|
Post by tod2 on Jul 15, 2012 7:55:50 GMT
Finding various window fixtures for a camera seriously lacking in various ways - eg:awkward to use quickly and particularly unsteady even when tightened, also too cumbersome, my husband invented his own extremely simple, quick and easy to use device. The old and unused purchase: The new homemade version: What you need: 50X50 angle aluminium ( from scrap yard dealer) Cut to 2X15cm lengths. Method: Weld two sections together with a gap in between ( some spot welds in about three places.) Cut a strip of high density foam to plug down between the gap so that it will cushion the window glass against the weld. Cover in ordinary felt - adjust gap with off-cuts of carpeting before glueing felt over. Glue a square of high density foam (very rigid), cut to size, on the top. That's it! Note: we drive a right hand vehicle, but the photographer sits in the passenger seat on the left. Sitting behind the steering wheel does not allow enough maneuverability when you need to swing round and take a shot at the-rear of the vehicle. Obviously for Left hand vehicles, the opposite will apply. This device was made to fit our car window. It does not fit our other vehicle's window. Maybe it could be improved by putting a slightly spongy rubber in between the two gaps which slide onto the window? I don't know. When it sits in place it is very firm but the felt covering allows it to be slid on and off very easily. WARNING: Don't let the driver control the window mechanism....
|
|
|
Post by nycgirl on Jul 17, 2012 3:41:16 GMT
Excellent! I'm going to assign a window fixture-making project to my husband.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Jul 17, 2012 23:31:44 GMT
A friend of mine is in the US right now & is willing to bring back a camera for me.
My Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH20 works fine & seems to be quite well made, but I want something better. I feel as though I always have to do something to fix my pictures before they're presentable, plus the camera is a little weird about red tones. The main thing I note is a certain "depth of field" lacking, for want of a better way to put it.
If I'm to get another point&shoot, I want better than I have now. But if I upgrade to something much nicer, I don't want something so big &/or heavy that I wind up using the present camera just because it's so much easier to carry around.
Advice, please!
|
|
|
Post by Don Cuevas on Jul 18, 2012 19:53:01 GMT
Bixa, you asked about my camera. It's a Canon PowerShot A710 IS (Image Stabilization). I bought it in 2007, after my old Fuji FinePix fell apart. My tech savvy brother-in-law helped me choose it, and set it up. Here's a review, on Dpreview.com: www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona710isNowadays, I usually take photos on the AUTO setting. I'm pretty ignorant of the workings, so I leave the settings alone for the most part. I have learned that when taking pictures of food, I'm usually better off without flash. I also had to learn to be sure to press the Macro button when shooting within 3 feet or closer. There are other food picture taking tips I could write. But not just right now. My typical processing is to run the pictures through Picasa.app My older computer also has PhotoShop Elements 8 (I think??) for Mac, but it's a real P.O.S. and I hate it. Picasa gets 85% of the job done, and relatively easily.
|
|
|
Post by Don Cuevas on Jul 18, 2012 20:06:56 GMT
After skimming that Dpreview review, I started playing with the settings on my camera. It was a deep and labyrinthine voyage into a strange and little known world, but fortunately, owing to many many years of cave exploration, I was able to find a way out of the maze.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Jul 18, 2012 20:25:17 GMT
Thank you SO MUCH! That's exactly the kind of information I need. I've been looking at reviews, & the Canon PowerShot (in different incarnations) comes up again & again.
I do love the well-made feel of the Panasonic, but feel it lacks in sharpness. Of course that could be my fault, but most of the reviews rate it poorly in that area.
Anyone else have a recommendation or warning?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2012 20:36:18 GMT
I too, have a Canon. Power Shot SX210 and love love it. It has what seem to be unlimited features on it. I am still learning it.
|
|
|
Post by fumobici on Jul 18, 2012 23:52:59 GMT
I love my tiny little Canon SD-1000 Elph. It was dirt cheap too. I think it takes amazing photos. Whatever the current equivalent is is probably better and likely cheaper as well. I wish it had a manual focusing lens but that's about all I have for complaints.
