bubbajustin htgguy . You will be happy with a GOOD point and shoot or a DSLR. My complaint with a DSLR is sensor dust. Changing lenses, especially outside, your sensor will eventually get dirty and need cleaning. How will you do that? The camera has a “micro pulsation” system that cleans it’s sensor.
htgguy . You will be happy with a GOOD point and shoot or a DSLR. My complaint with a DSLR is sensor dust. Changing lenses, especially outside, your sensor will eventually get dirty and need cleaning. How will you do that?
.
You will be happy with a GOOD point and shoot or a DSLR. My complaint with a DSLR is sensor dust. Changing lenses, especially outside, your sensor will eventually get dirty and need cleaning. How will you do that?
The camera has a “micro pulsation” system that cleans it’s sensor.
So does my Pentax-trust me, you will still need to clean the sensor. The sensor shaker will NOT get everything off.
Visit look4trains.com
I'll jump in late, too!
Justin the best piece of advice I'd give is to get whatever camera that has the best optical zoom you can get. 'Standard' trackside distances just about any camera (even cell phone cameras now!) can pull off. The one thing I'd say most 'fans miss when getting a camera is optical zoom (if you have P&S). There's many a time I wished I'd have more than what I did (my P&S has a telephoto converter which helps) but don't worry about MegaPixels. The picture below was shot with an Olympus 3.2 MP camera:
I'm currently on my 2nd Canon P&S (gravity claimed the 1st-BTW get and use a strap for the camera lol) which is a Powershot A590IS. It's an 8 MP camera. I typically use 2 GB cards (~575 shots at full size) but I also got two 4 GB cards (~1150 shots at full size). Extra big cards are getting cheaper and cheaper (mine were $10!) and can save the day.
Another thing to think about is batteries. Having a specialized rechargable on the camera is great...until it is discharged trackside and you need a spare now (and don't have one-they can be pricey). My camera happens to use AA size batteries and I just love Energizer's E2 Lithium batteries. They last a long, long time and aren't too expensive for what you get. You can get a 4 pack for about $10. Always keep a spare battery (or two) with you...you'll thank yourself.
My final item (you mentioned you already have a tripod in mind-good!) is a good lens cloth. If weather gets inclement or dust happens to find your lens, it can ruin your shots. Having a decent cloth (or two-they're not expensive) in the camera bag can be one of those little things that keeps you happy at the end of the day.
Good luck with 'Santa'!
Dan
The road to to success is always under construction. _____________________________________________________________________________ When the going gets tough, the tough use duct tape.
Sorry I am late to this party. I have to agree with the posters who played down the megapixel race. I shot for a couple of years with a Canon S2IS and was happy with it, but wanted something with more flexibility and wound up deciding on the Pentax K200D. I have the 18-55 kit lens and the 55-300 tele-zoom. Here is a shot from my S2 (which is a 5mp camera, with about 450 mm equivalent zoom (12x). Here is a shot from the K200D. I think you can see either of them can make a sharp image, as long as the camera is steady and the focus is correct.
It's important to remember that neither of these looked sharp out of the camera. I never post an image anywhere that is not processed in the computer. Every image needs some combination of leveling, cropping, adjustment of saturation and contrast, and sharpening/unsharp mask applied. One of the things that the DSLR allows me to do is shoot when the light is not perfect, as the RAW files have more information to recover in post-processing.
I don't mean to be contrary, but I rarely use a tripod. With image stabilization, a fairly fast lens, and ISO 200 (or 400 if needed), I have been able to get sharp enough images handheld. My tripod is for night shots and shots where the shutter is slow enough to blur the train against a sharp background.
I also like cameras that take AA batteries, as I can get them anywhere if I happen to need a fresh set. I am now using lithiums in my Pentax and get well over 1000 shots from a $9 set of batteries, and carry a spare set all the time so when they do go dead I'm ready. Used NiMH in the Canon, with very good results.
I like Photoshop Elements 7.0 as image processing software.
Good luck with whatever you decide on and take lots of pictures. Look closely at other's photos, figure out what you like and dislike, and develop your own style.
Jim
Hi all.
Again, thanks for the info! I really appreciate it.
I assume that the camera will shoot with JPEG by default. Also: PV, I already have a good tripod picked out! J
A nice freeware for dealing with multiple formats of images is FastStone. You can google that name, find a site to download, and then play with it. Nice programme.
-Crandell
Let me echo everything PV has told you.
I don't use RAW much - I don't usually do a lot of post processing and I have a try-ware that lets me crop and resize images for the web.
That said - Go big with the memory cards (memory is relatively cheap any more - get two, if you can), and don't forget extra batteries - which may be special to the camera. I have two extra batteries and two 1 gig cards for my 8 mb Rebel - that will get me through a 500+ picture marathon if I shoot large jpegs (about 120 images if I shoot RAW+JPEG).
