Looking For A Digital Camera


Azure

Trust the recursion...
Joined
May 21, 2003
Messages
3,805
Location
California, USA
I currently own a Sony CCD-TRV67 camcorder, and I usually use it to take pictures, but the thing is, it wasn't ment to take pictures, so I have to do this:
1. Remove camcorder from case, along with AC adapter, and plug into outlet. (Really annoying because the AC adapter cable is usually very tangled)
2. Record video of the object that I want to take a picture of.
3. Turn camera off, remove AC adapter, move camera to PC, plug AC adapter into outlet near computer, plug in video cable.
4. Run InterVideo, push play on camcorder, and take as many snap shots as possible.
5. Check to see how many actually worked (The majority of them have a white bar in the middle and some don't refresh and just take a blurred picture of the first snapshot taken).
6. Keep taking pics and checking them (Usually ~15 mins)

This is just too much for me. And when I actually do get a picture taken properly, it's going to be in crap quality:
Set_Up.jpg

Games.jpg

Gap.jpg


So, I definetly need a digital camera, but the thing is, I don't know much about them. I've only used 1 digital camera before, the Olympus D380, and that was only for the Computer Club (Yeah, that's right. I was in the Computer Club :D ). I don't know much about some of the terms, like "CCD."

I was watching HSN recently and they had this camera up. It seemed real nice, and they kept raving about it being "super ccd," and that that would make it the equivalent of a 6 Megapixel camera. What do you guys think of this camera? Is it decent? The only downside I see in it is that the video mode doesn't feature audio, which I really want.

If that's not a good camera, what should I get? Here's what I'm looking for:
- 3-4 Megapixels
- Capable of shooting video (at least 2 minutes worth) with audio.
- Photography software included (Like the HSN one)
- Decent Optical Zoom (~3-5x)
- Good shutter speed (I don't know much about this, but I heard that it determines how fast you can take pictuers. I'd like it to be able to quickly pick up the camera take a picture right away)
- <$250
 

Attachments

  • Set_Up.jpg
    Set_Up.jpg
    52.3 KB · Views: 148
  • Games.jpg
    Games.jpg
    60.3 KB · Views: 144
  • Gap.jpg
    Gap.jpg
    33.4 KB · Views: 128
  • Set_Up.jpg
    Set_Up.jpg
    52.3 KB · Views: 147
  • Set_Up.jpg
    Set_Up.jpg
    52.3 KB · Views: 144
  • Games.jpg
    Games.jpg
    60.3 KB · Views: 143
  • Games.jpg
    Games.jpg
    60.3 KB · Views: 158
  • Gap.jpg
    Gap.jpg
    33.4 KB · Views: 142
  • Gap.jpg
    Gap.jpg
    33.4 KB · Views: 141
trooper posted on Jul 10 2004 at 06:36 PM said:
The length of video you can record with the camera is only limited by the size of the flash card, Either Compact Flash type 1 or 2 and micro drive or xd flash cards.

Trooper
Oh, I thought some cameras had some kind of limit. How much do you think 2 minutes of video would take up? And are there usually display qualities for shooting video? Or is that just for taking pictures?

EDIT: The M603 is a little out of my price range. I'm looking for something less than $300.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are quality settings for video, especially on the m603.

640x480 30 fps
320x240 30 fps
320x240 15 fps

The camera uses m-jpeg (motion jpeg) for compression so the video is not as small as say... Divx or even mpeg.

A two minute video would have the file size of about 120mb in high quality 640x480 30 fps mode.

or

A two minute video would have the file size of about 30mb in low quality 320x480 15 fps mode.

I know they are very large but the quality is excellent and they be converted to divx etc once transfered to a pc.

Trooper
 
Ah, I see. Thanks for the info, Trooper.

Anybody have any other cameras that you would like to recommend?
 
My sister has a fujifilm finepix A203, which is nice but doesnt really meet your needs. It has no audio, and the film is limited to 20 seconds (You might be able to change it), but she got it for 150 euros, which is REALLY good.

TBH I dont think youll get your specifications in your price range, but im dumb.

EDIT: Does anyone else read the title as "But I'm a pornography n00b"? No? Just my dirty dirty mind then?
 
if your willing to wave goodbye to the optical zoom then you shouldn't have too much trouble.

i recently got a canon ixus i, lovely little black thing, 4mp, 320x240 videos with sound, very pocketable and 1 second start up time and very very quick shutter.

the best thing to do would be to head to a computer/electrical store and just spend a bit of time browsing.

as i said, chuck out the idea of that much optical zoom, ain't gonna happen, just forget about it!
 
After doing some more research, I've narrowed it down to the two, the Canon A75 and the Nikon CoolPix 3700.

