I'm ready to buy a digital camera but need your help!!!
 

Hello digital experts:<BR>I know there are tons of post already about the subject but I would like to start from square one.<BR>I made a decision to buy my photography freak husband a digital camera for his birthday. On our last trip to Europe last December he took a total of 65 rolls (he brought two cameras, Nikon and Canon)one of them malfunctioned due to overused; the cost to buy the films and to develop cost us arm and leg and yes we are nuts not to think about going digital.<BR>Please help me! If I walk in to a Best Buy store other than the camera what other gadgets do I need? I don't want to depend on the sales clerk to show me a lot of things that I don't have a clue on. What kind of battery, memory card that is ideal for my husband who takes loads of pictures? He loves photography and we have a new printer that I believe is capable of printing pictures. This would be a surprise gift that I don't to give him hint.<BR>I DO APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT. THANK YOU.

Some advice, but not everything on the subject:<BR>1) use film for the &quot;best&quot; pictures. Detail is better, it might last &gt;100 years, you can see your work without a computer.<BR>2) Visit www.cnet.com for reviews<BR>3) A real zoom is better than a digital zoom. A digital zoom is fake-all it does is magnify a bigger and blurrier image. A real zoom uses a zoom lens.<BR>4) 2 MP is good. 1MP is too primitive. <BR>5) I think there are 3 formats, Compact Flash (most common), Smart Media (quite common), and Sony (only Sony uses it). If one format is to die, it's Sony.<BR>6) Digital cameras encourage taking too many pictures then erasing the one's you don't like. That's ok to me. I have 2 small cameras, one of them digital. On a trip, I take 10 digital for each film picture. I end up erasing about 50-75% of the digital pics.

I was going to suggest buying a 64MB memory card(which is what I use) but if your hubbie took 65 rolls of film on your last vacation, then I advise getting the biggest memory card you can find! A 128 MB card should enable you to store around 200 good quality photos (if you downgrade the quality you can store a lot more), although this will depend on the type of camera you choose. <BR><BR>The other thing to remember is digital cameras just eat batteries, so make sure you buy a model that comes with its own battery charger (most do).

Do you think that your husband would like a digital camera? Sounds to me like he really enjoys using 35mm cameras. Or,do you just want him to go digital to save money? Don't get me wrong, digital is great, but only if that's what you want. There are a lot of advantages to staying with 35mm as well. Better check out his preferences first.

I recently bought a Nikon. I think the D100 SLR are to big for me, and ended up with the compact Nikon 5700 which has an electronic viewfinder which is a big plus (what you see is what you get). Not many Digital cameras are SLR, and the viewfinder on most cameras is somewhat incorrect. An electronic viewfinder is the closest you can get a fully SLR. I am very pleased with the camera. If he has a Nikon, some of his lenses may be used on the digital as well.<BR><BR>I bought a 512 MB Compact Flash memory card 12xspeed from Lexar, the bigger the better. The speed is how fast the picture is saved, and the MB is how many pictures you could save without having to download and erase.<BR><BR>Canon does also have good cameras. That being said. And depending on how much you are willing to pay the Canon G3 is a good camera.<BR>

The battery mostly comes with the camera and there is usually a memory card that follows. It is often so small that you have to buy a bigger one but it is a start.

I have a canon g2 (the g3 is the current model) and it has all the bells and whistles a serious amateur photographer could want. <BR><BR>Most cameras come with some sort of memory card, but not a very big one. You can buy bigger memory cards, and even small hard drives that will fit in the memory card slot, but you have to check compatibility. I ended up with a 128 meg card (about $50), which will not hold all the pictures I will take in a trip, so I got an mp3 player (archos multimedia jukebox, just over $300) which has a 20 gig hard drive, and can hold music, pictures, and even some movies. I put all my favorite music on it to entertain me on the flight over, and I still have over 15 gig of space left for pictures. My plan is to carry the camera during the day, and download the pictures into the mp3 player each night. Other people report they just take the camera to the appropriate shop and have them burn the pictures onto a cd, but I would rather spend my time taking in the sights than looking for the appropriate shops.

