U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-05-2017, 05:13 AM
 
10,756 posts, read 18,017,874 times
Reputation: 10249

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by davebarnes View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnd393 View Post
A real camera has to have a viewfinder. I have a Canon A1400 that fits in my shirt pocket, has decent battery life on rechargable AA cells. an optical viewfinder, 5x optical zoom, 20x digital, a dedicated button for 720p video. I turn off the screen and either use the OVF or just point at something and shoot. If there is sound and motion like a waterfall or crashing waves I'll shoot some video.
Ok, so far from these two we've determined that one, you will only be happy with a $4k camera and two, if it doesn't have a viewfinder it's not a camera, even if you get pictures out of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-05-2017, 11:01 AM
 
1,294 posts, read 771,006 times
Reputation: 2285
Ok, I'll lighten up a bit about the viewfinder. A viewfinder is a nice feature to have on your camera.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2017, 08:39 PM
 
4,275 posts, read 8,024,678 times
Reputation: 6100
I am still using a 10 year-old Canon A720is. The battery door locking mechanism broke 2 years ago. I use tape to hold in it place. Other than that there is nothing wrong with it. Is there any new camera that uses 2 AA batteries?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2017, 07:48 AM
 
Location: Removing a snake out of the neighbor's washing machine
2,371 posts, read 965,168 times
Reputation: 1772
The difference between zoom on most phones and on a real camera is that the phones crop in on the center-most pixels when they zoom. This might have changed with the latest iPhone though. Actual cameras physically zoom in and out with no loss of resolution assuming finer glass, something that has been physically challenging to incorporate into increasingly thinner smart phones.

Last edited by TheGrandK-Man; 09-06-2017 at 08:12 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2017, 07:51 AM
 
Location: Removing a snake out of the neighbor's washing machine
2,371 posts, read 965,168 times
Reputation: 1772
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbear99 View Post
Any camera can have a focus failure, even my 70D. A rule of thumb is the more focus options, the more likely failure, and sometimes the reason is quite curious. Most cameras, when using multiple points, focus on the nearest. Sometimes you don't want the nearest.

Why, if Canon gives you focus trouble, have you owned multiple ones?

You should note too that I've seen no reports of focus problems with Canon (or any other brand for that matter). Yes, some models of some brands are better in some situations than others. (If you note a lot of qualifiers in the previous sentence, it's because there are many options in this marketplace.)

FYI, I've analyzed many a blurry picture in Lightroom (there's a plug in that shows focus points) and in every case, it was because focus locked on a location I did not expect.
I've often thought about my finger, or a window I might be photographing through. But no, 'Canon Blur' seems to occur randomly, independent of circumstances under which I'm shooting(indoors, outdoors, through glass or unobstructed, handheld, on a tripod with timer engaged). And I'm obsessively careful about my finger not accidentally covering up sensors out front, even if I have to hold the camera in a manner that gets fatiguing after a while.

I'd say I've gotten the Canon Blur on roughly 1 out of 20-30 photos. If the oppty still exists, I just quickly snap again, and get a crisp result.

Why have I owned Canon digital cameras? Largely their features per money spent, and personally theeee most intuitive operation and settings menus I've ever experienced on cameras with menus. Someone else might say the same thing about Nikon, or Olympus for that matter. Whatever works for that user.

Last edited by TheGrandK-Man; 09-06-2017 at 08:14 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2017, 10:37 PM
 
Location: Kirkland, WA (Metro Seattle)
4,265 posts, read 3,445,887 times
Reputation: 7827
Quote:
Originally Posted by michael917 View Post
I'm going on a big trip in two months and am planning to buy a new camera for the experience. I know the majority of people today use their phones for taking photos, but I've never cared for this option. It doesn't help that I have a low-end Android phone that doesn't take great pictures, but that's only part of it. I simply prefer the familiarity of the camera. When I'm off in a faraway land, I'd prefer not being stressed over picture-taking. I'd rather just enjoy myself.

That being said, anybody have a recommendation for a good quality digital camera?
Had lots of cameras, and state of the art smartphones from the day they came out. Smart phone cameras have never competed until last few years. I carry my small camera(s) less and less.