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Make sure what cards the camera takes before you buy any. A Compact Flash drive cannot read or write an SD card.
The camera will come with a CD that has a software utility that can read the RAW format and can manipulate the images and save them to JPEG without overwriting the RAW file, so you always have the ability to reopen the original file if you mess up the one you are working with.
Photoshop has a raw image utility built into it and so can use RAW images right from the camera.
The brand of computer is irrelevant unless it has a built in card reader. If it does, make sure it can read the type of card the camera uses, there are several. If it doesn't, or cannot read the type you need, then a USB external card reader is not expensive, and the camera will come with a USB cable that will allow you to download images straight from the camera.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Sorry, I got tripped up on typing. I meant IS.
Well, at Walmart.com they recommend the 2gig version. Same card different storage capacity.
Will My HP PC "take" RAW images. Is raw the best quality? Can I still upload to Shutterfly?
PS: You can call me Justin
Bubba:
ISO is film speed or it's digital equivalent. I believe you mean IS which is image stabilization.
I'm not sure you will be able to use your SD card. All of my Canon EOS series cameras use Compact Flash cards which are available up to 12 gig. I have several 2 gig CF cards and would consider that a minimum, but it really depends on how many pictures you will be taking at a time and in what format you will be saving them on the card. RAW or PNG preserves the most detail JPEG is the most universally readable and has several settings. The smaller the file it saves the more detail will be lost, so if you use JPEG use the largest file size. The bigger the CF card, the more images it will hold. Let your wallet be your guide. And I still strongly recommend a good tripod.
PV,
I’m glad you like it. I guess the lenses won’t be as much, because they don’t have the ISO in them. The body does.
I have a SD Impact 1GB card. Is that enough?
That's a good camera, I'm sure you will like it.
Keep this in mind. That is a pretty short lens, it will be fine for shooting your layout and some family pictures, but your are going to find the need for a longer one before too long. You might want to check the prices of additional lenses before you commit. 12 MP images will take up a lot of memory card space, so get a couple of big cards.
Here's the one I want.
http://www.walmart.com/Eos-Rebel-Xsi-Digital-Kit/ip/9208352
Well, I didn't get to read the thread, and I don't know what your goals are, but I can tell you that for me, my Kodak Z760 and Z885 have done pretty well, and I never paid over $200 for either, though these are lower-end cameras. They are fine for all the basics, but if you're a more demanding user, you'd need better than these.
selectorcoborn35...DO NOT buy a point and shoot its like throwing money down the drain in the long run. I couldn't possibly agree. I have a Canon Powershot A710is that handles large prints in the 24X32" range with ease. I took this image a couple of years ago, hand-held, and on automatic. I was looking off the bank from my property down to the Strait of Georgia, about 80' below, and facing the rising sun. Someone who practices and who knows his/her equipment can take excellent images. SLR's are better tools, but they are not strictly necessary for the best images. -Crandell
coborn35...DO NOT buy a point and shoot its like throwing money down the drain in the long run.
I couldn't possibly agree. I have a Canon Powershot A710is that handles large prints in the 24X32" range with ease. I took this image a couple of years ago, hand-held, and on automatic. I was looking off the bank from my property down to the Strait of Georgia, about 80' below, and facing the rising sun.
Someone who practices and who knows his/her equipment can take excellent images. SLR's are better tools, but they are not strictly necessary for the best images.
Justin, here are my 3 most recent images from my camera, a Canon Rebel XS:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=296981
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=297096
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
Thank you all for the info! It really is helpful. PV. Some of the stuff is over my head for now. Like in railroading it’s self, I’m constantly learning more, and more.
The camera I want is the Cannon Rebel EOS XSi EF-S It has a 18-55 mm lens on it. At Wal*Mart, it is $599.99 it is actually more expensive on-line than it is in the store.
From what I’ve heard, It sounds like a great camera. I will look at E-bay to see if they have one.
Again, thank you all for the information!
Justin
tree68 PV - As Coborn points out, a point-and-shoot isn't the way to go, even if it is cheaper. So I think most of us have been pointing him at a low end SLR. I can hand my Rebel to a total novice with it set to the green box, and they'll turn out technically acceptable pictures (even if the composition stinks). But in Justin's case, he's just getting started in what will likely become more serious digital photography, and I'm sure he'll progress. He may start out just taking pictures to use as wallpaper on his computer, but as he learns and hones the necessary skills, he'll start getting "fancy" and will use more of the features on the camera. Most important, though, is that he'll have a decent foundation with an SLR, something that can't be said for a point-and-shoot.
