Re: Digital camera blues

Judy,
    I would like to answer one more thing, butting in at the
last...The Canon G3/G4 ($500.00-$600.00) in my opinion is the highest
professional-quality digital camera, without going to the $!,500.00
SLR's (which handle the Canon/Nikon lenses).

     Why? Because if for no other reason, It's capture CCD for 4-5
megapixels is much larger capture area (think larger negative) than
the Nikon counterpart for 4-5 megapixels. In fact, the last time I
checked, Nikon gets to 5 megapixels in these rangefinder-style
cameras by software interpolation.
Bob

Judy Seigel wrote:
>
> Dear List,
>
> Wow -- I have to download & print everything out (except the part about
> the altoids, I'll remember that) so I can study properly. Nothing I've
> read so far got into the operational details this way. Thank you 100
> megapixels. So glad I asked.
>
> Someone mentioned cost, leading to the thought that in a year or so the
> digital camera is free... In my weight bracket (under 8 oz) it costs
> about $450 (many now with rebate) and the peripherals (memory card, etc.)
> maybe another $100? Total about $550 (??)
>
> If I shoot two film rolls a month, that's about $12 for the color film,
> and another $30 or so for processing, and I still have no real prints, but
> spend about $504 plus tax in 12 months. Which would "pay for" the camera,
> to assuage my guilt if I dump it.
>
> Question: everyone talks about "noise," which I take it is an artifact of
> digital photography more than analog. B&H catalog gave a serious
> description of how camera X CANCELS noise, which did, I admit, ring alarm
> bells -- I figured I'd HATE it just like I hate the auto correction of
> word programs -- but why do some folks get noise & Peter Marshall doesn't?
> Will I really mind noise? I tend to like blur, consider myself an f2.8
> photographer. Will it be more noise than gum prints have anyway? Does it
> get noisier in large prints? For instance, a project of the moment
> wouldn't be reproduced larger than, say, 5 by 7 inches. But later I want
> to make 13 by 19 negs. Would they have more noise ?
>
> Are folks who prefer analog developing their own film? I don't have
> time/heart for that in my old age. Too persnickety... And certainly I'm
> not about to develop color. Heaven forfend !
>
> Charlotte --ignorant question: what kind of files are 240 megabytes?
> Good Grief !! And your point about how to store the files when they're
> digital -- I didn't think of that... Burn a CD? Uh oh, Yuck. It is
> awfully nice to have that piece of film... is there a photoshop plugin
> that puts your digital neg on film? (Maybe next year?)
>
> You say with digital files "you only have images if you print them." As I
> recall either photoshop or my Epson software will print an array -- if so,
> theoretically one could print a contact sheet. I hate the thought of
> learning to do all that stuff... more learning curve, ugh ! But scanning
> film negs is also time consuming, so I see no easy way out. And I do know
> that I can't/won't carry 2 pounds of Nikon everywhere. (I suppose if the
> answer were simple, everyone would be doing it.)
>
> More questions ASAP.
>
> Meanwhile, many thanks to all...
>
> Judy
Received on Sun Nov 9 11:56:20 2003