A75:
Known to be a great camera for beginners and has had excellent reviews. Good price (~$199-250) But the movie mode isn't all that great: 640x480 15fps for 30sec max, 320x240 15fps 3 mins max.

3700:
Known to be a more high end camera. Haven't read too many reviews about it. Great movie mode: 640x480 30fps unlimited & 320x240 30fps unlimited. But kind of expensive (~$249-349).

Gah! Which one do you guys think I should choose?
 
guess it comes down to cash really.

if video is a sticking point for you, then go with the best video model. don't forget that digi cams have awful compression size wise for videos, i think they all use motion jpeg, a .mov format that only quicktime (or quicktime alternative) can read, bit of a hassle when it comes to editing!

hands on experience is always useful, when your putting down that much cash for something, know that you like it in the flesh!
 
So, I would have to find some way to convert the .mov to a .mpeg, and then compress that through virtual dub?

I don't know if I want to test it out in person. I doubt I would hate it for it's form factor or something else like that. Plus, when I actually do get it, it'll be like a little surprise because I'll finally be able to see it in person (Like with the GP32, when I first took it out of the box, it was really nice. The experience would have been totally different if I had been able to play with it a little in person).
 
Azure posted on Jul 14 2004 at 11:54 PM said:
So, I would have to find some way to convert the .mov to a .mpeg, and then compress that through virtual dub?

I don't know if I want to test it out in person. I doubt I would hate it for it's form factor or something else like that. Plus, when I actually do get it, it'll be like a little surprise because I'll finally be able to see it in person (Like with the GP32, when I first took it out of the box, it was really nice. The experience would have been totally different if I had been able to play with it a little in person).
i'm off school tomorrow so if you like i can do a little research on the video codecs of those two

if they match up with the ones used on either cam i have access to, i'll report back on compression sizes and editing?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, that would be great, spray. Thanks.

EDIT: What's the exact model of your camera? I googled "canon ixus i" and found various cameras.
 
nikon cool pix is a good camera
it has all the things that you want in it

edit: wow i feel really specially now with my 1000 posts
 
But the thing is, I HATE compact cameras. They look like shit. I know, I know, it's not about their looks but how well they perform, but there's a psychological aspect involved. The camera would just seem weak and cheap because of it's design. If the 3700 was a normal digital camera size then I wouldn't have any problems, but NOOO, it had to be compact <_<
 
i've got the canon ixus i, as featured here:

Canon Ixus I

right, i spent a while surfing and reading a few reviews, i'm certain that the canon uses motion-jpeg, an avi codec with a .mov extension.

i'm 99% sure the nikon does as well. the best i got was it being called an avi codec that was opened with quicktime. my father has a nikon which uses m-jpeg, most cameras seem to, i see no reason why this should be any different!

size wise, i took a 30sec clip on my canon @ 320x240, 15 fps. The output file was ~6mb, so i can comfortably say you should be looking at 10-12mb per minute.

obviously this would roughly double for 640x480 but would be unaffected by fps.

i found it very easy (which was a surprise to me) to access the video through vdub, and being a gp-er i'm sure you'll have no troubles utilising that! i'd also recommend downloading quicktime alternative to view the original .mov files, far less bloat and annoyance than quicktime!!!

hope this helps!
 
Canon A75 is very good choice. Canon's optics is one of the best and A75 is very good for noobs (great quality in full auto mode) and after some practice it allow you to experiment with manual setting. Great for night shooting and has 3x optical zoom. Really great. And i dont recommend because i own Canon A80 :) but because it is really great camera. I wil try later post some night shoots (the difference beetwen A75 and A80 is mainly number of mpix - A75 has 3.2 where A80 has 4.0 but I mainly use 3.2 settings so ti will be near the same )
 
Olympus camedia series are very nice. You can also pick up an Olympus E-10 quite cheaply now...

frontview.jpg


I've got on eof these and they are bloody fantastic. Great optics, manual and automatic, semi-pro SLR camera.

Beautiful :)
 

Attachments

  • frontview.jpg
    frontview.jpg
    95 KB · Views: 125
  • frontview.jpg
    frontview.jpg
    95 KB · Views: 136
  • frontview.jpg
    frontview.jpg
    95 KB · Views: 131
I would go with the Nikon you mentioned above. Nikon make some really serious cameras. I myself have one of these...

25214_360.jpg


... though it falls slightly outside your budget :)

Other than that, I think you should consider anything in the Canon range of cameras. They make really good CCDs so the quality from them is always good.

Don't fall for marketing gimmiks such as "Super CCD", just pop over to http://www.dpreview.com and make sure the reviews are favourable.
 
Back
Top