Camera - Digital Still Camera Suggestions (Last: we12.21.05)

[vhelp]

UPDATE (wed.12.21.05.pm) ..

Kodak C330 w/ 4.0MP digital camera -- REVIEW --

Note, from time to time, as experience unfolds, I will be updating
this page with my findings. Possibly once a day, or until I am
satisfied with the completion of the test phase, or 14 days, which-
ever comes first

PROS:
** quick start; USB-2 fast U/L of images; good pics at this stage;

CONS:
** manual focus=none; win98 drivers disapears & need to reinstall drv;
** no manual f-stops; can only delete single image at a time;
** regular batteries die quick; need 3v power for continue op;

The cons can be anything from: camera operations; to features; to user
willingness to compremise with certain aspects of camera to pc processing;
As such, items under cons does not necessarily mean that the camera is bad.


- sun.12.18.05 -
- focus - ..
If manual focus is what you need, then this camera might not serve you well.
You are souly under the mercy of the camera's auto mode.

At this stage, it is too early to tell wheather or not I am completely
satisifed with this brand/model dig camera. But, so far so good.


- tue.12.20.05 -
- strange shut-off experiences - ..
During picture taking, the dig camera would act up, and shut off.
I blame this on account of weak batteries. However, I did not research
this thourghly. But, I suspect, it is the cause of the shut-off's.

But, I also am feeling that this dig camera may have other issues
that were (are) causing it to shut off. Could very well be just
*this* camera only.


- tue.12.20.05 -
- dig camera get fairly warm/hot during many photo shoots - ..
During my last battery of tests, the dig camera would get kind of hot
near the battery area. (remember, in above notes, the unit was shuting
off) hmm.. Anyways.


- wed.12.21.05 -
- For the time being, I am (still) testing out this dig camera to see if
it is all that I need for my projects and things.


** - - ** - - ** - - ** - - ** - - ** - - ** - - ** - -
.
.

Searching for suggestions on Digital Still Camera's for my imaging
projects.

(In the mean time, I have been searching out the internet for some images
done by digital camera's. I have found a few, but not many. Now, I want to
have my own dig camera to take pics of things that suits my imaging projects)

The obvious, of course..

** minimally want - 5MP -
** quality; color reproduction; picture size; low-light/indoor; Manual Adjm'ts; etc.
** my price range is under $200 but I am thinking along the lines of used units for
rediculous low prices, if possible.

I see that most of the specs I have been reading are all indicating JPEG as
the file image format. Course, there could be those that do not specify other
poosible formats. I would like to see some RGB and/or YUV as formats, in addition
to those jpegs.. (fwiw noting.. jpegs are yuv, but not raw) And for my needs,
I require next to raw/original images of the objects to photograph.

I am also looking around for url links to image samples of each of the
cameras being researched. They seem to be hard to find, even on the internet.

I've been to Epinions.com as they are great for the down-to-earth reviews, but
they do not post images or url's to them.

Does anybody have some suggestion to urls for dig cameras brands w/ images ??

In the end, I may end up going to some nearby stores and purchasing one to at
least try out.., taking advantage of the 30day return, but this could be some
work as well

Thank you for any advice, etc.

-vhelp 3687

[redwudz]

This has been my favorite site for reviews and info:

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

I have a Canon Digital Elph 400, not what you are looking for, but it will output in raw format. I think quite a few can do that as an option. Takes a lot of memory space, but 512MB flash cards are inexpensive enough.

There are so many digital cameras on the market these days that it's not easy to dig through all the info. You might find a few used ones, maybe check with some of the bigger dealers for trade ins or returns. B&H Photo is one large mail order company that comes to mind. They do have a used section.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/

[Conquest10]

For $200 you're not going to get what you want. Good low-light performance is tied directly to sensor size. The larger the sensor, the better the low-light performance. Unforuntely, the larger sensor cameras are also more expensive (cheapest being the Nikon d50 at ~$700).

[vhelp]

Hay, thanks guys for your responses.

fwiw.. I think that I will make the first page (page one) with my
positive feedback on my findings.

So far, I've looked at various brand and model makes, and am very
impressed with the outputs these units can produce.

I've looked at the nikon D50 and Kodak P850 these past couple of days
and am very impressioned with the images.

