Questions about photography.....

[Shockwave]

I have a few questions about hptography and was wondering if someone could help me out. Currently I'm using a Sony DSC-S75 camera. Love the camera, the pics look excellent. It seems as if my current problem is with the printer.(HP 932C) When I print the pics they look just a touch grainy. Not quite the 3x5 film look I was going for.
Well, figured it might be time to upgrade, and why only do one thing right?

First off, printers. What kind / brand / model number of printers should I be looking at to really take full advatage of a digi cam's abilities? The 932C does print, they do look good, but if thats as good as it can get....... Also, what kind of price range are good photo printers?

Next, digi cam's are listed as mega pixel values (3.3, 5 etc etc). What mega pixel value is equal to a 8.5x11 print quality pic? Would a 5 megapixel camera provide high enough quality pics to be 8.5x11 print quality? Essentially, whats the minimum megapixel camera one can lok at to really feel like you have a suitable replacement to film?

Again on cameras, what features should one look for? Would you cut all nifty options to geta 5 megapixel, or sacrafice to a 3.3 megapixel to get full control of everything (Shutter, arpeture etc etc) Basically, what specs should one look at to make sure there getting a good camera?

Now, I have a specific application. Suppose one has a budget of $400. The requirements are that it must provide decent good quality pics and *MOST IMPORTANTLY* be able to do fast frame shooting for high action shots. Think of sports, racing, etc. When you hit the button it has to shoot NOW or you miss the shot. I notice my Sony has horrid shutter lag which is just unacceptable for high action shots. The kicker, those are the only requirements. 400 bucks or less, good quality pics and able to do fast action. Digi or film is fine. What would you guys recommend? I think such the budget is somewhat low (For digi's anyways) that perhaps film would be the best way to go for good quality and fast action and still hit budget. Thoughts?

Thanks.

 

[pennylane]

1) My belief with printers is that the Canon i850 is the best bang-for-the-buck photo printer. Can be had for like $150 retail (less with hot deals).

2) Most people say 3 MP is good enough. Others say you need at least 4. 5 won't be much better than 4 (or even 3). I think 3 is good enough.

3) I would try to get a full manual control camera of at least 3 MP if you want to experiment with cameras. Unless you really need the high resolution, 3 MP could be fine as a starter camera if you're not printing higher than 8.5x11.

4) Uhh... canon G2? I don't know much here...

 

[Shockwave]

Originally posted by: fanerman91
1) My belief with printers is that the Canon i850 is the best bang-for-the-buck photo printer. Can be had for like $150 retail (less with hot deals).

2) Most people say 3 MP is good enough. Others say you need at least 4. 5 won't be much better than 4 (or even 3). I think 3 is good enough.

3) I would try to get a full manual control camera of at least 3 MP if you want to experiment with cameras. Unless you really need the high resolution, 3 MP could be fine as a starter camera if you're not printing higher than 8.5x11.

4) Uhh... canon G2? I don't know much here...

Canon eh? Yeah, I've been looking at there cameras pretty seriously. But damn, the one I want is like over a grand. Currently using a 3MP so if I do upgrade (Which I may very well not, as I think right now my printer is my MAJOR downfall) I would have to go more then that.
Anyways, off to Canon's website...

 

[Eli]

Splurge and get the Canon EOS-10D.

 

[dolph]

my $.02...
canon g3 takes breathtaking pictures, has full manual control, and is a 4 mp camera. however, the shutter lag on it leaves something to be desired, unless you're shooting at 1/2000 and in broad daylight.

 

[kyutip]

I also vote for Canon i850, best value for the money without sacrificing quality.

As for camera for fast frame shooting for high action shots, it will be very tough for any digicam except DSLR.
Even the fastest of digicam is not fast enough just yet.
You have to adjust yourself if you use prosumer digicam. For example, anticipate on where the action might be and keep your half press shutter on. Snap when appropriate and you can also use burst (burst3 on DSC-S75).
Probably the top 5MP's camera will be better in shutter lag wise, but do not expect SLR like speed.
Since DSLR is out of the question, you would be better of with a decent SLR such as Canon Ti and a good lens.

I think DSC-S75 or 3MP camera will be good enough to cover 8x10 prints. As for prints quality at that size, a good 4 or 5MP will not yield more than 25% better prints (assuming the camera has the same quality picture).

Megapixels is not everything. For example, I would rather keep DSC-S75 than switching to any 4MP HP or Kodak.
I have DSC-S75 and it is an excellent camera, go to www.dpreview.com and read the review here

Feature is important if you want to learn more about photography. Aperture priority, shutter priority and manual is a must and your camera provide that.

If you must upgrade, DSC-F717 is a good choice since you can keep using your MS.

 

[Shockwave]

Originally posted by: kyutip
I also vote for Canon i850, best value for the money without sacrificing quality.

