MnGCA Home MnGCA
Minnesota Geocaching Association
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   User listUser list   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Small digital cameras
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> Tech Talk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
KC0GRN
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 22 Feb 2004

Posts: 1424

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:48 am    Post subject: Small digital cameras Reply with quote

Okay so I broke my pocket digital camera the other day (still bummed, as it had a bunch of pictures on it, and no way to get them off it due to integrated memory).

So I'm looking at getting another small camera that will fit in a pocket easily (that's really the major thing), have a simple USB interface (ie no weird cables to hook it up), a flash, possibly have removeable memory (in case of a repeat accident). Besides that, I don't care about super great megapixels, as the images all get sized down to 640x480 anyways.

Anyways, does anyone have any ideas? Heard about a decent camera that fits this bill?

Thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:53 am    Post subject: Re: Small digital cameras Reply with quote

KC0GRN wrote:
as the images all get sized down to 640x480 anyways.

Is this your own resizing?
_________________
Sad state of affairs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KC0GRN
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 22 Feb 2004

Posts: 1424

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually on my old camera, it only took in 640x480 mode, which was ideal for it's purpose. Higher res modes are fine, but really not neccesary.

The reason is actually twofold. One, it's only documentation images I take at cache sites (for myself personally, or if I need to send something to the cache owner) and so being, a smaller filesize is fine. And two, it's much easier to upload direct to gc.com if it's in that size.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

KC0GRN wrote:
Actually on my old camera, it only took in 640x480 mode, which was ideal for it's purpose. Higher res modes are fine, but really not neccesary.

The reason is actually twofold. One, it's only documentation images I take at cache sites (for myself personally, or if I need to send something to the cache owner) and so being, a smaller filesize is fine. And two, it's much easier to upload direct to gc.com if it's in that size.

I routinely upload 1024x768 pictures to GC.com without issue. I guess I have broadband so the speed of uploads isn't a big deal to me but I certainly enjoy seeing pictures that are large and clear.
_________________
Sad state of affairs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KC0GRN
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 22 Feb 2004

Posts: 1424

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

yeah I have broadband as well, I thought gc.com had a sizelimit to image uploads though.

Even so, I guess I'm just looking for a camera that's small and lightweight, takes a decent image, and will be cheap enough I'll be okay draggin it around with me while caching.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

KC0GRN wrote:
yeah I have broadband as well, I thought gc.com had a sizelimit to image uploads though.

They do have a 125k image limit but my 1024x768 images seem to upload there just fine.

Quote:
Even so, I guess I'm just looking for a camera that's small and lightweight, takes a decent image, and will be cheap enough I'll be okay draggin it around with me while caching.

Yeah, I had some reservations about bringing along my 5 MP camera w/me while caching but I have had good luck so far with it (crossing fingers) and have ended up with what I believe to be some beautiful shots. Too bad I am not a professional like s4xton Wink
_________________
Sad state of affairs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
s4xton
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 23 Mar 2003

Posts: 1070

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

KC0GRN-

If you want to spend $200 on very nice ultra-compact pocket camera:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Sony/sony_dscu40.asp

If you want to spend less, you can find deals if you hunt. You can find Sony DSC-S30's pretty cheap on eBay. Although it may be a bit chunkier than what you want, it is probably the best 1 megapixel compact camera I have ever touched. Excellent lens and surprisingly good color reproduction for an inexpensive digital camera.

Just avoid these brands with digital cameras: HP, Casio, Epson, Kodak, Kyocera. They generally are focused on BS features that will make the customer buy the product if they don't know much about digital photography, and they don't invest in making good quality cameras.

The better consumer digital cameras, if I were to make a huge generalization, generally come more often from Canon, Sony and Nikon.

You may be able to find older model Canon and Sonys at CompUSA even on clearance...

Another thing to remember: Over a few million megapixels, the resolution is meaningless unless you're serious on making professional looking prints. What really matters is the quality of the lens and the CCD or whatever imaging unit is in the camera. When looking at ultra-compacts, you can keep it simple and think that generally a bigger lens will be better quality, especially in lower light situations. That rule of thumb generally will work with ultra-compacts.

My $0.02.

I'm in the market for a camera myself as my Sony DSC-S30 broke this weekend and I've narrowed down my search to a few Canons and a Sony.