I don't think it's necessary for most of us to spend much to get a far more than adequate digital point and shoot camera.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2012 1:27:27 GMT
I agree, The "new" camera my friend gave me is a Nikon CoolPix S3, and, although I just got this a few days ago I am love loving it. It's tiny and far superior to the previous pocket camera I had which, albeit, was my first pocket anything digital camera and I probably didn't do it justice. But, I am super impressed with this Nikon cutie.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Jul 19, 2012 6:32:45 GMT
This is IMMENSELY helpful and so much easier to absorb than internet reviews. Thanks & keep it coming, please.
|
|
|
Post by bjd on Jul 19, 2012 9:26:32 GMT
I just bought a new camera this week -- had to order and go pick it up tomorrow. I spent ages looking at reviews, then spent an hour at a real camera store taking with the salesguy. He mostly repairs cameras, so could give advice about quality.
I have a bridge camera and wanted another one. My Sony has been giving me problems (not turning on, saying "system error", and giving pictures that are just not sharp). The salesman told me that Sony had big problems with its CCDs about 3 years ago (the age of my camera) that affected lots of cameras since they supply cards for various brands.
Anyway, after browsing various internet reviews and talking with the guy, I bought what I had more or less decided to buy before I went into the store: a Panasonic Lumix FZ150. I mostly want a decent zoom (this camera does not have the biggest in this category) and something light because I usually use the camera when I go on holiday. That precludes a reflex, which is just too heavy to cart around and stick in my bag.
|
|
|
Post by Don Cuevas on Jul 19, 2012 9:52:10 GMT
When I was considering buying a camera in 2007, I tried out a smaller camera as well. I decided for the somewhat larger Canon because I like the increased stability due toi its mass. It also had an optical viewfinder and zoom, while the smaller did not.
Now I have seen touchscreen cameras. I was intrigued but dubious that I'd want one. Too much fiddlefaddle to fuss with. I could be wrong. (I was wrong about that "iPad" thing.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2012 10:26:07 GMT
Yes, that's what I really like about the Canon PowerShot I have too Don C. The zoom on it is incredible and is the first thing people who look at it comment on. It's also a great camera for using on a tripod. It's not real heavy but it's a wee bulky for say bike rides and going out with if there's a threat of rain unless one is super prepared. It also takes 4 or 5 AA batteries, which can add weight especially if you are carrying spares. Having the luxury of being able to choose which camera to take with me makes all the difference. The Nikon compact is palm sized and I barely know I am carrying it. If there's any way you can swing getting both a pocket size and a larger model Bixa, go for it. Consider what situations you photograph in the most, what added features you really want, and weigh out the practicality of both given your circumstances. Both have enormous advantages and drawbacks depending on what you want most. Versatility versus convenience, practicleness, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2012 12:04:25 GMT
My last upgrade was from a Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ7 to a TZ25. The zoom can go up to 32x.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Jul 19, 2012 17:36:52 GMT
Well, I already have the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH20, which is well-sized for a take-along camera. It also comes out well in reviews. However, I've found this mysterious "drift" to it, wherein settings have to be redone. I went online & found quite a few other people complaining of the same thing. Of course the problem is always discovered after taking a bunch of pictures meant for a thread here.
Some still fairly basic cameras that have very decent wide angle abilities. That's very tempting.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2012 17:52:09 GMT
My DMZ-TZ7 probably had the same problem. I received a message from the vendor way back when about a software fix that needed to be done -- download from the Panasonic site and then load it into the camera to fix the color problem. I never did it because it sounded scary and I'm not good with cables -- and the Photobucket automatic fix button always solved the problem on photos displayed here.
As for which model is which, the Japanese/Korean camera companies use different code names depending on the continent due to all of the tiny little differences due to metric/non metric and other such things. For example, the Elph that Fumo likes is called an Ixus in Europe.
In terms of the real world, it must be said that some of my older photos displayed on this site are better than the ones that are simply stored on my computer due to my ignorance.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Jul 19, 2012 23:23:41 GMT
I'm just about cross-eyed from reading reviews online at the moment. It's useful, though, because I'm forced to look up terms, so will come out of this a teensy bit more knowledgeable.