Here are a few suggestions to expose you to more info:<BR><BR>- visit the Usenet newsgroup rec.photo.digital (go to http://groups.google.com and search for it).<BR><BR>- visit the site http://www.dpreview.com - great info even if most of it is high-end.<BR><BR>Andrew

I do love my digital camera and I've taken great pictures with it. I'm no expert but I've had great results. I have an Olympus D490.<BR><BR>Just a tip, if you upload your digital photos on ofoto.com you can get prints of the ones you like in different sizes very cheaply. It's better than printing out a whole role of film and liking half of the pictures.<BR>

Besides the camera you will need to get a digital wallet, it is a portable hard drive,you can download you pictures from your camera card. They now have over 10G of memory, room for thousands of pictures.<BR>For more information see dpreview.com.

I went digital a little over a year ago. I bought a digital SLR (Canon D30) that uses the same lenses as my 35mm Canon - warning, this is an expensive proposition! I still use my 35mm for some things, because the D30 still have some limitations.<BR><BR>For most people, a consumer digital camera costing $300-$500 will do just fine. You want something that is at least 3 Megapixels, so that you can get great prints up to 8x10 or even larger. At the standard 4x6 size any camera in that price range should give you excellent prints.<BR><BR>I'd get a large memory card that can hold many pictures - or a couple of smaller ones so you can split up the load. Perhaps two 128MB cards or two 256 cards if you can afford them. Remember, when you go on vacation, you'll want a lot of photo storage.<BR><BR>You'll also want to get computer-savy with photos if you aren't already. You can start doing this *without* a digital camera. Get your next roll of film scanned onto CD as well as getting prints (most consumer prints today are made digitally anyway, by scanning your negatives and printing digitally). Then import them into your computer and play with them. Is your computer fast enough to handle them? Do you have the right software? If you have a CD burner, try burning two or three photos you got scanned to a CD and try getting prints made (see below) as an experiment.<BR><BR>It is possible to get prints without owning a printer. There are many online photo stores now where you can upload your photo files to a website and have prints sent to you. Both Wal-Mart and Costco offer these services on their website. However, at some Wal-Mart and Costco stores you can get digital prints at their one-hour service (I am *not* talking about those little print kiosks where you get a print right there for 49 cents a pop).<BR><BR>My Wal-Mart will take a CD or memory card with my digital photos and give me prints in about an hour (29 cents each). My local Costco has an upload kiosk where I can upload my photos into their system, chooing which ones to print, and I can get the prints back in 24 hours (19 cents each). The Wal-Mart method is expensive if you are doing lots of pictures, but with digital you find you don't *want* every picture printed! If you don't mind two trips to Costco, 19 cents a print is a great price.<BR><BR>Both the Wal-Mart and Costco retail services use the same printers that they use for their one-hour film prints I believe.<BR><BR>Andrew<BR>

Go to www.steves-digicams.com, they review all digital camera's. I'm in the market for a digital camera and have decided on the Minolta Dimage 7i or the Nikon coolpix 5700, both are 5 megapixel and have 7x (Minolta) &amp; 8x (Nikon) optical zoom lens. They are expensive but in my opionion are two of the best for the price.

Digital is definitly better! I was a hard core 35mm user who switched about 2 years ago and am very glad I did. I have an Olympus 2100UZ which is 2mega pixels and I can print 8x10 with no problem. I did just get a Nikon 5700 which is 5mp and can print much larger. The beauty of digital, especially for someone who likes to take a lot of shots, is that once you get home you can choose which ones to print. Saves lots of money over printing them all which you have to do with film (unless you have your own darkroom). Plus I actually like showing them on the computer which I didn't think I would. I recently made a CD of my last trip (several hundred shots) to send to some relatives out of state. They had asked for it but I figured who would want to look at that many pics of someone else's trip - well they loved it and are showing them to friends, etc. And all for the $1 it cost to burn the CD. Plus, if you or your husband want, you can get into Adobe photoshop and do some amazing things with improving your shots.<BR><BR>The above mentioneed sites have tons of information, reviews, even forums to ask questions on (my next favorite after Fodors is to go to dpreview's forums). Also megapixel.com is a good site. I would seriously consider buying on line also as you can save quite a bit over going to best buy, etc. and the sales people in those stores are generally quite ignorant anyway. I will say though, that circuit city has a liberal return policy so if you are not sure what your husband wants that may be the way to go. Most other stores, as well as most internet sites have a 10-20% fee for returns. Buying on line requires some research to find reputable sites but the photo sites listed above will also help with that.