PV - As Coborn points out, a point-and-shoot isn't the way to go, even if it is cheaper. So I think most of us have been pointing him at a low end SLR. I can hand my Rebel to a total novice with it set to the green box, and they'll turn out technically acceptable pictures (even if the composition stinks). But in Justin's case, he's just getting started in what will likely become more serious digital photography, and I'm sure he'll progress. He may start out just taking pictures to use as wallpaper on his computer, but as he learns and hones the necessary skills, he'll start getting "fancy" and will use more of the features on the camera. Most important, though, is that he'll have a decent foundation with an SLR, something that can't be said for a point-and-shoot.
I am not in any way denigrating the Rebel. it is an excellent camera.
This is odd, because I am on the opposite side of the argument I usually make when people are asking which DCC system to buy, but I do stand by what I said. The original poster is obviously not a photographer. If he was familiar with all the terms being presented here, he would not be asking a train forum which camera he should buy. he, like many amateurs, believes that more resolution automatically means better pictures. You can tell that by the way he framed his inquiry.
These two images were made by a friend of mine with a Canon Power-shot S1 IS, a 3.3 mega-pixel camera.
This image was made by me with one of my DSLRs. I believe it was the Canon 20D. using a $1,500 lens.
For his intended purpose, the Power-shot has all the capability he needs. If he ever reaches the point where he needs a DSLR, by then he will have formed an opinion about what he wants, and the difference in price is substantial. A GOOD tripod is a better investment than a DSLR.
Phoebe Vet You guys do realize you are talking way over the head of the original poster, don't you? He's looking for a camera to shoot pictures to display on his computer monitor and you guys are pointing him toward high end cameras and photography lessons. Most new cell phones have as much resolution as he needs for his intended purpose. He doesn't need $2,000 worth of camera and glass.
You guys do realize you are talking way over the head of the original poster, don't you?
He's looking for a camera to shoot pictures to display on his computer monitor and you guys are pointing him toward high end cameras and photography lessons.
Most new cell phones have as much resolution as he needs for his intended purpose. He doesn't need $2,000 worth of camera and glass.
Actually, my suggestion was for an original Digital Rebel with an EF 50mm f1.8. With some careful shopping, that combo could be had for $300 and will be light years ahead of any brand new P&S he could buy.
And my reply was generated as a response to his question about how to get sharp photos. There's a lot that goes into that, so I illustrated what goes into my shots. Over his head, possibly, but I'd like to think that there was a little bit of information not only for Justin, but for other photogs as well.
Camera salesmen would love to have the world believe that more megapixels is the answer to better photos. Sadly, the exact opposite is true in many cases. Lenses that I thought were good on my K100D were only OK on my K20D. The jump in resolution from 6MP to nearly 15MP proved to be a real stress test on my glass.
I'm with Tree on this. In the "Green" mode, any DSLR will work essentially as a P&S (though kind of a bulky one). If and when Justin is ready to learn more, the DSLR is going to give him opportunities that no P&S will.
-ChrisWest Chicago, ILChristopher May Fine Art Photography"In wisdom gathered over time I have found that every experience is a form of exploration." ~Ansel Adams
Chris, great shot up at North Yard.
Justin, I use a Canon Rebel XS, with one lense, and it works great for me! Got it for under $500, and you will be able to use it for a long time. DO NOT buy a point and shoot its like throwing money down the drain in the long run.
Justin, Chris' post above is spot on. I would underscore his comment about glass, because that is the single most important part of any camera. With bad glass, you are hosed no matter what. With good glass, you do not have to have the best body behind it, so long as you have the resolution you need and the sensitivity required for the kind of pictures you shoot.
While more Megapixels can help, he is correct about pixel size (nine micron vs. six micron is a big difference, a full f-stop in sensitivity) and there are other considerations such as dust and depth-of-field that come into the picture (you should pardon the expression).
But most importance should be attached to his advice, "Take the time to learn about photography and practice, practice, practice!" No better route can be shown to you, and the great thing is that with digital, the out-of-pocket cost of shooting is virtually nil.
Justin,
There's a LOT that goes into getting a "SUPER SHARP!" photo. Throwing megapixels at your subject isn't going to help -- especially if you're only looking to display photos on your computer. Megapixels only become important when you want to print BIG. And I mean really, Really, REALLY BIG! I've printed to 20x30 with really good results with a 6 MP DSLR. I have yet to push my K20D yet, but I suspect that 40x60's would be possible if I'm really careful.
So what goes into a "SUPER SHARP!" shot? Here's some important things to remember:
1) The quality of your pixels is way more important than the quantity of them. There's a lot of physics that goes into it, but the general idea is that larger photo sites are very important. So what does that mean? If you look at the sensor size of the sensors that go into compacts digitals and those that go into DSLRs, you'll see that the DSLR is much bigger. Because of that, if you have 10MP on a DSLR and 10MP on a Digital Compact, the photo sites will be bigger on the DSLR. Because they're bigger, they do a much better job of capturing light, and will give you a better photo.