As for camera for fast frame shooting for high action shots, it will be very tough for any digicam except DSLR.
Even the fastest of digicam is not fast enough just yet.
You have to adjust yourself if you use prosumer digicam. For example, anticipate on where the action might be and keep your half press shutter on. Snap when appropriate and you can also use burst (burst3 on DSC-S75).
Probably the top 5MP's camera will be better in shutter lag wise, but do not expect SLR like speed.
Since DSLR is out of the question, you would be better of with a decent SLR such as Canon Ti and a good lens.

I think DSC-S75 or 3MP camera will be good enough to cover 8x10 prints. As for prints quality at that size, a good 4 or 5MP will not yield more than 25% better prints (assuming the camera has the same quality picture).

Megapixels is not everything. For example, I would rather keep DSC-S75 than switching to any 4MP HP or Kodak.
I have DSC-S75 and it is an excellent camera, go to www.dpreview.com and read the review here

Feature is important if you want to learn more about photography. Aperture priority, shutter priority and manual is a must and your camera provide that.

If you must upgrade, DSC-F717 is a good choice since you can keep using your MS.

Yeah, I'm very happy with the S75. I've read many reviews, at the time I bought it it had been on the market...2 months....maybe... The at-the-time contender was the Nikon Coolpix 9something, but from what I saw the S75 was the best you could buy and still be on some semblence of a budget.
I figured SLR was the way to go for fast action shots. I knew that the newer digi's had come a long ways, but still werent there. Didnt know if the DSLR's were up tot he task yet, and hell even if they are they cost an arm and a leg anyways. Drop that much in SLR gear and you'd have a setup 10 times better!
So, the Canon i850 eh? Just for comparison purposes, whats a no holds barred photo printer? My 932C was around 150 i think, and while a good printer on the whole I'm just very much not impressed with my picture printouts. Thats why i think for now I'll be upgrading the printer first, then if still not happy look into new cameras.

 

[Shockwave]

Oh yes, also they list 35mm equivelent (lenses?) an example being maybe 37mm-80mm or whatever. Exactly what is this telling me??

 

[kyutip]

Best printer for photo (inkjet) probably i950 or S900 for around $200+ ish.

What kind of action that you are going to take ? how far away ?
That will determine your lens need. The faster the lens the better but cost arm and leg too.
If you one want to carry 1 lens with you, try Tamron XR 28-300/3.5-6.3. It will cost you about $300 after rebate though.
That'll leave you $100 for the SLR
I'd sugget you visit your local photo store, not BB, CompUSA, CC or the likes.
They might have some affordable use SLR, probably lens too.

Here are some reading to help you.

"Its not the equipment but the photographer who makes the picture" is generally a true statement. However with sports and action photography, having the wrong equipment means not getting the shots you want or need. This relates back to the section on location. The further away, the longer the lens is needed to capture the same image in the frame. Different sports require different lens lengths. For instance, basketball is generally shot from the baseline or sideline near the baseline. You generally can get good results with an 85mm lens in this situation. However, by the time the players are at mid court, you need a 135mm to capture them. If they are playing under the far goal, a 200-300mm lens is needed to fill the frame well, yet for shooting a soccer game, a 300-400mm lens is needed for just about anything useful.

Generally, for a 35mm camera, each 100mm in lens focal length gets you about 10 yards (9 meters) in coverage. This coverage means that on a vertical format photo, a normal human will fill the frame fairly well. Thus, if you are shooting American Football from the 30 yard line with a 300mm lens, you will be able to get tight shots in an arc from the goal line to mid-field to the other 40 yard marker. As players get closer, your lens may be too long. Many photographers will carry two bodies with two different length lenses for this reason.

Lens speed is also a critical factor. The faster the lens, the faster the shutter speed you can use, which as the lens grows longer, this becomes even more important. This will be covered in the freezing action section in more depth. If you look at the sidelines of any Division 1 college football game or an NFL football game, you will see people with really big lenses. These range from 300mm to 600mm or longer and even then, they may have a 1.4X converter or 2X converter on. You need fast shutter speeds to freeze action with long lenses. Every F Stop you give up requires a faster film or less freezing potential.

Most consumer grade long lenses and zooms have variable apertures, but most are F5.6 at the long end of the lens. F5.6 is good for outdoor day time shots, but becomes very inhibiting for night games and indoor action. Most people use lenses that are F2.8 or faster. These lenses are very expensive. A 400mm F2.8 sells for over $8000 US. They are also very heavy and bulky. Using a monopod is a life saver with these big lenses.

 

[KenGr]

Originally posted by: Shockwave
Oh yes, also they list 35mm equivelent (lenses?) an example being maybe 37mm-80mm or whatever. Exactly what is this telling me??