Eric, I agree with you. The Minolta DiMage 7i is probably more easy to use than the Nikon 5700, turning wheels instead of pressing buttons. It is a bit ugly looking however.

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR WONDERFUL INFORMATIVE REPLIES!!!<BR>Yes, my husband would like to embrace the digital camera for this century. He did itemize what he had spent on rolls of film, batteries and the development. <BR>When he went to pickup the developed films the lady at the store was about to faint after ringing all the 65 rolls!<BR><BR>It's nice to hear from you experts on this board! I really do appreciate it.

Nikon D1 hands down. Nikon is the superior brand in my opinion for 35 mm photography even if I prefer regular 35mm SLR (slides) as opposed to Digital. Check out www.nikonusa.com and bhphoto.com.<BR><BR>

Jill<BR><BR>I never thought about comparing the two camera's but your right, the Minolta is a bit ugly compared to the Nikon, pretty funny.<BR><BR>See ya later

A couple of thoughts from another convert from film (30+ years, own darkroom, $000s in gear, etc...)<BR><BR>3 megapixels is the minimum for decent prints 8 x 10 or larger, 4 or 5mp may sound like overkill but allows selective enlargement later.<BR><BR>Optical zoom is crucial, which makes the lens quality equally crucial. You can digitally &quot;zoom&quot; on your computer to your heart's content later.<BR><BR>Two 128mb cards may well be cheaper than one 256mb - and as someone said earlier, the speed at which the image is saved is very important. Digital cameras don't permit the same snaps per minute as film, so if you're taking pix of &quot;action scenes&quot; film is better. <BR><BR>If you use the higher resolution settings, a 3mp camera full image will cost you around 900K in memory - do the math. <BR><BR>Toss as you go. There's no reason to use up memory card storage on images you know you won't print at some point.<BR><BR>GET A CAMERA WITH A RECHARGABLE BATTERY, then buy a spare. Make sure the recharger is compatible with 220/240v European current. Cameras without rechargable batteries go through them like crazy, and they're really expensive, and often scarce, too.<BR><BR>Many many places offer printing services off digital cards, and having the prints while you travel is fun. Make sure you have the pix burned to a CD before the photo shop erases the card.<BR><BR>Enjoy!

I personally don't think this sounds like a great surprise gift. If your husband is truly a &quot;photography freak&quot;, will he be satisfied with a camera that might not meet his requirements?<BR><BR>To get the kind of control, image quality and versatility he's probably accustomed to, you'll need to go with a top-line &quot;prosumer&quot; camera like the Minolta Dimage 7i/7Hi, Nikon CP5700, Canon G3 or Sony 717. These range from $800-$1200US. While each of these is a fabulous camera and produces excellent images, they each have specific advantages that make it difficult to decide which would be best for someone else's use. Even your husband probably could not decide which of these he prefers without extensively studying the specifications and perhaps even trying each one out for himself. <BR><BR>You could buy a less-expensive model, but most &quot;consumer&quot; level cameras don't offer enough control for a true &quot;photography freak&quot;.