If I get at a certain point, I will post my findings here. But in
the mean time, I will look for the less expensive units, to get an
idea of what I can do. Later, as I grow (as my needs grow) I will
move into the more advanced units.

If I find luck, at a used display, and purchase one, I'll post back
my excitement.

Thanks again for your interests, and please feel free to post more
info.. less-to-great advance level is perfectly fine by me, and this
thread topic. It *will* definately help everyone with-in their budget
or needs.

-vhelp 3689

[dipstick]

As far as I know, all digital cameras save as jpg. Most higher end will also save as TIFF and RAW. I never heard of YUV for color space for a digital still camera. Most or all will save in SRGB, while some of the higher end cameras will save in 1998-Adobe RGB color space.

I've been playing with digital still cameras for a while now. From what I've gathered, you get what you pay for in most cases. The best quality comes from good Glass (lenses) and good Image Sensors and to a smaller degree, camera software.

For a low budget, get a camera with the best "Optical Zoom", most manual settings, best lens grass, and 3 - 5 mp.

Tips: learn to shoot with manual settings like White Balance, Arpeture Priority, Shutter Priority ect.

As for me, I've finally moved up to a DSLR and really love the pictures I'm getting. I bought the Olympus E-500.

[vhelp]

Well, this afternoon, I finally took the plunge and purchased a new

Kodak C330 w/ 4.0MP digital camera

At the moment, I am overwhelmed at its capabilities.. (not to mention,
I had a bit of a rough start, getting it to work under my WIN98 system,
but in the end, I won it down, and I still am boss, hehe) That is, every-
thing to do with dig photography and what-not. And, I am finding myself
learning new things along the way with this unit. So, at the early stage
of my new toy, I'm no pro at turning up great photographs - yet.

Well, I didn't get it for that, specifically. I got it for several reasons.
But partly for my yuv image projects, and because I was tired of relying on
the images I would find, (after exhaustive google searches) ..and I wanted
to have images of certain scenes that would bring benefits to these projects.

I might share some sample image pics from the Kodak C330 digital camera,
case anyone is interested in this model's capabilities and are still
shopping around for a dig camera. But bare with my lack of experience
in this field, (and camera operation) as I turn up some non-professional
(louzy) photos during this early stage of my picture taking endeavors

Now, I wanna take pictures of everyhing around my house.. low-light; outdoors;
indoors; etc. etc. Oh well.. see you when I report back additional feedback
from this new digital endeavor

-vhelp 3690

[redwudz]

Good deal.

I've been very happy with my digital camera. It has more capabilites that I can use.

If you have Photoshop you can do wonders with a digital camera image. A freeware program that does some tuning is DCE enhance:

http://www.mediachance.com/digicam/enhancer.htm

I purchased 8 digital cameras for my supervisors to document events as needed. I got them Nikon 4600's and it's worked out very well, even with guys that have no experience with digital cameras.

I think the best thing about digital cameras is that you can carry them with you everywhere and you will tend to use them more than you might a film camera. The more photos you take, the better you will get.

[vhelp]

slight update here..

I am finding that its not such a bad deal too

I'm fine-tuning the indoor (low-light) shoots as best I can.
And, I am finding that working the white-balance with the ISO
paramenters under various lighting conditions are proving well,
but tricky at times. Focus is not a strong point here. But
there seems to be some tricks around this.. ie, focus at a fixed
point (same distance) and orient the lens to the actual spot you
*really* want to take snap shot of. Seems to work in some situa-
tions. (Sorry, that was an advanced step too soon, hehe)

fwiw, I did read some reviews on this brand/model. And, there
were some good scores, but soem didn't like the picture quality
too well. I'm in debating-mode with this myself. But only
because of the differences between one user's eye vs. mine, for
instance. And, you can't always to by someone else's report until
you've had a chance to see the results yourself. But so far, I
am pleased with the results I'm getting this evening.

Using 1.1MP [1216 x 912] mode inside bathroom ...

Another fwiw.. I took the dig camera into my bathroom. It is
the one place that is the most well-lit room. And, I took some
items to snap pics of.. ie, my pizza box, and red coffee can, and
did a few series of what-if shots. I *was* pleased with the results
in this test.

My YUV Tools test scenario ...

