camera for my father

Tzortzakakis Dimitrios wrote:
Ï "Pete D" Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
...
"ray" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 04:27:21 -0800, steph wrote:

Hi group,

My mother wants to buy a digital camera for my father as a gift. And my
task is to choose one!

My father is 68 years old and he doesn't like computers and technical
gadgets. He likes photograpy, but he only used to cameras with film up
to now - has never used a digital one. I know, if he gets one that's too
complicated, wigh cryptic menues and too many useless functions, he'll
never use it and it's going to be a waste of money.

So basically I'm looking for a camera that somehow resambles an old
analog camera, that is a camera with automatic exposure and focus, with
view finder (not ony a screen on the back) which produces fotos of
decent quality. price should be around 300?. so far i didn't find any
model that fits my needs. any ideas?

thanks,
stephan
Sounds like he 'needs' a film range finder.
Agree, nothing wrong with film, no cards to worry about, no need for a
computer or learning how to use on, shoot away, drop the film off and a
few hours later there are your prints.

Seconded. I encouraged my godmother (65) to continue using her film camera,
and my sister's godmother (82) to get another film camera P&S when her
current is completely toast. While my godmother has a laptop, she needs
"private lessons" for almost everything, and I think a digital camera would
be a major stress. There are ,many film P&S going for less than 100 euros
now. Using a digital the way you used a film camera misses all benefits, and
if you just print the photos and burn a cd at the local photo lab will be
much more expensive thatn the usual flow with your own computer (which you
will have anyway and not just for photos, unlike traditional darkroom
equipment.



I disagree.
One can use a simple P&S camera exactly like the old film models. Just
find one with a real viewfinder, pop in a card, take pictures, pop out
the card, take it to Wal-Mart, buy a new card (their GIVING THEM AWAY),
and when the prints come back, file the old card as an 'electronic
negative'. No need for a computer, no change in work-flow, and no
confusion. Benefits, cards hold a LOT more pictures than roll film, and
cost less, and they are MUCH easier to load and remove.

tony cooper wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 11:40:12 -0800, SMS
wrote:

Pete D wrote:

Agree, nothing wrong with film, no cards to worry about, no need for a
computer or learning how to use on, shoot away, drop the film off and a few
hours later there are your prints.
My mom's about 80, and as un-technical as they come, but using a
computer to send e-mail, web-browse, and use the digital camera, is
something she's able to do, and all her friends of similar ages are also
able to use computers to the extent of importing digital pictures. The
Kodak camera with the dock really simplified things for her and her
husband. I was amazed when she managed to attach a photo to an e-mail.

Of course my brother and I provide lifetime free technical support. Up
until 9:00 p.m. ET she calls him. After 9:00 p.m., west coast technical
support takes over and she calls me.

Our favorite tech support scenario is when we ask my stepfather "what's
on the screen now" and he reads us _everything_ on the screen;
'copyright 2007, Microsoft Corporation, all rights reserved... .'

Good Lord. As someone over 70, these posts make me feel like I should
follow the other elephants to the graveyard.

I moved to a P&S when digital became popular, bought a dslr when they
became affordable, have been using Photoshop for several years, and
provide "technical support" to both of my children. It's me asking
"What's on the screen now?". I just bought a laptop for my son - a
gift - and I downloaded and/or installed the programs he'll be using
because he's less proficient at this than I am. My son uses a
camcorder, but I edit the results into movies.

My business background is not in IT, but I can read a book or a
manual, follow a tutorial, and search for solutions on the web as well
as anyone.

I do admit that I have never opened FaceBook or MySpace, sent a text
message, been able to figure out "textspeak", or ever had the desire
to add Bluetooth to my mobile phone. Nor have I played a computer
game since my son embarrassed me at Pong yonks ago.

Some of us old folks manage.

As for the comments about the choice of cameras, the OP should buy a
P&S for his father. It doesn't make any difference that it is
different from film or won't offer any advantages over film for him.
It doesn't make any difference if he never does more than point and
press the button. His wife wants to do this for him. Indulge her
wishes. Sometimes you do something just because it will make someone
feel good. It's not always about practical.