-Aaron
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Centris
Past MnGCA Chair


Joined: 27 Nov 2002

Posts: 620

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

s4xton wrote:
Just avoid these brands with digital cameras: Kodak
I second that!!! I have had two of the @#$%'s , they seem to commit suicide within weeks after the warranty expiration. Mad Even if Kodak is on great sale and they throw in a bunch of freebies... run away!
My next camera will be a Canon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
SirPoonga
Geocacher


Joined: 07 Feb 2003

Posts: 144

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd stick with Sony, Canon, or Olympus for a digicam. Checkout www.steves-digicams.com Olympus has some very nice pocket cams that are weather resistant. All the opennings have rubber seals and such.

I have an older Olympus C-3000. I love it. I needed features and expandability.

My sister had a 4 megapixel Olympus, I believe the D-400. One of the weather resistant pocket cams. Very nice, basic features, 3x zoom, fits in pocket.
Make sure you get the extended warranty wherever you get it from. My sister's camera , the latch for the data port door broke. Since Best Buy didn't run that model anymore they replaced it with the D-410 because of the extended warranty.
She took it along when we did this cache and has some nice pics of the view.

A friend of mine wished he got the extended warranty. On his Canon a pixel went out on the CCD and it was out of the 1 year manufacturers warranty.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SirPoonga
Geocacher


Joined: 07 Feb 2003

Posts: 144

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

s4xton wrote:
Another thing to remember: Over a few million megapixels, the resolution is meaningless unless you're serious on making professional looking prints. What really matters is the quality of the lens and the CCD or whatever imaging unit is in the camera. When looking at ultra-compacts, you can keep it simple and think that generally a bigger lens will be better quality, especially in lower light situations. That rule of thumb generally will work with ultra-compacts.


Right, Sony, Canon, Nikon, Olympus have great lenses and CCDs.

The general rule of thumb for megapixels, if you were to print the pictures out without being grainy is this:

0-3 megapixels is grainy no matter what
3-4 megapixels will do a standard 6x4 pic
4-5 will do 8x10
5-6 will do 11x13
6+ will do small poster size and above accordingly....

This is if you print them out on a 6 color inkjet on photopaper, i.e. a photoprinter like my Epson 785EPX.

For web use 2-3 megapixels is great. I wouldn't go below 2 megapixels because I think you lose alot of color definition, even under 3 megapixels.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KC0GRN
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 22 Feb 2004

Posts: 1424

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the suggestions. I started looking at some sony ones today actually, seems like some of the cybershot models are fairly small and portable.

I actually own an older olympus digital camera (a d-460 zoom, 1.3 megapixel, GREAT lens) and it's the best camera I've ever had, I just don't like to bring it caching with me due to the size and risks of dropping it, though I have accidentally dropped it a few times and it's still working great.

As for this camera, again megapixels aren't a priority, nor super features. Just a simple small camera that fits in the pocket well. So far Sony seems to have an edge on that, especially pricewise. Basically a camera I don't mind banging around a bit while caching (hence the price thing, less fancy should mean cheaper).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SirPoonga
Geocacher


Joined: 07 Feb 2003

Posts: 144

PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 8:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's why I suggested the new olympus cameras. They are water resistant. My sister has dropped hers while caching. But only once, she normally keeps it in a fanny pack while caching.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
King Boreas
Geocacher


Joined: 16 Dec 2002

Posts: 2444

PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.officemax.com/max/solutions/product/prodBlock.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&expansionOID=-536906215&prodBlockOID=537346778&moreInfo=yes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
s4xton
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 23 Mar 2003

Posts: 1070

PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Sorry for the inconvenience. You have reached this page due to an interruption in your connection with our system or you were directed to a link that is no longer valid.

Try again by hitting the Back, Refresh or Reload
buttons on your web browser
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
King Boreas
Geocacher


Joined: 16 Dec 2002

Posts: 2444

PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2004 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry

http://www.officemax.com/max/solutions/search/search.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&searchType=product&searchString=credit+card+camera&searchBtn.x=28&searchBtn.y=4

or

www.officemax.com

search for sakar camera

credit card size, $29.95
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> Tech Talk All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Geocaching Cache Icons, Copyright 2009, Groundspeak Inc. All rights reserved. Used with Permission.