Stil Digital Camera

Andy O'Neil · 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.

Greg Gross · 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

Andy O'Neil · October 14, 2004

Thanks, Greg. This helps.

Carlos M. Icaza · 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.-

Andy O'Neil · 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?

Filip Plesha · 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.

Greg Gross · 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!

Tim Hall · 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

Andy O'Neil · October 16, 2004

Thank you everyone, this is good stuff.

Greg Gross · 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

Tim Hall · 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

Carlos M. Icaza · 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.-

Tim Hall · 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