If you aren't already overwhelmed with information, I'll add my 2 cents:<BR><BR>1) Digital cameras strike me as a bit more fragile than a rugged 35mm. Any one else's thoughts on this are appreciated, but if your husband has already worn out a camera this may be a consideration.<BR><BR>2) If your husband is a real shutterbug, he may have preferences about using certain lenses, etc. He won't have quite as much flexibility with a typical digital camera, unless you get the profession version like the post-er above. That can be expensive.<BR><BR>2) There is a compromise between digital and 35 mm. Last time I came back from Europe I asked that all my 35 mm pictures be deliverd on CD Rom. Kodak and other photo developers do this service. I did NOT get the 4x6 prints that most people order, and that saved a lot of $$$. I got only development PLUS the CD Rom. You can then view all of your pictures on a small sheet that comes with the CD ROM, plus you can do a fuller review on your computer. I then did custom prints (up to 8x10) on my computer using Adobe Photoshop to clean up and fine tune the prints. I used printer paper made for photographs, this paper is not cheap but I only printed about 50 prints total out of the 15 rolls that I shot. I have a pretty good color printer (but not the best). <BR><BR>I found this to be an unbeatable combination, no one who has seen the prints can believe how crisp, lifelike and perfect they are. Also, I don't like the digital format--to me the colors/details aren't as good as 35 mm. So this gave me the best of both worlds.<BR><BR>Anyway, more food for thought. Have a great trip next time!

Well, as further clarification, I actually got the CD ROMs done on my last day in Europe, rather than lugging my rolls of film back through airport x-rays (developed film is a lot more stable than un-developed film). Also, fair warning Adobe Photoshop is an expensive software program, but perhaps not as much as developing 68 rolls? I don't know but I'm sending you cyber-smelling salts to revive you after that shopping trip! :) Have fun and take care...

I think there's nothing wrong with taking the digital plunge gradually. If you are not sure which kind of camera to get, get a cheaper one for $200-ish (even a 2MP camera) and play with it, maybe even take both your 35mm and the digital on your next trip. My friend just bought an HP 2MP camera (a closeout) at Office Depot for about $99 - sounds like a great starter camera...<BR><BR>If you are willing to do the research, you can spend a little more money and get a nicer camera now. But there are some things you just can't learn through research alone - nothing like experience to learn about digital photography.<BR><BR>Andrew<BR>

To Amy: I don't think digital cameras are necessarily more fragile than film cameras (except digital cameras have fewer moving parts; my digital D30 even has a mechanical shutter, which you won't find on the cheaper digitals). On rec.photo.digital you rarely hear about cameras dying, so they can't be that fragile. 35mm cameras break also.<BR><BR>I'm not sure why you think the &quot;digital format&quot; lacks the &quot;colors/details&quot; of 35mm. For one thing, all digital cameras are different so there is no one &quot;format&quot; - each brand produces different color responses, just as film from Kodak and Fuji produces different colors. Also, most 35mm film prints today are made on digital printers; negatives are scanned into digital 1's and 0's before printing. Why is that necessarily better than the conversion of the image into digital 1's and 0's by a camera? You really can't make a blanket statement - depends on the camera technology and the scanner technology. Digital cameras improve every year - don't sell their quality short.<BR><BR>If you do get your 35mm film scanned, make sure you get scans in high resolution (I get 6MP equivalent scans of my 35mm stuff), unless you don't want to make enlagements past 4x6. Getting CD scans of 35mm instead of prints probably won't save you any money in the long run, but it does give you some flexibility.<BR><BR>If you print at home, be aware that the longevity of the pictures you print depends on the paper and the ink you use. I wouldn't trust prints off of a home printer to last for decades regardless. It's not that much more expensive to get quality digital prints from a lab.<BR><BR>Photoshop: most people don't need the full version. Photoshop Elements is much cheaper. You can also get Paint Shop Pro, a fine program that does most of what most people here would need in Photoshop, for around $100. There are even some free graphics programs out there (GIMP for one).<BR><BR>Andrew<BR>

Well, I take both digital and film, but I'm deranged. The speed at which the camera takes photos is very important if you take any type of action shot. A medium priced digital will take about a second to &quot;snap&quot; the picture, which is an eternity if there is action going on.<BR><BR>As far as software for digital editing, my experience so far gives a firm nod to Paint Shop Pro over Adobe Photo Elements. I'm not a pro at this yet, but I have ended up with both and I tend to use Paint Shop. Yes, about $100. It seems quite a bit more user friendly and can do anything a serious amateur might ask it to do.<BR><BR>Bill

65 rolls of film? That camera must have been glued to his hand for the duration of your trip!

