Digi camera!!!!

[rubysoho]

I've always been a fan of photography and I could be considered a snob because I have always prefered film over digital. But, after getting some christmas money (and finally convincing myself I didn't need another fish tank...*sigh*) I found myself looking through the digital cameras at Best Buy and then I was drawn to them at Walmart. Anyway, it came down to a 6 megapixel minolta or a 5megapixel Kodak. The photographer in me wanted the higher resolution, but I decided to go with the Kodak because if I ever needed maintanace done I think it would be easier/less expensive. Plus the kodak just felt great in my hands and operated very well. It also didn't hurt that it was about $75 less so I could buy better memory. Anyway, turns out the kodak has tons more options than what I origionally thought it had (yeh... it was a bit of an impulse buy and I probably should research this as much as my fish!) and now I can't wait to start playing with all the settings. It has over 15 settings PLUS I can go in a customize just about anything. So, while my film camera will still be my favorite when it comes to working in more artistic ways, I now have a shiny new toy that will be much more convenient when wanting to put something on the internet (like my fish tanks, hehe )



PS-does anyone else hug their new presents? If the box weren't so uncomfortable, I'd probably sleep with it as my pillow!!

[austinsdad]

PS-does anyone else hug their new presents? If the box weren't so uncomfortable, I'd probably sleep with it as my pillow!!

Might wanna check to see if a psychological assesment in order. I'm thinking that might work fine with teddy bears... but cameras??

I know how you feel about film cameras - with all the manual settings to manipulate, depth of fld and shutter speeds, etc. I got an old Mamiyaflex, twin lens, with a 2 1/4" negative format. I'll NEVER get rid of it.

[fishfreek]

Their are some nice Digital SLR's that are basicly fully manual except its digital media vs film the imges are stored.

[austinsdad]

Yeah. One day I'll spring for one. Aren't they, like, in the $500 and above range?

[rubysoho]

From what I've researched, the quality won't be near the same as film until cameras reach 13 megapixels (and can properly white balance, etc...). However, the advantage to digi cameras is you can take some shots that unless you brought proper lighting equipment, you wouldn't be able to do that with a film camera. For example, I was playing with backlighting while still wanting detail in the person's face in the foreground and the digital camera adjusted so that I got everything I wanted. Pretty cool and I didn't have to lug 85 lbs. of lighting equipment!

[austinsdad]

Couldn't you meter on the face with a film camera? Some have spot meters too, right? I can't remember. I carried both a flash meter and a Luna Pro light meter. I never did like to rely on auto metering in cameras anyway.

I'll bet to match my 2 1/4 format camera, digi's might need to get nearer to 20 megapixels (guesstimate only ).

[rubysoho]

I'll bet to match my 2 1/4 format camera, digi's might need to get nearer to 20 megapixels (guesstimate only Rolling Eyes ).

I'd be willing to back that up.

As for metering, I don't know. My film camera is from the 80's so there is nothing automatic about it. I don't follow the new film cameras so I bet they do what you are talking about. I suppose I am showing my lack of knowledge in photography but I love the results I get from my film camera.

[fishfreek]

Digital slr's are upward to $1000 or at least the one that the art professor at the college keeps wanting to get is.

My digi cam has a setting to calibrate white balance or it has some white balance presets based upon outside, florecent, incadecent lighting.

Im sure my camera also has spot meter captability although all of thats above my knowlege.

[Scottm]

post some pics of that flowerhorn!

[rubysoho]

haha! I'm getting there, he is soooooo active though it is VERY hard for me to get a decent picture of him.