I am pretty much like you (will turn 66 next week), but spend 40 years
in IT, and keep my mind working by teaching school part time. I do use
bluetooth on my cell phone, on rare occasions.
I agree that he should buy a camera that his father can use like his
film camera, be it a P&S or SLR.

SMS wrote:
tony cooper wrote:

My business background is not in IT, but I can read a book or a
manual, follow a tutorial, and search for solutions on the web as well
as anyone.

There are some people that are terrified of plunging in and trying
things. I'm actually quite pleased that my mother and stepfather haven't
thrown up their hands and given up.

Of course there was that transition from WordPerfect for DOS to Word for
Windows, when my mother went back to her electric typewriter for a while.

I can't imagine anything less than total technological devastation (EMP)
that would make me resort to EVER using a typewriter again for any
purpose other than addressing envelopes.

Clair Johnston wrote:
tony cooper wrote:

Good Lord. As someone over 70, these posts make me feel like I should
follow the other elephants to the graveyard.

grin
Tony, I do think some of these youngsters don't really understand us.
No wonder we are so cranky. To them it is a wonder we survived so long!
/grin

My wife got her first camera for Christmas at age 69, a Nikon L6 point
and shoot. Two months later we went to Florida for Christmas. She shot
in the neighborhood of 2000 photos in 6 months of everything. Closeups,
telephotos, flowers, butterflies, birds, everything. She very quickly
out grew that camera, so I bought her a Panasonic TZ3. She has over
8000 shots on that that and is ready to move to a DSLR but doesn't want
the bulk. What is interesting is that we joined a local Photo Club that
has monthly contests and she has won or at least placed in most that she
has entered. So I have to agree with her, its not the camera.

My advice to the OP is to buy both of them digital cameras. Spend some
time teaching computer skills necessary. You may find that your folks
are capable of learning, especially if there is interest.

"How many pictures of a sunset an you take?"
"As many as I want, they are all different!"

Clair

They may be like my older brother who used to use computers, and highly
technical lab. equipment at work, and when he retired doesn't want to
deal with LEARNING to do anything. He uses a computer, mostly to play
Solitaire, but learning anything else new is not an interest for him. I
hope that if I ever reach that point someone will put my out of my misery!

"Tzortzakakis Dimitrios" wrote in message
...

Ï "Pete D" Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
...

"ray" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 04:27:21 -0800, steph wrote:

Hi group,

My mother wants to buy a digital camera for my father as a gift. And my
task is to choose one!

My father is 68 years old and he doesn't like computers and technical
gadgets. He likes photograpy, but he only used to cameras with film up
to now - has never used a digital one. I know, if he gets one that's
too
complicated, wigh cryptic menues and too many useless functions, he'll
never use it and it's going to be a waste of money.

So basically I'm looking for a camera that somehow resambles an old
analog camera, that is a camera with automatic exposure and focus, with
view finder (not ony a screen on the back) which produces fotos of
decent quality. price should be around 300?. so far i didn't find any
model that fits my needs. any ideas?

thanks,
stephan

Sounds like he 'needs' a film range finder.

Agree, nothing wrong with film, no cards to worry about, no need for a
computer or learning how to use on, shoot away, drop the film off and a
few hours later there are your prints.

Seconded. I encouraged my godmother (65) to continue using her film
camera, and my sister's godmother (82) to get another film camera P&S when
her current is completely toast. While my godmother has a laptop, she
needs "private lessons" for almost everything, and I think a digital
camera would be a major stress. There are ,many film P&S going for less
than 100 euros now. Using a digital the way you used a film camera misses
all benefits, and if you just print the photos and burn a cd at the local
photo lab will be much more expensive thatn the usual flow with your own
computer (which you will have anyway and not just for photos, unlike
traditional darkroom equipment.