Just bought my first digital took it to Italy last November and loved it . It has only 2mp and is fine for up to 5 by 7.So ya I want 5mp for the next trip.<BR>The camera does have 3X digital zoom and I think that feature is critical so th $99 HP is probably a waste of money. for $50 to $100 more you will get something better. I took 2- 128mg cards and that was great. I alternated from the best quality to next down and took more than a 1000 pictures with room to spare.Batteries--------- I prefered the disposable and used only $10 worth in 1000 pictures.I did not want to mess with charging in europe, adapters etc. But here is the deal on battery use. You use up the batteries when you review the pictures. If you don't have the LCD screen on all the the time and aren't always checking after every picture you won't go through batteries. The actually taking the pictures doesn't use battery power hardly at all. Take all the extra shots you want and review the shots at night as quickly as possible.I did ofcourse make sure certain shots were ok but kept to a minumum. Also downloading eats up batteries.<BR>It all seems really worth when I don't have to go through 100's of pictures that suck after I paid for developing.<BR>One more thing is I found low light like museums etc. and when flash is not allowed are better than a 35mm in the same price range.<BR>

Melissa: I took almost 1300 digital pictures over two weeks in France and the Netherlands last September. That's over 50 rolls of 24. However, many of these were not &quot;keepers&quot; - I just didn't take the time to remove them til after I got home. After my first pass at picking the good ones I was down to 400 (closer to what I would have taken had I shot film). Even then only I printed only about 100 of the those.<BR><BR>Steve: I don't know what kind of HP camera my friend got (haven't seen it yet); it was a closeout so it may indeed have optical zoom. I'll have to check it out.<BR><BR>If you are worried about running down your camera batteries when downloading, get a card reader (about $20). This way, instead of using your camera to download, you unplug your memory card (&quot;digital film&quot;) from the camera and plug it into the card reader, which is plugged into the computer's USB port. Not only does this save batteries and the hassle of having to hook up your camera, but card readers are often faster at downloading than your camera is. And card readers will work in most newer computers (Windows ME, 2000, XP) without installing a driver. You could use your card reader on the road to download your photos to someone else's computer. Very handy.<BR><BR>Andrew<BR>

I moved to digital after nearly 40 years of using SLRs when I researched and bought a SONY MAVICA CD300. I was very pleased with the results.

I no longer had to scan my photographs. And I didn't need a laptop for downloading, nor scads of memory cards. Each 30 cent CD held between 105 and 120 3 megapixel shots, depending on how many movies I shot.

I could also shoot movies and film clips for my web-pages.

After over 6,000 shots on the Mavica CD-300, I bought a new 5 megapixel SONY MAVICA CD-500 with higher resolution and more features to play with. I paid slightly over $500. There are other models with lesser resolution available, but I tend to be picky about photo quality. You can get the exact specs from the Sony web-site. I'm sure this would meet your needs. (Some of the retailers have some errors in their descriptions or they really don't know camera CD technology.

Some folks I know use CDRWs, but I prefer the CDRs because they seem to record faster and I like the instant archiving. Sometimes I stop in an Internet cafe overseas and email a few shots from the CDs to torment my coworkers who are back in the office.

I recommend CD technology cameras without reservation. The only drawback is that when traveling I need to bring 10 or more blank CDs since the 3 inch CDs are hard to find outside of a serious computer shop. A pocket-sized one-inch thick stack of 3 inch CDs will hold over one thousand high resolution photos that are ready to drop into any computer tray without needing a special card reader or hook-up.

As far as the &quot;FRAGILE&quot; issue, I wrapped my CD300 in a single sheet of bubble wrap and stuck it in its standard padded case for the overseas transit. Never had a problem. I think the newer models are even more sturdy, but I don't want to test that theory just yet. But I think any camera (digital or film) is at risk when subjected to more than a three-foot drop.

By the way, I carry two back-up charged batteries. I have never run out of juice, even on my more insane days when I shoot hundred shots.

Good luck with whatever you choose.