The Digital Camera Thread: Questions, discussions, etc.

[kb100]

Originally Posted by StarScream

kb100, Apart from Kaushik's suggestions, there is really one reason why P&S pics come out grainy. And that is ISO. The sensors of all cameras have a range of sensitivity just like we used to have with film: Speed ratings of 100, 200, 400 etc. The higher the ISO, the more the grain.
In the pictures with high grain, check the ISO. Any number above 400 will be very grainy. The way to fix this is to go manual and tweak settings yourself. There really is no way around it. But do remember there is no free lunch - a low ISO setting will mean slower shutter speed and camera shake.
The camera is trying to do the best job it can given its limitations
For a new camera are you looking at a DLSR or a P&S? A DSLR will be more capable of handing the situations you have described.

Hmmm....

I had the ISO@400 and the AWB on Evaluate (not auto) in the MANUAL MODE/SETTINGS ... I was under the assumption if I select full auto it will pick the default settings - but looks like it inst doing that!

Don't know if thats the problem but I have put everything on Auto even in the manual settings.. and am off to Ooty tomorrow !! The results will speak for itself but something tells me this must be it!

And yes... I am willing to pick up a DSLR - something that gives excellent shots with great "depth" - I am a BIG fan of DEPTH in shots!... somehow dont like how most camera's (the P&Ss that is) don't give you the feeling of depth. Depth makes portraits and landscape come alive! I don't mind the bulk - but I do want ONE lens - or maybe max Two (Tele). BUT both of them have to be quick on the draw - that is give me the ability to take a shot on the run without having to dawdle on the settings.

Suggestions are most welcome - along with an indicative price.

Edit: The Batt- 840mAh - used to last me almost 100 odd snaps with flash when new - more if flash was not used as much. I have a spare which really seems to have copped it - gives me only some 15 odd shots now (with flash) - Hence was thinking might make more sense to buy a new camera than go in for two new batteries. Ixus 430 was launched some time in Feb 04 and I picked it up in April 04 - this was the top of the line then with 5 megapixels just getting in . But now 8-10 seem the way to go!

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by kb100

And yes... I am willing to pick up a DSLR - something that gives excellent shots with great "depth" - I am a BIG fan of DEPTH in shots!... somehow dont like how most camera's (the P&Ss that is) don't give you the feeling of depth. Depth makes portraits and landscape come alive!

By depth you are referring to Depth of Field (DOF)? Then let me confuse you further. P&S generally offers better depth than dSLR because of their smaller sensor. For a given F-stop, bigger the sensor, lesser the depth.

[navin]

Originally Posted by Samurai

By depth you are referring to Depth of Field (DOF)? Then let me confuse you further. P&S generally offers better depth than dSLR because of their smaller sensor. For a given F-stop, bigger the sensor, lesser the depth.

Naughty boy, Samurai!

DOF can be controlled by varying the apature so a DSLR can have the DOF as a P&S if the user wants it so.

DSLRs (even those with APS-C sized sensors) cant be compared with P&Ss. Most P&S sensors are 1/10 the area of a APS-C sensor.
Depth of Field: Optical: Glossary: Learn: Digital Photography Review

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by StarScream

kb100, Apart from Kaushik's suggestions, there is really one reason why P&S pics come out grainy. And that is ISO. The sensors of all cameras have a range of sensitivity just like we used to have with film: Speed ratings of 100, 200, 400 etc. The higher the ISO, the more the grain.

Again I forgot that I was dealing with P&S in auto mode and conveniently forgot about ISO settings ;-), yes in auto mode it'll try to set the highest ISO if light is low so that you can get good shutter speed.And what more with P&S cameras is that they have even smaller sensors and the noise is more in them then SLR's.


and KB,if you want to pick up a SLR but want to shoot as fast as possible using the automatic modes then there is no point of going for a DSLR. You'll end up getting the same results only.All I could say is that you need to be very patient and wait for the moment to get a better shot from the good ones.And if you want to take quick shots without bothering about settings then better to go for something like prosumer cameras(with longer reach) A DSLR may be a overkill here.Another good point about P&S is that most of the P&S cameras will do a kind of post processing on the shots so that colors will look vivid but in DSLR most of the time one has to do his own post processing.
I always suggest this to people as I've seen quite a few people who buy the most expensive DSLR but use it as a P&S and get frustrated with the results.Some of them learn and some just throws the camera aways blaming it for the not so good shots.
The initial stage of photography has a steep learning curve(albeit a easy one if one is interested) and go for a DSLR only if you think you really want to.I'm not trying to dishearten you by saying this, please don't get me wrong.I'm also a learner in this field but have experienced these things along the journey.
Regards
Kaushik

[Torqy]

Originally Posted by redrage

I agree that a lot of photos need PP and its very important to learn RAW conversion. Why i compared was i took the pictures in JPEG format and the straight out of box Jpeg's both camera gave, i felt very bad comparing the pictures. I have posted the image from both cameras taken at the same place during our safari, and i dont know what setting went wrong but the images out of 40D lacked any colour, Was there something wrong with exposure? Aperture? DoF? I like to mention that these are out of the camera pictures without any PP. Same 18-55 lenses.