Have to disagree on cost, with film you don't have to have a computer and I
am betting you will find that an occasional user will not need to take
thousands of shots every time they get the camera out, a few will be quite
sufficient.

Pete D wrote:
"Tzortzakakis Dimitrios" wrote in message
...
Ï "Pete D" Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
...
"ray" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 04:27:21 -0800, steph wrote:

Hi group,

My mother wants to buy a digital camera for my father as a gift. And my
task is to choose one!

My father is 68 years old and he doesn't like computers and technical
gadgets. He likes photograpy, but he only used to cameras with film up
to now - has never used a digital one. I know, if he gets one that's
too
complicated, wigh cryptic menues and too many useless functions, he'll
never use it and it's going to be a waste of money.

So basically I'm looking for a camera that somehow resambles an old
analog camera, that is a camera with automatic exposure and focus, with
view finder (not ony a screen on the back) which produces fotos of
decent quality. price should be around 300?. so far i didn't find any
model that fits my needs. any ideas?

thanks,
stephan
Sounds like he 'needs' a film range finder.
Agree, nothing wrong with film, no cards to worry about, no need for a
computer or learning how to use on, shoot away, drop the film off and a
few hours later there are your prints.

Seconded. I encouraged my godmother (65) to continue using her film
camera, and my sister's godmother (82) to get another film camera P&S when
her current is completely toast. While my godmother has a laptop, she
needs "private lessons" for almost everything, and I think a digital
camera would be a major stress. There are ,many film P&S going for less
than 100 euros now. Using a digital the way you used a film camera misses
all benefits, and if you just print the photos and burn a cd at the local
photo lab will be much more expensive thatn the usual flow with your own
computer (which you will have anyway and not just for photos, unlike
traditional darkroom equipment.


Have to disagree on cost, with film you don't have to have a computer and I
am betting you will find that an occasional user will not need to take
thousands of shots every time they get the camera out, a few will be quite
sufficient.


You don't HAVE to have a computer to use a digital camera!
Shoot the pictures, take the flash card to a 1hr printer. Go home with
the pictures, file the card as "electronic negative". Buy new card.
Repeat.
You can buy a new 2GB card for less than $10. How much would you pay
for film to shoot 200 pictures? STILL cheaper with digital, and you
only have to pay for the printing.

On Tue, 09 Dec 2008 03:37:49 -0600, Ron Hunter wrote:

You don't HAVE to have a computer to use a digital camera!
Shoot the pictures, take the flash card to a 1hr printer. Go home with
the pictures, file the card as "electronic negative". Buy new card.
Repeat.
You can buy a new 2GB card for less than $10. How much would you pay
for film to shoot 200 pictures? STILL cheaper with digital, and you
only have to pay for the printing.

Technophobe scenario : Grandpa or grandma at family events,
birthday parties, etc. usually takes a couple of dozen pictures,
using about 100MB of card space. At that rate the card could be
used for 20 events over a period of several years. If instead they
then immediately file the card away, treating it as film negatives,
they're wasting most of the card space and by the time they take
enough pictures that could have fit on the single card, they would
have had to have purchased 20 cards for a cost of $200. And unlike
negatives that can be identified simply by looking at them, they'll
end up with many little cards that probably were never labeled.
Some wiser coots may store the cards in labeled envelopes, but
that's a solution just waiting for Murphy to arrive.

If instead grandma/pa continues using the card, it obviously
fills, and now they either need computer skills to be able to select
the most recent set of photos to print from their local kiosk, or
have to hope they can instruct the 1hr printer workers to select and
print just the new photos, not repeating any previously printed
shots or skipping any new ones. ("Just print the ones I shot a week
or two ago.") This doesn't even get into not printing many of the
poorer shots that you or I might have skipped, or choosing which
ones are worthy of multiple prints. And if they do it this way,
letting the card slowly fill over a year or three, they risk
accidentally losing their pseudo "negative archive", the tiny card
that so many here used to worry about dropping and losing their tiny
(smaller than CF) cards in the grass, etc.