I used my new Canon Digital Rebel XT for over 700 shots before I gave it its first recharge. (The battery indicator was showing less than 50% charge at the time). It doesn't use the same battery as my G5 and G1 but apparently they have improved the battery life significantly. Of course, cold weather and flash use decrease that. Harold
As there has been so much recent mention, I looked around for info on that Canon. The price is double the Fuji originally mentioned! Beyond any hopes I have in the near future! Boxcab E50
Boxcab: Yes. Cost was a major factor for me when I bought my camera. I waited a while because I wanted to get a camera that would allow me to publish pictures. I finally bought a used Nikon 5000 on ebay for 700 US$. It is probably half that now. Mine is five megapixels, but 2-3 will do. The very newest at 10+ megapixels are back in the 1000 US$ range. For me, I would only go digital. [ April 19, 2005, 09:05 PM: Message edited by: sapacif ]
I'm with you Flash .. there's no real need for anything over 5 megapixels. Anything higher uses too much space in the memory card, and takes forever to download (unless one reduces the resolution and size while taking the photo(s) ) But if that's the case, why buy more than 5 mpx ?
FWIW - I talked to the Visual Department here on base, specifically the guy who takes all the pics and uses a $12,000 6-Bazillion megapixel camera. He showed me a poster that he blew up using a 2MP setting on his personal camera - and the quality was fantastic (poster was about 24x36). So if your constraints will keep you 8x10 and under, then I would say 2 MP (+/-) is fine - according to what he told me. I use the Nikon CoolPix5400 - you can see some of my pics *in this post*
I can't see myself ever doing larger than an 8" by 10" print. A poster size would need to be something fabulous and rare. Boxcab E50
Since I have both 5 and 8 megapixel models, I can tell you why I switched. The main reason was to go to a Digital SLR. MY 5 mp Canon G5 is a great point and shoot type camera. With a 4x optical lens, LiIon battery, assorted modes & functions, plus compact size, it's hard to beat. And yes, it'll make a great large size image. However, the Digital XT SLR offers a whole host of possibilites not available on a point and shoot: different lenses, extreme shutter sheed and apeture choices, and a lot of creative & photographic choices you just don't get with a point and shoot. That's why I moved up to a larger mp camera! However, my Canon G1, rated at 3.3 mp, is now in the hands of my kids and still continues to take great photographs that can be made into large color prints! Harold
Another great feature of my Canon cameras is their use of Compact Flash memory cards. If you have USB 2.0 on your computer, you will notice a tremendous increase in download speed by using a card reader to download your pics (my PC actually has multi-readers built in) if the camera only has a USB 1.1 interface. Another great thing about CF: it is one of the cheapest forms of memory. 1.0 gig cards can be had for ~ $70 street (name brand). The best use for a high mp image is for cropping.... with an average roster shot of a locomotive, I can zoom in on small details such as builders plates and they are usually legible. Harold
How about accessories? What have you found, that you couldn't live without? I wonder about things such as I have on my SLR. Filters. A lens hood. And? Boxcab E50
I have not really gotten back into all of that, yet (mo' $ ). I remember that one of my favorite filters was a circular polarizer, and I will pick one up. I do have a UV on my lens just for protection now. As far as hoods, I have none either. Harold
Dear Boxcab, The use of filter in digital photography is still needed in some instances. The first is to protect the front element on your lens. The standard UV filter works well for this. Most PS and compact digital cameras already have a clear lens on the front of the lens for protection. Check with the dealer concerning the camera your are interested in to see if a front filter is needed. A polarizing filter is used to reduce or eliminate reflections off of subject matter and darken the sky at certain angles. It also reduces the amount of light going into the lens by about 2-3 stops. These are great for landscape shots and water front shots. There are specialty filters which can give point source lights a star pattern or cause halos. There are also graduated filters for darkening the sky. The filter starts clear and then gets gradually darker (blue-er?!). These types of filters are used by keeping the subject matter in the clear area, but allowing the darker area to darken and color the sky. There were other types of colored filters, and soft-focus filters and other filters. However, all of these effects can now be done on the computer using imaging software. For my work I still have the UV filter on the lens front, but I use SLR's. PS cameras may not need or have the option to attach filters. I also always carry a polarizing filter and a graduated filter. I also carry a #25 red filter for use with B+W film. Yes, I still shot film. 4x5" film. I use a 1942 Speed Graphic Press Camera to shoot with. For those of you old enough, it's the press camera you saw every press photog carrying, the big, black box that spit out flash bulbs. As far as hoods go, they have one use. They prevent stray light from striking the front element of a telephoto lens. When abient light gets into the lens, it obscures the color, detail, contrast and sharpness of the image being photographed. I can compare it to watching TV in a darkroom (shooting with a hood) compared to watching the same TV in a room full of sunlight (shooting without a hood). The TV in sunlight looks washed out and is hard to see. Hoods really only are useful with telephoto lenses. In the 35mm realm, lenses 100mm and larger benefit from hoods. Shorter lenses generally do not benefit from a hood. Mark [ April 26, 2005, 03:46 PM: Message edited by: cmstpmark ]