In 2012, I took a photography clinic in the desert. Brought three cameras, with zero intention of using second and third (boy, was I surprised). 1) Nikon D7000, two lenses 2) Canon S95 pocket 3) Galaxy Nexus phone.

I took a *Lot* of shots with that S95, it was just easier to deal with and oh btw took stupendous little shots. The Galaxy Nexus caught a few effects shots too. The D7000 is the bomb, but was my second favorite of the trip, not first.

...which is exactly what Ken Rockwell, co-host of the clinic, warned us about. Travel light, he suggested.

I took a Fujifilm X100T to Africa and took a lot of shots. Most were great, at 35mm equivalent on a APS-C sensor. People shots were stupendous, what it does best. Landscapes only decent. Still, a decent call for the trip since I had to carry it everywhere for 2,700 miles of ruthless terrain in a motorcycle backpack.

Next time, I may or may not just bring a GoPro. Or, the best pocket cam money can buy. Or, reviewing my own shots, I may do best of all and bring the Fujifilm X100T (or successor) again: takes a bit more work to set them up right, but the big sensor is worth it in lower light (f/2 lens).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2017, 11:38 PM
 
1,719 posts, read 692,663 times
Reputation: 1545
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnd393 View Post
A real camera has to have a viewfinder. I have a Canon A1400 that fits in my shirt pocket, has decent battery life on rechargable AA cells. an optical viewfinder, 5x optical zoom, 20x digital, a dedicated button for 720p video. I turn off the screen and either use the OVF or just point at something and shoot. If there is sound and motion like a waterfall or crashing waves I'll shoot some video.
Some people want decent quality photos as well. (and, no, you don't have to spend $4000 to get that)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2017, 09:50 AM
 
Location: Sacramento, Placerville
2,509 posts, read 5,229,464 times
Reputation: 2225
Cell phone cameras are equivalent to the least expensive point and shoot cameras people who aren't into photography take with them on vacation. They will take a fair picture and are small and portable.

If you really care about quality and want some control over the camera, something more expensive is needed.

When I travel I usually take my Nikon B700 with me. Sometimes I'll take a DSLR along too. I do use the camera on my phone. However, it can be frustrating at times. For example, it refused to lock on focus when I tried to photograph the sun using a solar filter, so I used the B700 set to manual focus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2017, 09:41 AM
 
Location: Bologna, Italy
6,541 posts, read 3,778,871 times
Reputation: 2896
I have a $60 smartphone. It takes pictures, but it's more like pictures I take when I'm at a store and need to take a pic of something I want to buy to send it to someone.

Outside of the poor quality and difficulty to have correct pictures in low light, it is annoyingly difficult to use compared to a real camera with buttons and knobs. I have a small Sony DSC RX100 and it's already miles ahead. The difference is like night and day.

In the end I find the cellphone camera to be really just superfluous. I can use it, but it's like a throw-away camera back in the day. There when I need it, but the quality is really subpar.

Of course high end Samsungs or the latest Iphone probably have great cameras, but they're still more expensive than my phone + my camera (bought second hand) together, and like I said, I prefer actual buttons over touching a screen.

I guess if I did not regularly take pictures / was not interested in photography I might be happy with the phone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2017, 09:43 AM
 
10,756 posts, read 18,017,874 times
Reputation: 10249
Quote:
Originally Posted by forgotten username View Post
I have a $60 smartphone. It takes pictures, but it's more like pictures I take when I'm at a store and need to take a pic of something I want to buy to send it to someone.

Outside of the poor quality and difficulty to have correct pictures in low light, it is annoyingly difficult to use compared to a real camera with buttons and knobs. I have a small Sony DSC RX100 and it's already miles ahead. The difference is like night and day.

In the end I find the cellphone camera to be really just superfluous. I can use it, but it's like a throw-away camera back in the day. There when I need it, but the quality is really subpar.

Of course high end Samsungs or the latest Iphone probably have great cameras, but they're still more expensive than my phone + my camera (bought second hand) together, and like I said, I prefer actual buttons over touching a screen.

I guess if I did not regularly take pictures / was not interested in photography I might be happy with the phone.
That's to be expected with a $60 phone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:07 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top