It's also caused me to think that maybe I was selling my p&s short -- that I needed to attend more to the settings in order to get better pictures. So I did. But I didn't get better pictures, just differently bad.
The different names aren't really an issue, since the serious reviews always note the alternate names.
Re: reviews ~~ new generations of cameras seem to be released towards the end of a year, probably for the Christmas market. They get reviewed pretty quickly, which means it's hard to find assessment of the camera after a half year of use, as opposed to when it was all shiny right out of the box. Also, they're written by people with a skill level light years above what I'll ever attain. However, I've found that the buyer reviews on Amazon are useful in this regard, if you make sure to look at all responding comments & all the reviews, not just the couple highlighted by Amazon. When you're starting to zero in on a choice, this regular user input can be quite helpful.
|
|
|
Post by Don Cuevas on Jul 20, 2012 7:12:24 GMT
Reply to Casimira: " Yes, that's what I really like about the Canon PowerShot I have too Don C. The zoom on it is incredible and is the first thing people who look at it comment on. It's also a great camera for using on a tripod. It's not real heavy but it's a wee bulky for say bike rides and going out with if there's a threat of rain unless one is super prepared. It also takes 4 or 5 AA batteries, which can add weight especially if you are carrying spares." My Canon takes only 2 AA batteries. It's easy to carry spares. With Lithium-Ion cells, I don't have to carry a charger. Since I bought a 2 GB SD card, soon after acquiring the camera, I never have to worry about filling the card and having to swap it out for a fresh, blank one. Not so the case 10 years ago, when during our memorable Trip To Spain. picasaweb.google.com/doncuevas/Spain2002, I carried 2, 256 KB cards, a 64 KB, and a 32, IIRC. Not only was I swapping out cards, but also deleting individual photos from the camera. That's something I never have to do with a 2 GB card. (Note that I wasn't carrying a laptop at the time.) You can also see that the photos of Spain, taken on my old Fuji FinePix, and with my skill level less finely honed, makes for a generally inferior photo than if taken with the Canon PowerShot A710.
|
|
|
Post by htmb on Jul 21, 2012 15:15:46 GMT
Though some of my photos are taken with my cell phone (an older model blackberry storm), when I am prepared to take a lot of photos I use my four year old Sony Cyber-shot, DSC-T70. I was looking for something very small and lightweight four years ago and had no time to look for a camera before leaving on a trip. One of my techie daughters volunteered and she picked out this pocket sized model with the view panel on the back. It has no view finder and has a very limited zoom, if you can even call it that. The zoom part is what I miss most. The camera is a great size at smaller than my cell phone; it's about the size of a pack of cigarettes and is 8.1 mega pixels. I'm sure the technology has improved tremendously on these little cameras since I bought mine.
Since I've been traveling a lot lately and have not been using a regular computer to enhance photos I have not modified any of my posts with a photoshop-type program with the exception of the very basics that come with my iPad (which I have TOTALLY fallen in love with). So, I guess for the size, this little camera does a pretty good job, but if you want to do any type of photography using a zoom this is just worthless. Many of my photos posted on APIAS were enhanced with the iPad "auto enhance" feature, which just brightens up photos a little bit, and a few were also edited using the crop feature.
I am not much of a photographer and don't have a lot of patience when taking photos, so another good thing about this little camera is I can snap off a quick shot and will rarely ever get a blurred photo (it is billed as a "Super SteadyShot). I was actually happy to see this thread since I've been thinking that maybe I need to look for something light and portable that also has a zoom lens so I can get closer shots.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2012 16:16:03 GMT
During my recent trip to bright and sunny Provence, I once again had cause to regret the disappearance of viewfinders from all of the new small models. Quite a few times, I had to take a photo without being able to see anything on the screen due to the brightness all around me.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Jul 24, 2012 21:45:35 GMT
Thanks for all the input. It's really helping me, & I'm sure others will benefit from it too.
Htmb, I think you know I'm a fan of your pictures, & the image quality of your Sony is super, especially since you say you took most of them quickly. Patience or no, sometimes the only way to get THE picture is to snap quickly.
