Andy O'Neil Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Here's what I'm looking for: Price Willing to Pay: 700.00 Manual Controls: exposure compensation, focus, white balance, shutter speed, aperture Movie Mode/Sound recording: no thanks Focal Length (35mm equivalent): 25mm - 280mm Supports Conversion Lens: yes please Max Resolution: 3264 X 2448 or better? Video Out: yes please USB Support: yes please Computer Supported: Mac Storage Method: doesn't matter Zoom Capability: not sure LCD Display - yes please Anything else I should be aware of/look for/want? Thank you. P.S. My apologies for the subtracted "L" from the word "Still" in the topic title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Greg Gross Posted October 14, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted October 14, 2004 Hello Andy, I shoot with a Canon EOS 300D still digital camera with 6.3 megapixels. I use this camera for my own personal creative photgraphy and do not use it for my professional photography(but make no mistake about it,I could use it for pro- professional work). Its not the camera thats professional its the photographer. Camera's features: Shooting modes-Evaluative(full auto),Program-portrait,land- scape,close-up,sports,night portrait,flash off(flash disabled),Manual(full you adjust everything). I shoot most of the time with flash off of tne camera(in my hand). Camera has video output(you can view images on any monitor). Wireless remote for shooting approx. 5 meters away, self timer. Camera uses #1,2 compact flash cards, In high quality mode I get 152 images. Camera comes with its on battery(canon 511or512) and charger. ASA range is from 100 to 1600 and adjusted automatically or manually. White balance auto or manual,you can expose a white subject for your default and store it(use it as your white balance). It gives plenty of room for creativity. I believe about $889.00 with all discussed above from B&H Photo in New York City. Comes with Canon 18-55mm lens(1:3.5-5.6). I also use a Canon 75-300mm with it(1:4-5.6). Comes with software(windows&mac), camera utilities(canon,import images etc.)usb cable. Adobe elements 2.0 included also. Greg Gross,Professional Photographer Student Cinematographer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy O'Neil Posted October 14, 2004 Author Share Posted October 14, 2004 Thanks, Greg. This helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos M. Icaza Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Andy, I own a Canon 30D. (3megapixels) and I have been extremeley happy with the camera for its ruggedness and still snapping after all the beating that I have exposed to it. I actually own three Canon cameras, two film slr's and the digital and I am in the process of upgrading to the newer digital models. My first camera was a Canon Rebel (film) bought in 1988. Several of my colleages have the new Canon Digital Rebel which is pretty much what Greg describes. Check it out at Digital Rebel Pretty much what am trying to say is that you won't go wrong with Canon. C.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy O'Neil Posted October 15, 2004 Author Share Posted October 15, 2004 Thanks, Carlos. Am curious as to what the perceived quality difference is between 3 megapixels and 8. The less number of megapixels the cheaper, of course, but what is noticeably sacrificed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filip Plesha Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Well for starters the size of your output image. You said you want something like 3000x2000, that is 6 megapixels. But it is all very relative since all of those pixels are "fake", even the green layer does not have 3000x2000 sensors. It's all interpolation. When they say that it has 3000x2000 pixels, this does not mean that much for R, G and B. Its that much all together (RGB), and each pixel is "made up" by figuring out what could the value be based on neighbour sensors. This is the reason Genesis has 12 million pixels, and outputs HD resolution. It gives you a true HD resolution, not interpolated. Each pixel in the HD image has its own measurment of R G and B light. And probably the reason why Genesis does not output 4K image (the qualitty would probably be avarage). What really matters is how does it look to your eyes in the end. You know Imacon digital backs use Kodak 22Mp and 16Mp Bayer CCD sensors and give such clean and sharp images that you would never belive they are interpolated. It looks like pure 4:4:4 RGB data even if it is not. On the other hand sometimes the artefacts in some other systems can be so bad that you can't use the X-Mp resolution, but have to resample it to half of that to get a clean image. But of course the more the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Greg Gross Posted October 15, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted October 15, 2004 Suprisingly the Rebel's color is outstanding. Now keep in mind I'm used to shooting film so I'm skeptical. I use the the adobe 2.0 elements to correct color,contrast,saturation,hue,sharpness. This software is bundled with the the software that comes with the camera. I'm used to shooting color film at the the ASA/ISO I desire and then telling the lab how I want it processed. Red,green,blue each has its own slider in adobe and can be adjusted. I never like to tell another photographer what camera to buy(I think cameras are very personal and after 20 years of using them,I'm still in awe of them!). I will say though that this camera pleases me. I have never been so happy since I've combined photography with cinematography. Just two weeks ago I was away on an Indie film shoot(not a famous film) meals paid,hotel room,small salary. I would not have traded those moments for anytning else,you guys know what I mean, STAND-BY,ROLL AUDIO,ROLL CAMERA,ACTION! Anyway getting back to digital photography it just amazes me what some of these 1.2,1.5 cameras can do. After a days shooting I was swimming in the atlantic ocean, got out of the water,put my teeshirt on ,it was chilly. One of the female actresses came running up to me and asked me to take a picture of her and her mother and father together and she handed me