From: Sil Horwitz (silh@earthlink.net)
Date: 06/27/03-09:19:05 AM Z
At 2003-06-27 03:35 AM -0400, Judy wrote:
>So, to prove that I for one refuse to tremble, I admit that, much as I
>appreciate it, so far I have hardly understood the VERY savvy sounding
>digital camera advice. I've been coping with an 809-tooth, no make that 80
>tooth carbide tipped blade, among other disasters today, including 95
>degrees F on the streets of NY, and it's already 3:20 AM -- but I will try
>(tomorrow, or the day after) to submit a few of the intriguing and/or
>provocative sentences for clarification.
>
>Meanwhile, here's one to start-- I've heard everything from $800 to $8000
>dollars from folks willing to talk price... Is it possible to mention a
>price range here -- or is that just too crass?
>
>OK -- here's another. Upsampling? Downsampling? OK, they're in the
>Realworld Photoshop 7 book.... but I haven't spent my $8000 or $800 yet. I
>want that camera. But don't really know when I can schedule the learning
>curve, being in another set of hills. Is there a digital camera with a
>straight line learning curve?
As an instructor in "Digital" (misnomer - does it mean finger
manipulation?) photography, my advice is to get a simple, well,
comparatively simple, camera and learn to use it well. My recommendation is
the Nikon Coolpix 3500: it's about $300, very compact (will fit in a coat
pocket, so certainly a purse - my lady friend has one and loves it for its
simplicity and great results) has enough megapixels (3+) and zoom (35mm
equivalent: 35 - 105mm) to provide excellent results "grainless" up to 8x10
and capable of making 11x14 prints/negatives that are excellent. It is an
excellent carry-around tool for taking grab shots as it weighs only about
175g (6.2 oz). After getting over the fun of using it for point and shoot,
it can become a "serious" camera as all the parameters can be manually
manipulated. Only flaw: there is no eyepiece finder, and the picture must
be composed on the rear monitor screen. I recommend it as a first digital
camera.
As to Photoshop, it's overkill for our purposes. Granted, if you want to do
a lot of image reworking, it's a vital resource. Otherwise, a simple
program such as Nikon View, which comes with the Nikon cameras (or other
equally good programs from other makers), does the job. At one time Paint
Shop Pro was simpler than Photoshop (and a heckuva lot less expensive) but
it, too, has added so many features that it requires extensive study to use
properly. A simple "point and shoot" photo manipulation program (there are
many out there) will be just fine to start, costs a lot less than PS, and
requires minimum time in the learning process. Yes, I have Photoshop, but
use it for other purposes. I also have Corel Paint, which is OK. If you
need something for a specific purpose, send me a personal email and I'll
try to provide (or find) an answer.
Someone mentioned the Nikon 5700 - great camera, 8x zoom, probably the best
non-interchangeable lens digital camera on the market, but it is very
awkward to handle and heavy. Its 5 megapixels enable blowing up full-frame
to 16x20. I do not recommend it as a beginning digital camera because it
does require studying the manual in depth to operate properly. Weight is
also the problem with all the high end digital cameras, if you want
something to carry with you. I had one for a time, but didn't keep it
because of its awkwardness.
Oh, and yes, Judy - it doesn't get to 95F here in Central Florida in June!
Digital cameras and picture media can take the heat, so that's not a problem.
On a parallel topic: I think, in our areas of interest, using digital
cameras, then making negatives from the images for our alternative
photographic purposes, is the way to go.
---sil
Sil Horwitz, FPSA
silh@earthlink.net
personal page: http://www.silphoto.us
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 07/09/03-08:31:13 AM Z CST