"David Bogie" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Don't buy a Nikon or a Canon unless you REALLY want one, the operating systems suck.
But they do take the best looking photos, bar none, and this is true all the way down the model
line. They have the best exposure intelligence, IMO, which matters a lot to perceived image quality
(especially for consumers). Olympus is always too dark, IMO.
> Since you will not be expecting to be making a living with your camera, don't buy a digital
> still camera based on anything other than one simple criteria: The operating system built into
> the camera.
I disagree. Digital cameras function quite differently from one another, and the OS is only one
factor. Most folks will just pop in the batteries, switch to "Auto" mode, and start shooting. The
camera will be expected to handle all image decision making. They will never interact meaningfully
with the OS, so it is of little importance.
> Everything else is nonsense and marketing hype.
Yes, amen brother. I think that image resolution is hyped far beyond its value to the average
consumer. The number one culprit: Digital zoom. It's worthless, yet it's used as a selling point.
The bigger the better!
> just buy what you can afford, learn how to use it so you can enjoy using it, and start taking lots
> and lots of pictures.
This is harder than it sounds, since "what you can afford" is directly related to knowledge that the
average consumer doesn't have, such as what is hype, and what is not.
> The features are meaningless
I disagree. Optical zoom, memory card compatibility, battery type, ISO equivalence, audio annotation
and other "features" do distinguish one camera from another for pure ease-of-use, convenience and
compatibility. They're not quite generic yet. Also consider that size and weight my be deciding
factors. The Canon S200, for instance, is a beautiful, rugged little camera that can easily
disappear in a pocket. It also takes phenomenally clear and sharp photos for a camera of its size
and price. The only problem is the wimpy rechargeable battery...but that's what I mean about the
difference between cameras being more than just the OS.
> There are a few things people fail to consider in their purchase and you must include these in
> your budget. Don't buy Just The Camera, that's a dangerous and frustrating wasted emotional
> investment.
> 1. A good case (absolutely crucial if you're carrying electronic jewelry on a bicycle)
Any decent padded case will work fine, unless you have it out in the open while touring in
rainstorms. I paid $5 for my nylon Cordura padded zipper-closure case. It works great - even has a
little externnal pocket for extra CF memory cards and batteries. It was marked as an audio player
case, but it fits my camera very well.
> 2. Batteries system: I refuse to buy a proprietary battery system. If the camera doesn't run on
> AAs, I won't buy it. Period.
Agreed, though the Sony Li-Ion batteries are quite wonderful, with very long run times and quick
charge cycles.
> 3. Memory cards: They're all about even in performance and durability, don't let a salesperson
> tell you otherwise, they're full of it.
<sigh> You're absolutely right. I can't stand listening to the blue shirts at the big box stores
talking about memory cards and other digital camera details. They know just enough to be dangerous.
Much of what they say is specious at best.
> you MUST buy at least two additional cards of at least 128M capacity
Yes, 128 MB cards are the optimal value-for-dollar right now. With my Nikon 2 megapixel camera, I
get over 200 highest-quality JPEG's onto one 128 MB card. Two of those cards is enough for a very
long trip: 400+ photos is a lot of photos! If I switch to the "Good" quality setting at 1600 x 1200
(2 megapixels), I can get over 500 shots on a single 128 MB memory card. That's more than most
people will shoot in 5 years.
> The card that comes with the camera [is] worthless.
Better idea: Keep it with you as a spare.
> 4. Card reader or offloader: Depending on your propensity for these things, you may not like
> hooking up your caera just to download the shots so either get a reader for your Macintosh/PC
> or get a digital wallet so you can download and reformat your cards in the field. (The digital
> wallets that have display screens are way cool, totally silly.)
Dude, what the heck are you thinking? Digital wallet? Fuhgeddaboutit!
All you need is a USB memory card reader. They cost about $20-25. You plug it into your computer,
pop the memory card into it, and the memory card becomes just another drive on your computer. If
you're using Windows XP or 2000, you can use Thumbnail view to see all of the photos in the memory
card - no additional software required. I recommend making a new folder somewhere on your hard drive
(like inside the "My Photos" folder, for instance) with a name like "Pamela's April 2003 Baja Tour"
so you can easily find it later. Then just select the photos from your memory card and cut-n-paste
them into the new folder on your computer's hard drive. In a few seconds, the photos will transfer
to the hard drive, and you're ready to re-use the memory card. You can worry about messing with the
image files later.
With this technique, it's also very easy to archive your photos on CD-R's recordable discs. Drag the
folders you want to archive into your CD burning software (I use Nero Burning ROM), and burn the
disc. You're done.
> 5. A good digital photography book...or take a class in digital photography.
Good idea, but not going to happen.
> 6. Be prepared to buy a good photo editor package like Photoshop Elements. Everything else sucks,
> especially the **** that comes with most cameras or that joke that comes with Windows.
Yes, I used to hate the consumer grade Adobe Photoshop-like products; but Elements finally gets it
(mostly) right.
> 7. Be preapred to buy a photo-grade printer or learn how to use email and a phot post Web service
> really well.
Almost any of the current crop of inkjet printers will work fine for photo printing. Epson has the
best image quality, and good prices; but I've had some probems with my Epson printers (several of
them). I'm not sure what to recommend; but Epson, HP and Canon have cheap aftermarket ink
cartridges, while Lexmark does not. That will help make your decision.
Cheers,
-Barry
" <