When I brought the results back to my pc and exported to images,
and finally into my yuv tool to test under certain conditions, I
found impressive results. My main concirn was with RED colors.
I wanted to test them out with dig camera images instead of the
images from dvd rips. And the main reason for this was on account
of the fact that there seems to be no one correct software the
takes the mpeg-2 color space [yv12] and convert accurately, the
color space and sub-sampling, (ie, RED colors) and process them
in the video without chroma errors. But so far, the images from
my dig camera comes out clean. And, when I run them through my
yuv tool (and process them) as a test.. in short, I could not find
any results of chroma errors, using params such as yuv420.i420 and
yuv420.yv12 sub-sampling.

(I did say my main purpose for a dig camera was for my yuv image
projects)

Still, I'm in beta mode. Can't wait to next day, when the sun
comes out. So much to learn

-vhelp 3691

[offline]

I took these with an alcheapo no-name mp4 camera I got off ebay - just CMOS and 3MP. You don't need a fancy camera for most purposes. The polaroid look was done with the free Picasa software from Google

[dipstick]

Nice picture effect offline.

@vhelp,
Photoshop has a nice filter in the video section for NTSC colors that works pretty good on images intended for video. Both Photoshop and Elements have this feature and I'm sure other image editors have it also.

Indor low lighting is to toughest for digital cameras. If you don't want to use flash, experiment with White Balance and high ISO settings. A higher ISO is more sensitive to light, but also introduces noise becuse the imager gets overheated. In low lighting the shutter speed is decreased, so it's important to hold the camera very still or use Tripod/monopod.

[vhelp]

Thanks guys for the response.

fwiw.., I've updated my first page with (hopefully) useful info, in
hopes that it might help others. I will try and keep it updated on
a regular basis, within my 14-day-return-window trial period, per
store policy.. where I hope to come to a final decision by then.


@ dipstick

Yes, I know. Thanks.

The sw that comes w/ my dig camera is Kodak's Easyshare sw. It's not
that bad. Actually, its super speedy load up time. Not like ULead,
where it could take a long time to load and eat up all your memory.

Also, (regarding YUV and the images) they *are* yuv, because JPEG is
yuv format, not rgb. (it gets converted.. yuv->rgb for display, inside
your graphics apps)

(from what I understand, the ccd is r/g/b lights or something, and then
somewhere in the processing, the chip's inside the unit does a converion..
rgb->yuv, and finally to the jpeg format, which is ultimately yuv)

Also, you're right about the ISO settings. I've been experimenting with
the iso-400 setting, and as long as you don't move your dig camera, like
in your hands, the image will be sharp. I tend to have shaky hands
I will try and rig a tripod or something during photo shoots.

Lukily, I have a mono pod (single pol tripod) nearby. Last I recall, it
was no good for video. The pod will tilt/sway from left to right, forward
to backward motion. Other than that, I must be missing something with
these mono pods.. because my experience has been at best.
(fwiw.., but I haven't tried it w/ my dig camera)


The image format ...

I'm not sure what this file format image is for this JPEG, (EXIF 2.21)
but it seems to be a good format, no bleeding of any image details, (specially
red colors) are great.. super great.

But, I would like to know what kind of YUV sampling this jpeg [or shall
I say, EXIF 2.21] is using on these images.. ie, 420 with yv12 or i420 or what.
I don't know at this time.


@ offline

nice pics.

-vhelp 3693

[redwudz]

You will find most digital cameras 'eat' batteries. You can reduce that somewhat by shutting off the LCD screen and limiting flash use. You get used to carrying extra batteries, though. If yours has a rechargeable battery, get a spare. You'll need it at the most inconvenient moment.

I selected a camera for our people that uses disposable AA batteries as I knew they would forget to charge the batteries.

Most digital cameras are autofocus. But it sounds like you learned the trick of locking the focus on a fixed object then pointing the camera to a moving object in the same range to keep the autofocus from running all the time.

You will also find many one hour photo places will accept your digital camera flash card and print out your photos for a lower price than film cameras. (And often cheaper than you can print them with a PC printer.)

I have a full size 35MM with all the different lens and accessories. It takes great photos, but it's a pain to lug around. My Cannon Elph fits in my jacket pocket, takes hundreds of pictures on one battery charge and I take it with me everywhere. That's really the nicest feature of a digital camera. If you have it with you, you will tend to use it more.

