If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Baby coming, photos to be taken
I have a Olympus 410mju 4mp camera
http://www.camerastore.com.au/Olympu...10-details.htm with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Pete .? wrote:
with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... You may find the shutter lag is a big bugbear, especially when you try to capture the little blighter smiling. Made me move to a dSLR, and the pics are a heckofalot better since. (Oly 3040 - D70) -- Ken Tough |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
No idea, but a 4 mp $400 camera sounds great to me.Even my cheapo 100 euros
kodak cx 7300 takes excellent pictures, check my account at www.shuttercity.com .It's not actually the camera that takes the picture, but the *photographer*.Of course, you will need a minimum of hardware;you can't use all the time single use cameras or get a HP web camera that uses batteries and can be used off the computer... -- Tzortzakakis Dimitrios major in electrical engineering, freelance electrician FH von Iraklion-Kreta, freiberuflicher Elektriker dimtzort AT otenet DOT gr Ο "Pete" . έγραψε στο μήνυμα ... I have a Olympus 410mju 4mp camera http://www.camerastore.com.au/Olympu...10-details.htm with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Pete,
Here's my own experience.. I have steadily moved up the camera ladder in the past 24 months, buying one, keeping it for 4 or 5 months, then needing to step up. So I went through some nice Fuji cameras, then to the Olympus C8080, finally ending up with the Nikon D70. Here's what I decided: After about 4 megapixels in a typical point and shoot, the sensor stops being enough to handle the digital noise. So for instance, outside in the sun, the big C8080 was amazing, but take it inside even at ISO 100 and noise starts to be a factor. What am I really saying in all this??? That the pictures that come out of this D70 (when properly shot - which takes some real learn curve) are simply magnificent. Blowing the doors off of ANY of the point and shoots I had run through. IF though you decide to stick with a point and shoot, I would say stick to 4, maybe 5 MP and you'll get consistently wonderful noise-free shots. But gosh, if you have the money, I can't say enough about the D70. Simply incredibly. Tim "Pete" . wrote in message ... I have a Olympus 410mju 4mp camera http://www.camerastore.com.au/Olympu...10-details.htm with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Pete wrote:
I have a Olympus 410mju 4mp camera http://www.camerastore.com.au/Olympu...10-details.htm with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... Not worth the expense. Buy lots of diapers, and take your wife out to dinner once a week for the next year. For baby pictures, a simple P*S camera with decent flash would work just as well. -- Ron Hunter |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Pete
. wrote: I have a Olympus 410mju 4mp camera http://www.camerastore.com.au/Olympu...10-details.htm with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... Hi Pete, Here is an article reprinted with permission from NYI Institute of Photography: http://www.babymall.com.au/phototips/phototips.htm It has a lot of good tips for photographing babies, and also a warning about using the flash: "One question we're frequently is this: Is there any risk to the eyes of young babies if I use flash when I shoot their pictures? Since the experts are divided on this point, we think you should err on the side of caution: Keep flash use to a minimum. If you do use flash for a few pictures, stay at a reasonable distance. Our advice: Don't ever use flash for closeups! And we've already discussed the problem flash causes with red-eye. So avoid it if you can." Congratulations, NB |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Pete" . writes:
with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... The two big wins of using a DSLR are no shutter lag and more serious flash systems. Some of the fancier P/S systems also support external flash but they're not that far in price from low-end DSLR's these days. That horrible "snapshot" look we all see so often comes from the typical P/S on-camera flash pointing straight at the subject. The problem not just red-eye but the whole pattern of light and shadows. And, as someone else said, it's bad for the baby's eyes. The solution is to use an external flash bounced off of a white ceiling, or some other type of diffusion. See the 80-20 and Big Bounce examples in: http://www.lumiquest.com/compare.htm Even fancier is to use off-camera flash. The Nikon D70 has an amazing system that lets you control a remote flash without any wires to the camera (the camera pulses its own flash to send exposure data to the remote). I'm not sure if Canon has anything directly comparable. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 04 May 2005 11:32:14 GMT, "Pete" . wrote:
I have a Olympus 410mju 4mp camera http://www.camerastore.com.au/Olympu...10-details.htm with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... As other people have pointed out, a DSLR really comes into it's own when they are a bit older and you want to capture them in action. The combination of fast start up time, no shutter lag, and fast focussing and focus tracking systems mean you can get shots which you would otherwise have no chance of getting. When they are newborn these factors don't make much difference. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Ken Tough wrote:
Pete .? wrote: with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... You may find the shutter lag is a big bugbear, especially when you try to capture the little blighter smiling. Made me move to a dSLR, and the pics are a heckofalot better since. (Oly 3040 - D70) On the newer cameras shutter lag is only slightly longer than a DSLR, in some cases faster than the older ones. The shutter lag on mine is shorter than my reflexes so I guess I am the 'lag'. sigh. -- Ron Hunter |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Rubin wrote:
"Pete" . writes: with the little one on the way I was wondering if it was worth me buying a digital SLR camera to take better pictures? I just want to know how much better the pics could be with a camera like an entry level D SLR? thanks... The two big wins of using a DSLR are no shutter lag and more serious flash systems. Some of the fancier P/S systems also support external flash but they're not that far in price from low-end DSLR's these days. That horrible "snapshot" look we all see so often comes from the typical P/S on-camera flash pointing straight at the subject. The problem not just red-eye but the whole pattern of light and shadows. And, as someone else said, it's bad for the baby's eyes. There is a third big and arguably the most important win - the possibility of taking noise free images in available light many times better than any P&S can deliver. The solution is to use an external flash bounced off of a white ceiling, or some other type of diffusion. See the 80-20 and Big Bounce examples in: http://www.lumiquest.com/compare.htm Even fancier is to use off-camera flash. The Nikon D70 has an amazing system that lets you control a remote flash without any wires to the camera (the camera pulses its own flash to send exposure data to the remote). I'm not sure if Canon has anything directly comparable. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Printing mobile phone camera photos? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 21 | April 11th 05 06:27 PM |
Photos from Genoa (Italy) | GM | Photographing Nature | 0 | April 7th 05 12:56 PM |
digital photos on PC monitor too dark | BobAtVandy | Digital Photography | 3 | October 11th 04 10:07 PM |
Reducing File Size / Sharing Photos / Album Help | Dave | Digital Photography | 10 | September 16th 04 10:36 PM |
safe guarding photos | BJ | Digital Photography | 11 | September 15th 04 03:04 AM |