Best digital STILL cameras?

John Garcia · July 23rd, 2003, 07:49 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Steven Digges : Maybe I should actually TRY to sell this camera while I still can, I have 2 of them, it wasn’t even for sale until I offered it to John here. If I keep it for too long it will end up in my pile of “other old stuff” like a Tascam 4 track cassette Porta-Studio. That would be a shame because it is a great camera.

Buying digital cameras is just like buying a computer. How much can you spend and what are you going to use it for? We all know a guy that owns a PC with a P4 @ 3GHZ, 512Ram and a 120 Gig HD – What does he do with it? Checks his e-mail on AOL and types letters in Word. How much money did he leave at the store?

Jeff is right about the 6 mega pixel cameras being keepers. They have finally reached a resolution that will no longer result in dramatic improvements every 12 months. It’s just not necessary, more than that is like checking e-mail on AOL with the hot PC.

In case anyone is interested here is a little more on the D30. It will make great prints up to 8x10 (or 8 ½ x 11)– the fine/.jpg setting resuts in a 8x10 with 180 pixels/inch in Photo Shop. The rule of thumb for ink jet printing is 250 pixels/inch will render maximum quality from most prosumer ink jets. At 180 these prints look fantastic coming out of my Canon S9000. They are photo quality. If your not going to make prints bigger than that you will be happy. The real secret to ink jet printing is in the paper anyway.

It is a nice camera, the package I offered John will make a serious amateur very happy. Hey, for that matter, anyone want a Tascam Porta Studio? I could probably still find it in my shed.

Personally, I miss the days when I carried around a bag full of Nikon F3s. They were bullet proof, they worked at 30 below zero, you only put batteries in the motor drive, and your investment was good for many years.

I hope Chris gives us a place to keep this going.

Steve -->>>

hmm, interesting points...damn, if I dont pick up your camera, then im sure someone else would be happy to. Its a sweet setup, and yeah, I agree, you should sell it soon before it turns "ancient"....:) thanks again. I appreciate it...

Jeff Donald · July 23rd, 2003, 08:42 PM

Michael,

For large prints the Epson printers are available. You can upres with GFP and it does a decent job. You would save as a TIFF and burn the file to a CD and take it to the service bureau.

I was a beta tester for SmartScale (Mac) and I don't think it's in the same class as GFP, but give it a year or less. It may not be too stable on the PC yet. I heard from other testers that the PC version crashes still. Image quality is about 90% of GFP, but in some cases excedes GFP.

Mike Rehmus · July 23rd, 2003, 10:03 PM

RE: 6 megapixel cameras are enough.

I'd not bet on it. I'd guess we will see 3-CCD cameras before too long. Or maybe 4-CCD cameras with a black channel to boot?

Dean Sensui · July 24th, 2003, 04:18 AM

Regarding Genuine Fractals: I've enlarged photos from a Fuji Finepix Pro to 6 feet high at about 100 pixels/inch with excellent results... which can be quite astounding.

In fact, I had to re-print the image softer as the tiny pores and blemishes of the model's face was too apparent at close viewing distances.

Not many printers will take an ".stn" file, so you'd have to open it up at the final size and save it as a TIFF or JPEG.

Dean Sensui
Base Two Productions

Jeff Donald · July 24th, 2003, 04:33 AM

I doubt we'll ever see a 3 or 4 CCD camera in the 35mm or DX (APS size) market. The prism block is too large for a conventional style body. Pro's aren't going to want to throw away all there lenses. It might work for medium format (MF) that has interchangeable backs. One of the strikes against the new Olympus 4:3 format is the switch to new lenses. I just don't see National Geographic and other large organizations giving up there multi million dollar lens inventories.

Mike Rehmus · July 24th, 2003, 10:44 AM

I'd bet you that they'd trash everything to get a demonstrably better image. They've all done it before. Maybe with reluctance but they'd do it.

I can just see something with a 645 body size doing this. Perhaps the Foveon chip will finally become good enough to perform in this arena.

Jacques Mersereau · July 24th, 2003, 12:42 PM

As I write this post, I am printing out 36"x52" poster of
a very complex image taken with a Canon 10D
of an osprey nest with two fuzzy chicks and an egg that's been "pipped"

I'm also trying to get genuine fractals pro here at the U. If I succeed,
I'll post back with my observations once I reprint it.

One thing , the large format printer only does 75 DPI, so
I am not sure how much better the image will look once processed.

