| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 42936 | 2004-02-27 05:38:00 | Digital Camera's | Sherilee (4441) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 218544 | 2004-02-27 05:38:00 | Just to play with on my computer. Toys for the boys. :Doesn't have to be tooo flash but not DUMB either:( - what do you think of this one from Dick Smith can get it for $110 I think....... OR Any suggestions. Thanks in advance. www.dse.co.nz |
Sherilee (4441) | ||
| 218545 | 2004-02-27 05:56:00 | If you don't want to be disappointed on printing a 6 x 4 image then I would go to at least a 2 Megapixel camera. If you are using it to Email pics over the Net then the 1.3 will work. I wouldn't use the 1 Megapixel camera for landscapes though. I have a 2 Megapixel camera at the moment but I'm about to upgrade to 8 Megapixels with 7 x Optical zoom. Needless to say there will be a consequent increase in price. :-( I am keeping my 2 Meg camera as well so I'm not trying to sell my one. |
Elephant (599) | ||
| 218546 | 2004-02-27 08:13:00 | My advice is ya still get what ya pay for. If you buy a $199 camera expect the equivalent photos from it. Personally I don't recommend it myself. I have played with and printed photos from all the cameras at work ( we sell em too ) and would advise look at a 3.2 megapixel camera or higher, yes they are more expensive but the results leave the 1.3 or 2.0 cameras for dead and you get an even better jump with the 5.0 megapixel camera. Also remember that with the minimal zoom that comes with these cameras you will most likely need/want to do some photo editing, the more info ya photo has the more you can do with it. Hell for $299 Phillips are selling a 1.3 megapixel camera built into a 128mb usb key. |
dipstick01 (445) | ||
| 218547 | 2004-02-27 08:29:00 | Hi Sherilee, It seems amazing value. I received a promo email from DSE today, offering this for $95. (on order with a deposit). It appears to be a 1.3mp camera. No zoom or memory is specified. The software included appears good. It depends on what you expect & what you wish to do with the pics. It will be ok as a webcam, and for taking pics to email. Despite another comment, it should print 6 x 4" ok with a good printer. In my experience using 2, 3 & 6mp cameras, with 6x optical zoom, even the 2mp one prints very well up to 8 x 10" size on the Canon printer. A 2mp or more camera will cost many more hundreds of dollars, & is worth considering to benefit from higher quality, larger prints, & more options, such as optical zoom. If about $100 is all one can afford, it's better than nothing, but results from a 2 or 3mp optical zoom camera will be more satisfying. |
Bazza (407) | ||
| 218548 | 2004-02-27 08:58:00 | Cant go wrong for 100 bucks,just don't ecpect miracles. We had(infact still have) a 1.3 mp work camera,cost near a grand when we got it.It done us fine for a few years. |
metla (154) | ||
| 218549 | 2004-02-27 10:08:00 | We have a 2MP camera here and it produces terrible photos. If you are looking at buying that "thing" I'd imagine you would be pretty displeased with it. No zoom lense, no features. It would produce blocky, out-of-focus photos. Digital I would say 3.2MP minimum with 3x optical zoom and wouldn't go any lower. Save your money for another month and you won't regret it. Its funny, the quality of film photo cameras has gotten to the point where it is near perfected yet now everyone is moving to digital and a lower standard of quality. Whats up with that? |
PoWa (203) | ||
| 218550 | 2004-02-27 10:45:00 | Comparison time folks(and folkesess) heres a photo i took about a year ago on a 1.3 megapixel camera. www.computermedic.co.nz And heres one i took today on my 2 megapixel camera. www.computermedic.co.nz Make sure you have your browser is set NOT to resize images,otherwise you wont get to enjoy them in their full glory. For they are truely glorious. Lmao. Fell free to print them out to see how the relative print quality is,but if your going to compare them to a pic from the photolab then use photo quality ink,photo quality paper...and set your printer to print at the highest possible detail. Otherwise it aint a fair comparison is it. And personally,i think even the 1.3 took excellent photo's. |
metla (154) | ||
| 218551 | 2004-02-27 12:41:00 | Metla makes a convincing argument - a pic is worth 1Kword I started with a 3 MP camera and 3x optical zoom, but was occasionaly frustrated with the limited macro. So, in a fit of fiscal irresponsibility I bought a 7MP with 10x optical zoom. Took great pictures, but it was "too valuable" to take everywhere and so I missed opportunities while the camera and I were parted. I now have an "end of line" 3.2Mp with 6X , and spent a bit extra on a proper camera bag (water resistant, padded against shock) and cart it round all the time. I miss the bells and whistles and the quality feel, but, it is always handy, and is great value. A picture lost, is forever lost. A real neat camera that ain't there is not good value, regardless of price and Metla shows us what can be done. R2 |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 218552 | 2004-02-27 16:24:00 | Well said R2! Ive just bought myself a Creative PC-Cam 850 today.. Its 3MP, with only 4x Digital Zoom (Not Optical). Its a brilliant camera, much more than I would have expected for $180!! Might I suggest you hunt around Pricespy a little bit? Who knows what bargains you may find... :-) Chill. |
Chilling_Silently (228) | ||
| 218553 | 2004-02-28 00:49:00 | The DSE ad appears a little light on specifics - does it have ANY kind of memory card (A 1.3 Mp with 4Mb of inbuilt RAM is a worry, for instance) - in fact - does it resolve colour, what sort of batteries (is it a throwaway - :-) ) TANSTAAFL R2 |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||