They use equivalency to 35mm lenses because we're familiar with it. The focal length relates to the magnification of the scene and is related to the film (digital sensor) size, so absolute numbers are not useful unless you know the exact sensor size. A 45 or 50mm lens is considered "normal" so you will see the same perspective image through the lenses as if you were just looking at the scene. Lower numbers have a wider angle of view and everything looks smaller and farther apart. High numbers are telephoto.

It's best to get the widest zoom that you can on a digital camera. As long as you've got the megapixels, you can just crop or digital zoom to get a little closer without losing too much quality. No cheap way to get wider though.

I'm not sure why you aren't getting good results with your printer. You should check your paper and setting. I've got a cheap HP 5550 and it prints very smooth sharp 8 x 10's from 3 MP images. This is a $100 printer and I'm sure real photo printers do even better. Note that you must use photo paper to get photoquality images.

3.0 MP cameras will give good quality 8x10's. I was skeptical until I got my Canon A70 but it' s got good glass and it works well. I can scan 35mm slides at 11.0 MP and the images aren't that much better. You have to really blow up and crop to see the differences in pixelation. Check all your settings. A friend of mine has a DSC-S75 and his prints look pretty good. (ALMOST as good as mine )

 

[Shockwave]

Good advice guys. I'm definately thinking of going and re-trying my current setup. Perhaps I'm trying to cover up user faults with better equipment (Hey, not admit to say it).

On other question. The 932C I bought came with a GREAT software bundle for photo printing. Did all kinds of changes as well as allowing for printing of various sizes (You could print all 3x5, or all wallet or whatever).
Problem is the software wont install on a NT OS. It'll RUN on an NT OS, but wont install. Anyone know of
A) similiar software or
B) A way to force the install?

Thanks.

 

[Mday]

Originally posted by: Shockwave
Good advice guys. I'm definately thinking of going and re-trying my current setup. Perhaps I'm trying to cover up user faults with better equipment (Hey, not admit to say it).

On other question. The 932C I bought came with a GREAT software bundle for photo printing. Did all kinds of changes as well as allowing for printing of various sizes (You could print all 3x5, or all wallet or whatever).
Problem is the software wont install on a NT OS. It'll RUN on an NT OS, but wont install. Anyone know of
A) similiar software or
B) A way to force the install?

Thanks.

you can define a custom paper size, and fudge with the margins in some application to have it work. i recommend getting photoshop elements to touch up the photos with. ;-)


3 megapixel is not good enough for 8x10 (common photo size, basically 8.5x11 with margins) and will cause some of the "lossy" jpeg and noisy ccd imperfections to be shown. 4 megapixel is fine for 8x10, but 5 is better because it gives you a margin of error for cropping purposes.

there is NO digital camera in the sub $1000 range that will give you less shutter lag. although there has been a camera announced which proports 3fps until your buffer is full, or continuous if your flash memory is fast enough.

i recommend saving your money, and printing smaller pix, cuz $400 is not much of a budget for what you want in a digital camera. anyone that tells you otherwise will wind up causing you to give up some of your "desires" as stated thus far.

 

[Shockwave]

Well, theres actually kinda 2 different criteria here.
The 400 budget is for my Uncle. He was asking what was out there. I told him I wouldnt try going digital with only 400 and his requirements. He wants to be able to shoot pictures from his bike (He rides alot) so moving / fast action shots are important. Example, cruisin down the highway and sees a deer or whatever.
My requirements are simple. 35mm equivelant quality at all times. Unfortunately, my budget wont allow me to get the equipment to really do that so i must make sacrafices.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I have a Canon a40, which is a 2.1 mp camera. I have made nice 8.5x11 prints from my i950. Perfect?No, but good. If you want 35 mm quality, get ready to morgage something.

The Canon 10D is your entry level. Can be had for 1500 or so. Approaches 400 speed quality Next is the 1Ds. About as good as it gets in digital an about 5k minus lenses. ALMOST 35 quality, but 100 speed provia F and Velvia 50 speed are still superior. You can get into larger format that is actually better. Last time I checked we were at about 25k for that.

Me? I shoot both digital and film. Both worlds have advantages.

 

[Sid59]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
I have a Canon a40, which is a 2.1 mp camera. .....

Me? I shoot both digital and film. Both worlds have advantages.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Mday

3 megapixel is not good enough for 8x10 (common photo size, basically 8.5x11 with margins) and will cause some of the "lossy" jpeg and noisy ccd imperfections to be shown. 4 megapixel is fine for 8x10, but 5 is better because it gives you a margin of error for cropping purposes.

i disagree... well, to an extent. Depending on the picture, 2MP worked well for me. Since I was just putting it up, no one would get very close to it to examine it anyway. But even if they did, it looked great (s330 camera, s820 printer, both canon). It was a very well lit outdoor.. which is probably the key there.

and paper matching is very important. You use the wrong paper, and you might think the printer sucks. check the forums over in www.dpreview.com to see what they say.