Fatbastard Posted July 25, 2002 Report Share Posted July 25, 2002 I brought a Sony P71 (3.2) used it for a while but in general have gone back to using my SLR. main problem is variable exposure on the Sony and of course that god awful shutterlag. The two things that get photographed around here are my 4 month baby and my mates antics while racing motorcycles. both need a fairly quick shutter response and the lag makes the baby photography almost impossible because the little bugger doesn't hold still and the Motorbikes same thing. I took it out to a circuit yesterday and 50% of the photos wree useless because of underexposure, taken from the same spot under pretty much the same conditions. WTF's going on? The digi is useful for some things but the SLR has a wider range of uses for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lopburi3 Posted July 25, 2002 Report Share Posted July 25, 2002 Agree with you about shutter lag being a pain. The newest models seem to be getting that under control and believe some are 'almost' as fast as a normal camera now. Don't know your camera but if there is a choice of meter methods perhaps that might help with the underexposure problem (change to spot/zone/average) until you get better photos. Never press shutter completely before it gets its information ready at the half way point (am sure you already know that). Also you can do a lot with software to correct your photos if you have not tried it. I find digital very good for baby shots as you can take a huge number in a row and select out the bad ones. Another thing for exposure is to compute with image you want centered in viewfinder and hold that setting until you want to take photo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix Posted August 2, 2002 Report Share Posted August 2, 2002 Think too mut:> - for the record - read somewhere that the professional conventional cameras can do 17 megapixels. And that 8US$ disposable ones are at 6 Megapixels. < Yes, but the drawback is that you have to get your film processed at a shop or lab. Some of my memories of LOS wouldn't be suited for that!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sporty Posted August 3, 2002 Report Share Posted August 3, 2002 I read your post earilier, and did not reply, as I have a thing FOR Sony... For me, the ease of use, and quality is what I was looking for, with my 2 Sony Camera's I figure I get that... I have the FD91 with the 14 to 1 Optical Zoom, great camera, and with the images (Medium Pixel Range) on floppy disk, and 30+ per disk, its easy to collect them, I usuall go out for the day with 5 disks, and never need that many... If I am traveling with someone, and want to duplicate the disk, or individual photos and give them a copy of the photos, it can be done in the camera... If your like me lazy and want quality, Sony is the way to go... Sporty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 3, 2002 Report Share Posted August 3, 2002 >14 to 1 Optical Zoom< = 500 conventional telephoto! ( 35 X 14 ).. all but unheard of in a conventional camera... my Chinese 80 - 300 was $400. mail order. edited to correct math error.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sporty Posted August 3, 2002 Report Share Posted August 3, 2002 I had the Camera # wrong, originally... its a FD 91, Here is more info on it, a great camera for me... This is the Sony Mavica FD-91, it has a 850,000-pixel progressive scan CCD that yields 1024x768 images. The first thing you notice is that huge 14X zoom lens. This is the longest focal length lens available on any digital camera. The other feature that makes this camera unique is that it stores its images on 1.44MB floppy diskettes. You may not be able to get a lot of images on each diskette but you can't beat the ease of transferring them to your computer. It also has both a 2.5" color LCD and a color viewfinder for framing or reviewing your pictures. You can let the FD-91 run in automatic exposure mode or for creative control you can switch it into either shutter priority or aperture priority mode. Choose any shutter speed from 1/60 to 1/4000 of a second and freeze even the fastest-moving subjects easily. The FD-91 is but one model in a long line of Mavica cameras that started with the original FD-5 and FD-7 models. They all share one thing in common, the floppy diskette drive. Some of the newer models like the FD-83 (1216x912) and FD-88 (1280x960) have finally broken the megapixel resolution barrier. The FD-91 has a 2X speed floppy drive, the FD-83 and FD-88 have 4X speed floppy drives. In addition to capturing still JPEG images the MVC-FD91 also captures up to 60 seconds of MPEG video and audio. There's two settings: Presentation Mode, up to 15 sec. (320 x 240) and Video Mail Mode, up to 60 sec. (160 x 112). Sporty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lopburi3 Posted August 3, 2002 Report Share Posted August 3, 2002 Although these cameras were advanced a few years ago floppy drive is not of much use for the current generation of megapix cameras and I would not recommend a floppy for anything in places like humid Bangkok (they fail often). I would recommend 2 megs for casual users like myself, if we want any chance to crop or print large photos. Extra telephoto may be of use to a few but the need to keep camera steady may be a rather large problem at 14x (or even 6x). This form of photography is changing at about the same pace as our computers, so last years gem is an antique before we know it. Cameras are no longer a long term investment IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sporty Posted August 4, 2002 Report Share Posted August 4, 2002 Hello Lopburi3... Well, I agree, with much of what you said... But, take exception to a few things as well. I agree Camera technology is changing quickly. I disagree, or maybe I have just been exceptionally lucky, concerning the floppy, I have used the Camera at almost every major tourist venue in Thailand, more than 100 days out, on the River, at beaches, Summer Palace etc... NOT ONE FLOPPY TROUBLE, easily more than 5,000 photos taken. Zoom and Stabilization, understand the camera has technology, to aid in this, my photo, may not be crisp enough for National Geographic, but looks real fine, to me, on a 1600 X1024, monitor. JUst wish you could see a few to judge for yourself. Sporty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lopburi3 Posted August 4, 2002 Report Share Posted August 4, 2002 As you say, this is one of the things that has no answer. As long as we are happy with the results the tech details don't mean much. My equipment is also behind the times and I am happy with the results so have to postphone buying new for awhile. Perhaps I have had more trouble than most with floppies but when I lose a $200 operating system because one of the discs dies get upset. Have had many such problems here in Bangkok and before in South Florida when floppy was the only game in town. At any rate they are no longer a factor as the new generation of cameras needs larger storage. Also what you see on a monitor will look much better than what you print. So if your main need is the computer screen less detail will not matter much and I should have pointed that out before. Also, I am the type that needs a new computer every three years and suspect cameras will now be about the same timeframe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 7, 2002 Report Share Posted August 7, 2002 I use an Olympus 3000 Zoom (3 mega pixels) for travel and an Olympus E10 (4 mega pixels) at home, both are absolutely 1st class, well engineered and easy to use with outstanding results. I usually snap at the medium quality setting and can print full A4 prints with great clarity. Colour reproduction is first class too unlike some of the Nikon products which can give a red cast to the pix. The Kodak products are good but don't seem to be very robust and Minolta (which I use on building sites - company camera!) have a strange menu system. Remember to get some good photo software too, I use PhotoShop Elements (which is a cut down version of the full PhotoShop product) and it is excellent. Hope this helps. Taipan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.