[dipstick]

I don't know whether you know it or not, but you can get a lot of valuable information from reading the Exif info of the jpg. If your s/w doesn't read the Exif info, you can use Irfanview (free). Here is some Exif info from my camera:
------------------------------------------------------------

ImageDescription - OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Make - OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Model - E-500
Orientation - Top left
XResolution - 314
YResolution - 314
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - Version 1.0
DateTime - 2005:10:04 22:04:49
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
ExifOffset - 290
ExposureTime - 1/80 seconds
FNumber - 6.30
ExposureProgram - Aperture priority
ISOSpeedRatings - 100
ExifVersion - 0221
DateTimeOriginal - 2005:10:04 22:04:49
DateTimeDigitized - 2005:10:04 22:04:49
ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
ExposureBiasValue - 0.30
MaxApertureValue - F 2.00
MeteringMode - Multi-segment
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Not fired, auto mode
FocalLength - 50 mm
UserComment -
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - sRGB
ExifImageWidth - 3264
ExifImageHeight - 2448
InteroperabilityOffset - 758
FileSource - DSC - Digital still camera
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Manual
WhiteBalance - Manual
DigitalZoomRatio - 1.00 x
SceneCaptureType - Standard
GainControl - None
Contrast - Normal
Saturation - High
Sharpness - Normal

Maker Note (Vendor): -
Mode - 6620 (6620)
JpegQual - High
Macro - Off
DigiZoom - 1.00 x
Software Release - S0004
CameraID - OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Sharpness - Normal
Contrast - Normal
Image Width - 3264
Image Height - 2448

---------------------------------------------------------------

Info like this lets you know the settings used when the picture was taken.

[vhelp]

Update (wed.12.21.05.pm)

I've added these notes (below) on the first page here with some
latest info on my experience with the Kodak C330 digital camera.

Now, a detail account of my current experiences with the dig camera
since last night, and then some.


The camera and the shutting off problem ...

The Scene: picture the magazine photos

I've experienced some problems. During lots of shooting (wasn't
exactly a part of the testing, but considered a part now) I was
taking a lot of photos.. roughly +/- 50 pics. Anyways..

And during those shots, the camera would act up, and shut off.

Other times, during my focusing the camera (its autofacus, remember)
it would exhibit strange kaotic lines in this phase, and then finally
shut off. (it was probably in this phase, when I would loose pics in
the memory card, because of this)

I blame a good part of it to very weak batteries. But, when I put in
new batteries (almost new) the camera *seemed* ok, and working again,
so I decided to transfer my photos to my pc before I loose them. (during
this time, I did take a few other photos with the camera) Anyways.

It turns out, that during this time, (because of all the shut-downs) I
lost all but 17 pics from that scenario. Not a big problem.. as I was
just taking random shots of magazine photos to review the final picture
results (They came out pretty good) -- (This dig camera takes great
pictures, when it works properly) Anyways.


The camera's focusing weakness ...

The Scene: picture the LDC screen

This dig camera just doesn't do well under certain photo situations.

Take for instance, when I was shooting at my pc monitor (an LCD type) it
would not focus in 95% of my headeckes, I mean, shoots. I had to jimmy
around with tricks, like moving my fingers just at the objects distance,
and *sometimes* the camera would set, semi-sharp. Better than nothing,
I said. Anyways. Other times, I have to move the camera, during it's
auto-focusing phase, and the camera would *seem* to semi-sharp, just enough
for me to take the picture.

In all these tests, I set the dig camera to 2sec delay, and no flash.
(I did not want to taint or add to the camer's inability to take a decent
picture during such tests)

And under this setup, I made rather good quality pics. Except for the shoots
for LCD tests. These just plain failed. I do have at least one *fair* pic of
my LCD scren, but I'm debating on weather or not it is worth posting here.

All in all, I want to say, that IMHO, this camera, considering it's issues
with focusing, ..this dig camera takes, IMHO, great pictures. And, my own
*seemingly negative* expereinces is based on my kaoticness of tests.

But never-the-less, I did experience these issues, and it was the dig camera
that acted up on me with such temper-nonsense.


Last minute comments ...

I am still inside my debating of this camera. The focus is a major let
down for my needs. I need as best sharpness as possible, and focus is
part of that. There needs to be a "manual focus" setting in a given dig
camera, when it is in my hands.