D40

40D

@Redrage: The difference is the White Balance. Some cameras sometimes do a bad job at choosing the right White Balance (if you're in Auto WB). Try the same picture with white balance CLOUDY (or the canon equivalent).

-- Torqy

[kibi]

Hi Guys,

One quick question which is better Canon A710 IS/Canon A570 IS or the new Canon A590 IS

Kibi

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by Torqy

@Redrage: The difference is the White Balance. Some cameras sometimes do a bad job at choosing the right White Balance (if you're in Auto WB). Try the same picture with white balance CLOUDY (or the canon equivalent).

-- Torqy

IMHO, white balance may have played a small part but it cannot account for the difference in the shots. Wrong WB can add a different color cast and can even make a picture look washed out. But in the two pictures Redrage posted - the one from the D40 has sun and the other not.

[StarScream]

Originally Posted by kb100

Hmmm....

I had the ISO@400 and the AWB on Evaluate (not auto) in the MANUAL MODE/SETTINGS ... I was under the assumption if I select full auto it will pick the default settings - but looks like it inst doing that!

Don't know if thats the problem but I have put everything on Auto even in the manual settings.. and am off to Ooty tomorrow !! The results will speak for itself but something tells me this must be it!

And yes... I am willing to pick up a DSLR - something that gives excellent shots with great "depth" - I am a BIG fan of DEPTH in shots!... somehow dont like how most camera's (the P&Ss that is) don't give you the feeling of depth. Depth makes portraits and landscape come alive! I don't mind the bulk - but I do want ONE lens - or maybe max Two (Tele). BUT both of them have to be quick on the draw - that is give me the ability to take a shot on the run without having to dawdle on the settings.

Suggestions are most welcome - along with an indicative price.

Well you can get all the depth you want with a DSLR because you can control it with the aperture of the lens, as Navin said. Usually with a DSLR lens what people want and pay more for is fast glass i.e. lenses that let in a lot more light, which helps to throw the background out of focus. SLR lenses, even the cheapest, have no issue with depth - any and every lens will do that for you.
In my mind there is a direct correlation between an SLR and better pictures. I actually find digital P&S cameras, fidgety to use.
My suggestion for a DSLR is the Nikon D40x with the 18-200VR lens (the closest you can get to a do it all lens). Together they should cost $1,300. You can get the same lens range for less if you opt to go for two lenses instead of one - the 18-55mm and 55-200 VR. Those two with the D40x should cost about $850.
There is an inadvertent advertisement here for the D40x in Redrage's post!

[sids911]

Guys,

The Times of India ran an advert for new Canon cameras yesterday. One of the launches is the EOS 450D Kit (EF S18-55IS) which is priced at INR 47995.00!!!! . (Source: Canon India)

450D Body only is available at 42995.00.

Is it already available in grey markets?

[shankar.balan]

Hi

You might want to try and set the exposure on 400 ASA plus select the spot autofocus option which usually increases the camera's ability to take superb photos both outdoors and indoors.

I use a SONY DSC T9 6Megapixel with 3X Optical Zoom - Carl Zeiss Vario Tessar Lens.

It is very small, easily hooked onto your belt, and takes brilliant photos both outdoors and indoors. I can assure you of this because I ve covered a lot of ground with this camera and indeed, since I write Golf Travelogues for a magazine called Golfline as a freelancer, I ve given them high quality print ready photos of many golf courses around the world which were taken with this little camera of mine. All these photos have come out very well in print, in the magazine.

For your ref, I am attaching a few photos of cars taken with this camera, but which have been re-sized to a much smaller size to fit onto this website.

The two photos of Alvis Cars have been taken indoors at a museum, without flash, but with Spot AF on and with the 400 ASA setting. The photo of the Black Jag with the Spitfire in the background was taken with the same setting but on a moderately bright summer morning around 11am, and the photo of the Red Jag was taken around 630am in the morning when the sun hadn't yet come out and on the same camera setting.

There are some even better recent options than mine which are available from SONY and I would recommend that you view them.

Notwithstanding what anyone else may say, I am convinced that these are frankly amongst the best, most user friendly and technologically advanced digital cameras available for "non-professional" photographers like us and importantly, at reasonably manageable prices too.

Cheers

Originally Posted by kb100

HI Gurus

I have a 4 year old Canon Ixus 430 camera. Its a 4 mega pixel point and shoot - well, I don't know if it does anything more - I just put it on max resolution and point and shoot!!!