That's one think I've been looking at very hard -- the so-call travel zooms. They're so much smaller than the bridge cameras, which is what Bjd has, but both are most tempting. I keep being drawn back to that Panasonic Lumix FZ150. It gets great reviews, plus I like the way my little Panasonic p&s is built.
I find what Casimira & DonC say about the Canons really interesting, in terms of how satisfied they are & the camera's versatility.
Kerouac, you & I bought Panasonic p&ss at the same time. I remember that I was so annoyed that I had to pay the same for the lesser model here, that you paid for the nicer model with the Zeiss lens at the same time. Question: have you upgraded once or twice form that one? It seems you stayed happy w/Panasonic.
My feeling is that I need to jump at least two grades from what I have now.
The basics for me: image quality viewfinder good zoom good video non-fiddly controls small enough that I'd use it as much as I use my present dinky camera. excellent across the board reviews on the camera
|
|
|
Post by htmb on Jul 24, 2012 23:27:58 GMT
Bixa, you will have to let us know which camera you decide to purchase and what you think of its performance after the fact. Kerouac, I'm curious about your camera and wonder if you need to do anything to enhance your posted photos. They always look so clear, plus the color and contrast seem very bright.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 23:34:45 GMT
I upgraded just once, Bixa.
Most of my pictures are untouched. I do often run them through the Photobucket 'auto-correct' function, but more often than not, I decline the Photobucket proposal, which tends to remove most blue skies and give ugly white ones instead.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Jul 25, 2012 1:18:55 GMT
Yeah, most of those auto-correct functions tend toward the violent end of the spectrum. Htmb, I promise to bore one & all with details on the new camera. However, after re-reading my last post, I'm thinking I need to invest in a typing course instead.
|
|
|
Post by mossie on Jul 25, 2012 7:15:34 GMT
I am with Kerouac, I upgraded from a Panasonic TZ5 to a TZ25 about two months ago. I very rarely alter my pics after spoiling some many years ago, when I had a Kodak DC4800. Since then I have had a Canon Powershot 90 before the two Panasonics. 99% of my pics are taken on the IA settings which chooses the right settings by magic. Hooray for silicon chips! ;D
|
|
|
Post by bjd on Jul 25, 2012 9:11:31 GMT
Bixa -- since you seem to have a list of what is important to you, just decide from that. This was the advice the guy in the photo store gave me. He said there was no point in worrying about various extras if you don't plan to use them, and to choose a camera according to the use you want to make of it. For example, you take lots of scenery or monuments, get a good wide-angle lens; if you want to do birdwatching, get a big zoom; if you just like to take pictures while you are wandering around, get something light and easy.
He also told me that camera quality is pretty much equal these days. And going for huge numbers of pixels is useful only if you plan to enlarge small parts of a photograph.
I admit that once I ordered the Panasonic Lumix, on the way home in the subway I looked at the catalogue he gave me and almost phoned to change to the Fuji Finepix XS1, which has a mechanical zoom lens (hence doesn't use up battery power and is more accurate), but finally decided that an extra 200€ was too much. It has a great viewfinder though -- he let me try one that had arrived along with mine 2 days later.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2012 10:01:26 GMT
Good point about the pixels BJD. A dear friend of mine who is a camera, all things tech kind of guru to me told me that as well. Too much emphasis on the number of pixels these days. Unless you're shooting for prints. Kind of like the maxim, "Bigger isn't always better".
|
|
|
Post by bjd on Jul 25, 2012 11:20:34 GMT
Indeed, Casi. The camera I just bought actually downsized from 14 to 12 Mp in the newer model.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2012 11:51:24 GMT
I often adjust my camera to use fewer pixels so that uploads and downloads won't take forever. (Of course all of that is relative with high speed internet -- I remember the old days when you would sometimes wait half an hour for a picture to display.)
|
|
|
Post by htmb on Jul 25, 2012 13:29:50 GMT
So, Kerouac and Mossie, is there anything you DON'T like about your TZ25?
|
|