well, it was cool anyway.
|Canon S200 (small, $250)||GMS|
Oct 30, 2002 10:12 AM
|The only camera smaller than this and in the same price range is the Minolta Dimage X, which is also pretty good, but apparently the quality isn't quite the same.
The S200 is being replaced by the S230 now, so S200s are really cheap. I got one for $254.00, no tax, no shipping. If you work really hard (price matching, layered coupons) I have heard it can be had for $231.
The delay in every single digital camera I have used (I have a Kodak and a Canon and have used others) is mostly due to the time it takes to autofocus. Using focus lock (or infinity focus), turning off the flash manually, and turning off the LCD screen can also make shots faster.
I saw a Konica of similar size that was really, really fast in all operations, but it was also 200 dollars more and didn't offer much additional functionality.