At base ISO levels, this isn't too important, but as your ISO increases, it becomes critically important. Because the larger sensors do a better job of capturing light, they'll do much better job at lower light levels. ISO 3200 will look better on a DSLR than ISO 400 will on a Digital Compact.
2) Proper technique is absolutely critical. You want sharp pictures? Get yourself a good sturdy tripod. The various types of image stabilization certainly have helped handheld photography. I love Shake Reduction on my K20D. That being said, though, when I'm really getting nutty about image quality, the camera is on a tripod.
In the realm of Digital SLRs, there are other matters that can become important, too. For example, I use Mirror Lockup when I'm looking for absolute image quality, especially at middle shutter speeds (like 1/2 to 1/60th of a second).
Beyond that, knowing your lenses helps, too. Generally speaking, your lens will work better stopped down a bit. But...wanna know a secret? When you pack too many pixels on a small sensor, lenses become diffraction limited. On some of the highest MP compacts, the lens has to be used wide open to get the best image quality because if it's stopped down, diffraction is just going to blur images.
I personally run my lenses through a set of tests to figure out how they behave at different apertures and focus ranges (e.g. sometimes a lens will operate better at close focusing distance than at infinity, or vice versa). Because I go to that work, I know that I should use my FA 77mm Limited at f4-f5.6, my FA 50mm at f5.6, my Tamron SP 180mm f2.5 at f5.6-f8, etc. etc.
Again, technique is absolutely paramount to getting sharp images.
3) Speaking of lenses, don't forget that they're really, really important. Just like in the days of film, a good sensor is useless with bad glass in front of it. Buying good glass can be expensive, but doesn't have to be. Every manufacturer has some good stuff that isn't desperately expensive. For example, in Canonland, the EF 50mm f1.8 is really, really, really good, and costs right around $100. Yeah...it's not a zoom, but that just means that it can be small, light, really fast (lets a lot of light in), really good and really cheap. Good prime lenses can really surprise zoom photogs. I shoot almost exclusively with primes, and I'm constantly surprised what they can do. Modern zooms are very good indeed, but they still can't match a well designed prime.
4) Tree mentioned picking up a photography guide book. That's a great idea. At a very minimum, spend some time on the web learning about photography. Learn about light. Learn about composition. Learn how your camera and lens work. The more you know, the more succesful your photography will be.
5) Learn how to get the most from your files in post processing. Learn how to sharpen effectively so that it's nice and snappy, but not over the top.
When it all comes together, you'll be able to wow your audience. Want an example? Try this. Here's a shot of North Yard here in Denver:
See the building on the horizon on the left side of the frame? That's the Pillar of Fire church. At full resolution, it looks like this:
Despite the miles of atmosphere between it and my camera, I could still pick out the water tower supports. This was taken with my K20D with a sharp lens (the M 50mm f1.7) stopped down to it's sweet spot (f5.6), on a tripod with mirror lockup.
How about another one? Try this. Here's one of the flat cars that carries the Solid Rocket Booster Components for the Space Shuttle:
See the writing on the lower left hand side of the car? This is what it says:
If I were in your shoes, I'd forget about getting something new. Look around for an old Canon Digital Rebel (which you can find for $200 or less if you watch closely), and get a couple good lenses for it. The 6.3 MP it delivers will be plenty for your display, and will even allow you prints to 16x20 or perhaps even 20x30 if you are careful.
Take the time to learn about photography and practice, practice, practice!
If you need any help along the way, feel free to drop me a private message, or better yet, post a message here again. As you've noticed, there are a lot of great photogs here who are willing to share their wisdom.
Good luck!
I normally use my shot for wallpapers on my PC. Won’t they appear grainy though? .
Also, I see your guy’s shots here on the forum. The have an image size that’s really big, and when you click on “view larger image, it fills the whole page. Mine just fills the upper left corner. They are also SUPER SHARP! Really clear, and not grainy. I have shot with a 9 mp. Before. I guess it was ok, I just really like what my 10.mp is doing for me now(quality wise).
Good point - did lose some shots with the Sony due to that lag. The after lag was worse when I was writing to floppies (something that particular camera would do). The Rebel, on the other hand, will take something like 14 "large" jpegs in a row before it has to pause and catch up, and even that doesn't take long. RAW doesn't deal quite a well with rapid fire...
I won't deny that a point and shoot may well suit many people's needs. The Sony fits that description and performs nicely in that niche.
I, too, have experience with film 35's (Pentax K1000), so that translates nicely to the Rebel and it's peers, none of which I'll denigrate.
I would agree with that. And they don't tend to recover after the shutter releases quickly either, a compounded problem. Still, another $300 for a faster shutter....? It is something to think about.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.