Also, with the acting up of shuting off nonsense, I have to run further
tests on. It could be that the dig camera just needs strong batteries
to keep running properly. I was using an 3volt power source in all these
tests. But, it seems that the dig camera needs batteries installed in
order to work. If I take *out* the battery, and put in the plug by itself,
the dig camera will not function. So, batteries *MUST* be inside the
unit to work - period.

-vhelp 3699

[vhelp]

Hi everyone

Just a small update of my experience.. ( caugh, cauch.. )

(I haven't been around much, on account of my being sick with a bad head-cold,
and my head is still spinning round and round. So, things have been slow for
me these past 4 days and counting cold)

So far, as for my camera acting up (shutting off, etc) I think for the
time being (haven't done much test, due to head-cold) can be blamed on
low battery life and possibly a faulty power adpt'r. I haven't been
able to test this adpt'r yet.

Battery charger ...

I purchased a AA recharger (Ray0Vac) on Friday. And, pluged it in to
charge my batteries. The unit said, "charges over night" and I have done
just that.. from 5:30pm to 9AM the next morning. Well, guess what ?
The batteries weren't charged. I was disapointed. Anyway. To make a long
story short.. I found an old batter charger (Radio Shack brand) that was a:

** NiCd and NiMH configurable - Cat. No. 23-418[A]

I had a difficult time figuring out how to charge the batteries. On this
one, the lights would not come on. In short, not only did I have to put
the batteries in *pairs* ..but I had to put them in the first slot. Then,
everything worked, and 13 hours later (that's its charge time) the batteries
were charged and my dig camera was working again as it did when I first
opened it the day I got it.

So.., so far, in the short time I discovered this (yesterday) and on account
of my being laid back with a head-banger (I mean head-cold) I haven't had
the time to test further weather the dig camera is flakey or just that the
batteries and/or power adpt'r were to blame. I'm hoping its all on account
of pure coinsidence.

(Right now, I just don't have the energy to move around much. I've lost most
my taste buds, and I can't smell the usual things, and there's ringing and I
think, pressure build up in my ears, which make me 'like And, I can't
even enjoy whatever I cook - darn)

Well, that's it for now.. see you all later on, when things get better

Until then..

:P - ~!~ - (HaPpY ~!~ HoLiDaYs) - ~!~ -

-vhelp 3705

[vhelp]

update.. (Sun Jan 1, 2006.evening)

Well.., hi guys. Happy Holidays to you all.

I just wanted to give you all some udpates as to my
on-going experience with my dig camera, Kodak C330.

In other forum subject topics, it was suggested that a card
read be used for the transfer instead of the dig camera.
I gave this a test run, and I must say, it is definately a
better method for transfering photos.

The card reader I got was from a CompUSA brand and for $19
bucks some last year or so.

The OS supported at all: WIN98 / 98SE / ME / w2k / XP, and it's
an 8-in-1 External Flash Media Reader/Write [USB 2.0] model

My suggestion would be to get an SD (or memory) card for your
dig camera. I have a 32mb size (I thought it was a 64mb) and
I pop it in, and tell my Kodak C330 that I only want to use
the SD card. This way, when you take pictures with the dig camera,
the images get stored on the memory card.

The memory card is by Lexar.
(I bought it for my JVC 820U digital dv camera, for still pictures)

When you want to transfer photos from your dig camera's memory
card to your pc, you pop it into the card reader. It's really
that simple

After you are done transfering your photos, you can pop in your
memory card, (delete the photos if you need space, or whatever)
and take new pictures. That's it. Easy as a click.


CONS:
** It causes my WIN98 system to act up at times, and mislead my
ATI-Rage Fury Pro 's apps (ie, Video In / TV) to think that it
is running in low priority mode, or non-DMA mode, and bumps down
to a compatible mode (whatever that is) and continiue. (course,
this doesn't effect the D/L'ing speed. it's very fast)

PROS:
** A lifesaver. Just pop in a card (in my case, an SD [32mb] card)
and away it goes. Audo-senses it, and activiates the dig camera's
drivers, and calls the U/L process to begin. (But, you need to
be sure you have installed the dig camera's driver and software
first) The card reader only installs drivers for the devices'
i/o configuration what-nots. In my configuration, the card acts
like a HDD device. Pop in a card, and the transfer begins.


That's about it for now.. see you all later..


:P - ~!~ - (HaPpY ~!~ HoLiDaYs) - ~!~ -

-vhelp 3720