It used to give me excellent sharp and vivid pictures. But lately the pics have become extremely 'grainy' - this effect gets even more exaggerated indoors. What could be the reason? Here is an example

Secondly what might be a good camera to buy. Something with some good preloaded options/settings - again lots of landscape and holiday 'spur of the moment' shooting - No time to join Photography classes!!

[harjeev]

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

if you want to pick up a SLR but want to shoot as fast as possible using the automatic modes then there is no point of going for a DSLR. You'll end up getting the same results only.All I could say is that you need to be very patient and wait for the moment to get a better shot from the good ones.And if you want to take quick shots without bothering about settings then better to go for something like prosumer cameras(with longer reach) A DSLR may be a overkill here.Another good point about P&S is that most of the P&S cameras will do a kind of post processing on the shots so that colors will look vivid but in DSLR most of the time one has to do his own post processing.
I always suggest this to people as I've seen quite a few people who buy the most expensive DSLR but use it as a P&S and get frustrated with the results.Some of them learn and some just throws the camera aways blaming it for the not so good shots.
The initial stage of photography has a steep learning curve(albeit a easy one if one is interested) and go for a DSLR only if you think you really want to.I'm not trying to dishearten you by saying this, please don't get me wrong.I'm also a learner in this field but have experienced these things along the journey.
Regards
Kaushik

Kaushik
I too am not able to decide between a D-SLR or a Prosumer camera. Though I want to have control in my had I can frankly say that what I have been doing till now is P&S.
Actually that is what I am using now. My first cam was a Sony Cybershot DSC-P9 (4 MP) I bought it in 2001. Though I occasionally borrow the DSC-W7 (7.2 MP) (cousin owns it) and this is the one that I am currently using.
Now i am not able to decide whether to go in for a Canon PowerShot S5-IS or a D-SLR EOS 450D.
What I have been doing in the past is only Point and shoot. Though I wanted to seriously pursue photography as a serious hobby but never done it in the past 7 years. So what photography I generally do is on holidays and on family functions.

I am totally confused here so any help or tips would be useful.

[tsk1979]

Go for a prosumer like S5 IS. Unless you are really going into the type of photography which pushes equipment to the limits(Very long exposures, high ISOs, extreme zoom etc.,) a P&S will keep you happier.

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by harjeev

Kaushik
Now i am not able to decide whether to go in for a Canon PowerShot S5-IS or a D-SLR EOS 450D.
What I have been doing in the past is only Point and shoot. Though I wanted to seriously pursue photography as a serious hobby but never done it in the past 7 years. So what photography I generally do is on holidays and on family functions.

I am totally confused here so any help or tips would be useful.

Hi harjeev,
Well you said that you are interested in learning photography but haven't done for 7 years, that means that you are not very sure about it. So I would suggest as TSK said that go for a prosumer which will give you enough control(oh yes these cameras also have creative exposure control) to learn the nitty-gritties of photography. Now say after using it for a year or something if you feel like outgrowing the camera[that means say you want more control to try different things, you know something that can be done but the camera limits you etc.] then you'll know that you are ready for a DSLR.And then only go for one.Otherwise if you are happy with that camera then you can continue with that, those prosumers are also very very good cameras for many purposes.During this period use the net to fullest of use to learn photography, it's a treasure trove of information.Learn,experiment,shoot and then decide.I've said one year just as an example but you may outgrow your camera even in 2-3 months itself if you are keen on it.
wish you all the best.
Kaushik

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

Notwithstanding what anyone else may say, I am convinced that these are frankly amongst the best, most user friendly and technologically advanced digital cameras available for "non-professional" photographers like us and importantly, at reasonably manageable prices too.

But the images you have provided don't give that impression. I have seen way better shots from Canon or Olympus P&S. BTW, I own a prosumer Sony DSC F-717, but that can't be compared to a ultra compact like T9.

Talking about non-professionals, we have lots of dSLR totting non-professionals in the forum including yours truely. Therefore the term non-professional is moot. You should rather use terms like photography-aware and photography-unaware people. The T9 would be a good choice for the latter group.

Edit: The real legend among ultra compact was Fujifilm F30/F31fd.

[aburagohain]

Originally Posted by harjeev

What I have been doing in the past is only Point and shoot. Though I wanted to seriously pursue photography as a serious hobby but never done it in the past 7 years. So what photography I generally do is on holidays and on family functions.

harjeev, if you plan to mainly take pictures of family gatherings and not go out for much hobby shooting, i guess a point and shoot should be considered, the cameras on offer today are pretty good even at the prosumer level, there is of course the occasional chance to fiddle with the manual controls, only they would be a little clumsy, hidden behind menus.

one thing i have felt, one can enjoy a good dslr only while alone or with other enthusiasts, normally people would complain that you are taking too much time to just click the shot and soon enough you'd get bored of the complaints and convert your costly high end slr to a point and shoot