Jeff Donald · July 24th, 2003, 12:54 PM

For printing at such a low dpi you might want to look into NIK Multimedia. They make a product specifically for sharpening inkjet prints, NIK sharpener Pro. I've used it and it far exceeds USM (unsharp mask) in Photoshop. I believe they have a free download demo available also.

Jacques Mersereau · July 24th, 2003, 01:35 PM

Thanks for the tip Jeff.

I got the poster in front of me, and it looks great. I had to do the usual
tweaking for the specific printer, but a bit of saturation boost and a
a hint of contrast seems to have done a good job.

The 10D ROCKS!

Brendan Marnell · January 16th, 2009, 05:07 AM

Years later, can anyone please tell me if and how the quality of landscape images is improved by using 17-40mm rather than 18-55mm with 40D?

Jeff Harper · January 16th, 2009, 06:45 AM

FYI photo.net has a canon forum full of 40D users that probably give specific feedback on your question. Very nice site.

Daniel Bates · July 4th, 2009, 01:08 PM

The 17-40 has better glass than the 18-55. It's sharper, more colourful and contrasty, focuses faster (in my experience), etc.

It's no Zeiss but it is one of the best wideangle zooms available for EOS.

Brendan Marnell · July 4th, 2009, 02:15 PM

Thank you Daniel.

In the meantime I've been using EF 24-105 and it's the best I've tried for both landscapes and close to mid-distant bird-flight ... sharp and fast. It's late in life to be learning to shoot and process RAW but now I have 2 good lenses, 24-105 and 100-400. The quality difference between 72dpi and 280dpi is amazing me.

Daniel Bates · July 4th, 2009, 02:58 PM

Be careful with L-series glass - it's a slippery slope to f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes. I started with a 50mm f/1.8 II and ended up owning (at various times) a 135/2, 70-200/2.8, 300/2.8 I, and 35/1.4.

And, much as I love my company 5D Mark II, there are few autofocus systems that can hang with a 1D Mark IIN for BIF.

Tim Polster · July 5th, 2009, 09:57 PM

Yes, buying L-glass is a one way ticket.

Once you use one L lens you will never want to use anything else for Canon unless you pay up past the L quality.

July 23rd, 2003, 07:49 PM	#106
John Garcia Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Honolulu, Hawaii Posts: 199	<<<-- Originally posted by Steven Digges : Maybe I should actually TRY to sell this camera while I still can, I have 2 of them, it wasn’t even for sale until I offered it to John here. If I keep it for too long it will end up in my pile of “other old stuff” like a Tascam 4 track cassette Porta-Studio. That would be a shame because it is a great camera. Buying digital cameras is just like buying a computer. How much can you spend and what are you going to use it for? We all know a guy that owns a PC with a P4 @ 3GHZ, 512Ram and a 120 Gig HD – What does he do with it? Checks his e-mail on AOL and types letters in Word. How much money did he leave at the store? Jeff is right about the 6 mega pixel cameras being keepers. They have finally reached a resolution that will no longer result in dramatic improvements every 12 months. It’s just not necessary, more than that is like checking e-mail on AOL with the hot PC. In case anyone is interested here is a little more on the D30. It will make great prints up to 8x10 (or 8 ½ x 11)– the fine/.jpg setting resuts in a 8x10 with 180 pixels/inch in Photo Shop. The rule of thumb for ink jet printing is 250 pixels/inch will render maximum quality from most prosumer ink jets. At 180 these prints look fantastic coming out of my Canon S9000. They are photo quality. If your not going to make prints bigger than that you will be happy. The real secret to ink jet printing is in the paper anyway. It is a nice camera, the package I offered John will make a serious amateur very happy. Hey, for that matter, anyone want a Tascam Porta Studio? I could probably still find it in my shed. Personally, I miss the days when I carried around a bag full of Nikon F3s. They were bullet proof, they worked at 30 below zero, you only put batteries in the motor drive, and your investment was good for many years. I hope Chris gives us a place to keep this going. Steve -->>> hmm, interesting points...damn, if I dont pick up your camera, then im sure someone else would be happy to. Its a sweet setup, and yeah, I agree, you should sell it soon before it turns "ancient"....:) thanks again. I appreciate it... __________________ John Garcia

July 23rd, 2003, 08:42 PM	#107
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Michael, For large prints the Epson printers are available. You can upres with GFP and it does a decent job. You would save as a TIFF and burn the file to a CD and take it to the service bureau. I was a beta tester for SmartScale (Mac) and I don't think it's in the same class as GFP, but give it a year or less. It may not be too stable on the PC yet. I heard from other testers that the PC version crashes still. Image quality is about 90% of GFP, but in some cases excedes GFP. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