one of those dinky little digital cameras(hell I don't know how to use one!). Well I posed them for separation and tried to avoid a flat look,the sun was my key and fill(early evening). The result was absolutely fantastic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Hall Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Andy; At a $700 price point there is not a lot of "professional" type cameras to chose from. The Canon digital Rebel and the Nikon D70 are about the only interchangeable lens type cameras I could think of that might meet your needs. I shoot on a daliy basis with Nikon D1's and D1H cameras, (I'm the chief photographer at a company that has three weekly newspapers and a monthly magazine.) And though those cameras 'only' have a 2.7 meg sensor they do just fine. Granted I can't make 16x20 prints from my cameras without a little software help, but I can make full frame 8x10's from my dye-sub printer and you would be very hard pressed to tell if it was film or digital. In most cases it is not the number of pixels per sensor (though more is better), it is the phyical size if the sensor that seems to be more important. It is kind of like shooting video with a camera that has 1/4 inch ccd's vs 1/2 or 3/4 inch ccd's. The smaller the pixel pitch the greater the 'noise' generated by the camera. Now all I have to do is save my pennies so I can get Nikon's new D2X camera. I've got too much money tied up in Nikon lens to even think about switching to Canon. Tim Hall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy O'Neil Posted October 16, 2004 Author Share Posted October 16, 2004 Thank you everyone, this is good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Greg Gross Posted October 20, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted October 20, 2004 Tim, I really think that Nikon can get the job done! I would love to get my hands on that D2X, 12 megapixels, right? Of course I'm sure excellent sensor. After all Nikon takes the world's pictures! Greg Gross, Professional Photographer Student Cinematographer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Hall Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Tim,I really think that Nikon can get the job done! I would love to get my hands on that D2X, 12 megapixels, right? Of course I'm sure excellent sensor. After all Nikon takes the world's pictures! Greg Gross, Professional Photographer Student Cinematographer <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think the only problem with the newer high meg sensor cameras (besides the cost) is what those much larger image files will do to your workflow. At the end of a 500-1000 image day on set you still have to process and back up all of those files. One of the more interesting things coming from both Nikon and Canon is WiFi wireless image transfer systems. It will automaticly upload the images that you take and transfer them to a computer while you are shooting. I don't know all of the details involved with the process but it sure sounds like a great idea for a still photographer on set. Tim Hall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos M. Icaza Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Andy, Sorry for the late reply to your question of what is noticable sacrificed between 8 and 12 megapixels. To be honest, the only time when I see a huge difference is when I am either manipulating the image at a very high zoom, more pixels to play with at 12mb than at 8mb and smoother manipulation due to the larger number of pixels, and when I print large size. The bigger the #'s of pixels the better it prints. Other than that the obvious hard drive space :-), less number of picts fit on a 1gig micro drive and longer time to save, some newer camera models allow firewire connection to hard drive to save the pics right to it. C.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Hall Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Andy, Sorry for the late reply to your question of what is noticable sacrificed between 8 and 12 megapixels. To be honest, the only time when I see a huge difference is when I am either manipulating the image at a very high zoom, more pixels to play with at 12mb than at 8mb and smoother manipulation due to the larger number of pixels, and when I print large size. The bigger the #'s of pixels the better it prints. Other than that the obvious hard drive space :-), less number of picts fit on a 1gig micro drive and longer time to save, some newer camera models allow firewire connection to hard drive to save the pics right to it. C.- <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have to aggree with what Carlos said above, I think an 8-meg sensor camera like the Canon EOS-1D mark II, would be about my limit for on set photography. That size is large enough for a double truck (two-page spread) in a slick-stock national magazine like Time, People, etc., yet small enough not to overload your system. Plus it is much cheaper than going with Canon's 16-meg camera, in fact I think you can get two of the 8-meg cameras for the price one 16-meg camera. The one thing I do like about the Nikon D2X camera (I'm a Nikon owner) is its 'high speed crop mode.' Instead of a 5 fps 12-meg camera you get a 6.8-meg 8 fps camera with this mode enabled. Kind of gives you the best of both worlds, but since there is no D2X's on the market yet (Jan 2005) the jury is out on how well it works. I would'nt mind the Nikon D2H (4-meg, 8 fps) but it is Nikon's first attemp at building its own sensor and it seams to produce a lot of noise above 800 iso. Also I stay away from those Microdrives. Being very tiny hard drives, with tiny moving parts, they don't stand up well to any kind of shock, like dropping them on the ground nor do they take the heat very well. I had many photojournalist friends that lost images when their Mircodrives failed. I only use solid-state CF cards. You can even recover images from those CF cards if you dropped them in water, or left them in your pants pocket when you washed your clothes. Of course you won't want to use that card again, but you will be able to get the images off of it. Tim Hall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now