I've been studying the digital camera market for a while and I am
about to make the jump. I do a lot of work with high school marching
bands, motorcycles and web sites. This kind of sums up what I have
learned so far. Remember, I am no expert.
If you intend to print your pictures, a 2+ megapixel camera will work
up to 8x10. For 11x14 prints, you will need a 3+ megapixel camera.
For web only work, the 2+ megapixel cameras will do just fine. I have
not experienced satisfactory quality for web work with cameras below 2
megapixels. Often the low end cameras will not have the features you
will want either. I have had better luck scanning from 35mm prints.
For the basics, check for removable storage media, a red-eye flash,
USB or card reader connectivity, optical zoom (digital introduces
blurring), and long battery life with a charger. Also check to see if
the viewer is bright enough to work well in sunlight.
For mid-priced ($300-$500) cameras, check out Canon and Sony. Nikon
is cutting prices on some 2+ megapixel cameras as well. At the higher
end ($900+), look at the Nikon 990 and Canon G1.
This technology is just starting to move and I would expect to see a
lot of improvements in the next 6 months to a year. The 8x10 and
11x14 color prints from the 3+ megapixel cameras and a quality printer
using photo paper rival photographic quality. Pretty impressive, but
not cheap.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Councill <dcouncil@imt.net>
To: <mgs@autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 10:31 AM
Subject: digital pictures
> I need some advice, which is only marginally on topic. I've noticed
that
> several of you have digital cameras and have taken some excellent
pictures.
> In particular, there were some really nice digital pictures of the
Colorado
> Conclave (?), a British car show in Denver, last fall. I forgot who
it was
> that posted them but I did download several really nice MG shots and
used
> them on my desktop on my computer. They enlarged nicely with good
detail at
> 800 x 600.
>
> I have done 35mm photography for many years, and once the Internet
got
> popular, I scanned many of my pictures and posted them on various
web
> pages. Between the limit of the photos, the scanning of the
pictures, and
> then enlarging them, I end up with some blurring or even contrast
problems
> on even my best pictures.
>
> Well, to make a long story short, my question is what you guys use
for
> digital cameras? Will a 1.3 megapixel resolution be sufficient for
good
> quality desktop, 8 x 10 and 1280 X 960 pictures? And was this the
specs on
> the digital camera used at the Colorado Conclave (Larry or Andrew?)?
I'm
> ready to go to digital and I want to buy a reasonably priced camera,
just
> need to know what works for some of you out there.
>
> David Councill
> 67 BGT
> 71 BGT (parts car)
> 65 MGB (soon)
> 72 MGB (soon)
|