July 23rd, 2003, 10:03 PM	#108
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	RE: 6 megapixel cameras are enough. I'd not bet on it. I'd guess we will see 3-CCD cameras before too long. Or maybe 4-CCD cameras with a black channel to boot? __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

July 24th, 2003, 04:33 AM	#110
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	I doubt we'll ever see a 3 or 4 CCD camera in the 35mm or DX (APS size) market. The prism block is too large for a conventional style body. Pro's aren't going to want to throw away all there lenses. It might work for medium format (MF) that has interchangeable backs. One of the strikes against the new Olympus 4:3 format is the switch to new lenses. I just don't see National Geographic and other large organizations giving up there multi million dollar lens inventories. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

July 24th, 2003, 10:44 AM	#111
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	I'd bet you that they'd trash everything to get a demonstrably better image. They've all done it before. Maybe with reluctance but they'd do it. I can just see something with a 645 body size doing this. Perhaps the Foveon chip will finally become good enough to perform in this arena. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

July 24th, 2003, 04:18 AM	#109
Dean Sensui Inner Circle Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 2,054	Regarding Genuine Fractals: I've enlarged photos from a Fuji Finepix Pro to 6 feet high at about 100 pixels/inch with excellent results... which can be quite astounding. In fact, I had to re-print the image softer as the tiny pores and blemishes of the model's face was too apparent at close viewing distances. Not many printers will take an ".stn" file, so you'd have to open it up at the final size and save it as a TIFF or JPEG. Dean Sensui Base Two Productions

July 24th, 2003, 12:42 PM	#112
Jacques Mersereau Trustee Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 1,334	As I write this post, I am printing out 36"x52" poster of a very complex image taken with a Canon 10D of an osprey nest with two fuzzy chicks and an egg that's been "pipped" I'm also trying to get genuine fractals pro here at the U. If I succeed, I'll post back with my observations once I reprint it. One thing , the large format printer only does 75 DPI, so I am not sure how much better the image will look once processed. __________________ Jacques Mersereau University of Michigan-Video Studio Manager

July 24th, 2003, 12:54 PM	#113
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	For printing at such a low dpi you might want to look into NIK Multimedia. They make a product specifically for sharpening inkjet prints, NIK sharpener Pro. I've used it and it far exceeds USM (unsharp mask) in Photoshop. I believe they have a free download demo available also. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

July 24th, 2003, 01:35 PM	#114
Jacques Mersereau Trustee Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 1,334	Thanks for the tip Jeff. I got the poster in front of me, and it looks great. I had to do the usual tweaking for the specific printer, but a bit of saturation boost and a a hint of contrast seems to have done a good job. The 10D ROCKS! __________________ Jacques Mersereau University of Michigan-Video Studio Manager

January 16th, 2009, 05:07 AM	#115
Brendan Marnell Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 938	40D + which lens? Years later, can anyone please tell me if and how the quality of landscape images is improved by using 17-40mm rather than 18-55mm with 40D?

January 16th, 2009, 06:45 AM	#116
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	FYI photo.net has a canon forum full of 40D users that probably give specific feedback on your question. Very nice site.

July 4th, 2009, 01:08 PM	#117
Daniel Bates Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Daegu, Korea Posts: 180	The 17-40 has better glass than the 18-55. It's sharper, more colourful and contrasty, focuses faster (in my experience), etc. It's no Zeiss but it is one of the best wideangle zooms available for EOS.

July 4th, 2009, 02:15 PM	#118
Brendan Marnell Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 938	Thank you Daniel. In the meantime I've been using EF 24-105 and it's the best I've tried for both landscapes and close to mid-distant bird-flight ... sharp and fast. It's late in life to be learning to shoot and process RAW but now I have 2 good lenses, 24-105 and 100-400. The quality difference between 72dpi and 280dpi is amazing me.

July 4th, 2009, 02:58 PM	#119
Daniel Bates Regular Crew Join Date: May 2006 Location: Daegu, Korea Posts: 180	Be careful with L-series glass - it's a slippery slope to f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes. I started with a 50mm f/1.8 II and ended up owning (at various times) a 135/2, 70-200/2.8, 300/2.8 I, and 35/1.4. And, much as I love my company 5D Mark II, there are few autofocus systems that can hang with a 1D Mark IIN for BIF.

July 5th, 2009, 09:57 PM	#120
Tim Polster Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arlington, TX Posts: 2,231	Yes, buying L-glass is a one way ticket. Once you use one L lens you will never want to use anything else for Canon unless you pay up past the L quality.