How many people got new camera’s for Christmas?

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

she gave me a two mega pixel camera. Yuck! I’m taking this thing back. ~ sigh ~
—

It’s not even my holiday, and I think that returning the gift is a mistake! An inexpensive camera can still take great pictures . . . if you have the patience and are willing to follow some guidelines. I have a low pixel count camera and I love it! Any poor pictures I’ve taken are not the fault of the camera, but mine because I forgot to apply the principles of good photography.

Yes, I do want a better quality camera, but it has nothing to do with pixel count. I’d like more of a lens range available than what mine gives, especially wide angle views, and I can’t get that in a less expensive camera. Until I can justify giving mine to the kids, however, I take my camera everywhere and photograph everything. I consider it a challenge to work within the limitations of my camera and still get good to great photographs.

My advice: Smile a lot, say "Thank you for the camera", use it a lot and save for what you really want. That way you’ll both be happy and you’ll have a spare camera for travel, camping and other times when you may not want to risk a high cost camera.

Major Malfunction wrote:

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

she gave me a two mega pixel camera. Yuck! I’m taking this thing back. ~ sigh ~
—

It’s not even my holiday, and I think that returning the gift is a mistake! An inexpensive camera can still take great pictures . . . if you have the patience and are willing to follow some guidelines. I have a low pixel count camera and I love it! Any poor pictures I’ve taken are not the fault of the camera, but mine because I forgot to apply the principles of good photography.

Yes, I do want a better quality camera, but it has nothing to do with pixel count.

Some people have to compensate in pixels to make up in other areas. (Sorry couldn’t resist).

I’d like more of a lens range available than what mine gives,

especially wide angle views, and I can’t get that in a less expensive camera. Until I can justify giving mine to the kids, however, I take my camera everywhere and photograph everything. I consider it a challenge to work within the limitations of my camera and still get good to great photographs.

My advice: Smile a lot, say "Thank you for the camera", use it a lot and save for what you really want. That way you’ll both be happy and you’ll have a spare camera for travel, camping and other times when you may not want to risk a high cost camera.

The advantage of a small point and shoot is that you can cart it around with you just about everywhere and get more photos.

JP

JP White wrote:

and get more photos.

Something like 300 pics on a 128MB card!

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

she gave me a two mega pixel camera. Yuck! I’m taking this thing back. ~ sigh ~
—

And I gave my wife a 2MP.
You know what? it is a great camera, its lens is by far better than the same, newer, model offering 4MP.
My wife never ever had a print enlarged beyond 4×6 so what would she need more pixels for?

I’ll trade pixels for a real lens any day
I have this 5.2 MP someone gave me and I am going to sell it to get a 4MP. Anyone in for an trade? (MinoltaDimage7 for a Canon G3)

How ungrateful can you get?
Maybe that’s all ‘she’ could afford?
Far too many people value their gifts in comparative terms when it’s the giving of the thing they should cherish. I have a watch I almost never wear but I treasure it beyond belief because it was a gift from my wife. Not the one I wanted but you couldn’t get it away from me if my life depended on it. If you learn tollerance, you will enjoy what you have much more than if it was the best available. Happy Christmas to you too.

Doug
———————
"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

she gave me a two mega pixel camera. Yuck! I’m taking this thing back. ~ sigh ~
—
~ Everything turns out all right in the end. If it’s not all right, it’s not the end yet ~

she gave me a two mega pixel camera. Yuck! I’m taking this thing back. ~ sigh ~

ungrateful.. its not even your birthday and ur not happy. ————–
Become a mime. Nothing is more annoying than a mime.

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

she gave me a two mega pixel camera. Yuck! I’m taking this thing back. ~ sigh ~
—

Got a digital Rebel in October. Wife bought a telephoto and flash for Christmas. I haven’t seen them yet as she’s on a cruise but I expect to get some great shots. Now consider this… I’ll probably miss 99% of the great opportunities you’ll get with your little 2 pix because I won’t be able to keep my camera with me. IMHO you might spend your money more wisely on a bigger card and extra batteries. It should keep the peace with her too. By the way, the wife took her old Canon film camera with her to the Caribbean because she was afraid the new one (over $2500 invested in it so far) might get lost/broken/stolen. See my point?

i have a 2.1 mpx camera and if you don’t think it can take good shots, go look at my photography portfolio on my website at www.approach.co.nz and then get back to me if you still dont agree

a poor workman blames his tools…

"Ian Hurst (Troyka)" wrote in message

she gave me a two mega pixel camera. Yuck! I’m taking this thing back. ~ sigh ~

ungrateful.. its not even your birthday and ur not happy. ————–
Become a mime. Nothing is more annoying than a mime.

LOL love the ‘mime’ signature

I must be on the wrong planet or something.
Where are all these people giving cameras away when I’m around. Hell, I’ll take whatever is going, regardless of pixel count, lens, battery type, brand name or anything else for that matter.

Actually I’ve been using a 2MP camera for the last three years and to tell the truth I’d easily rate it among the three best cameras I’ve ever owned. —

Ron.

Stephan wrote in message

And I gave my wife a 2MP.
You know what? it is a great camera, its lens is by far better than the same, newer, model offering 4MP.
My wife never ever had a print enlarged beyond 4×6 so what would she need more pixels for?

I’ll trade pixels for a real lens any day
I have this 5.2 MP someone gave me and I am going to sell it to get a 4MP. Anyone in for an trade? (MinoltaDimage7 for a Canon G3)

Ok Doc, you make a good point! I’ll keep it just to have something to capture stuff with… But I’m gonna get that Nikon 5700. I just got to have it!!!

poor workman blames his tools??? LOL! I like that Steph. I checked out your site and the photo’s look nice. But…. Ever one of your photo’s are small. Show me something larger and without the help of Photoshop. That wedding shot was not to impressive. It’s to small. Perhaps you did this because the photo’s would load faster on this web site. No disrespect intended, but you asked…

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

Ok Doc, you make a good point! I’ll keep it just to have something to capture stuff with… But I’m gonna get that Nikon 5700. I just got to

have

it!!!

Try it first before you buy it.
I find it to small to handle properly and the electronic viewfinder is just a pain.

S

well by now you should have received the email reply i sent you with two full format pics attached as requested – if anyone else wants to see them please feel free to request – always happy to oblige 🙂
steph

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

poor workman blames his tools??? LOL! I like that Steph. I checked out

your

site and the photo’s look nice. But…. Ever one of your photo’s are

small.

Show me something larger and without the help of Photoshop. That wedding shot was not to impressive. It’s to small. Perhaps you did this because

the

photo’s would load faster on this web site. No disrespect intended, but

you

asked…

"Stephan" wrote in message

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

Ok Doc, you make a good point! I’ll keep it just to have something to capture stuff with… But I’m gonna get that Nikon 5700. I just got to

have

it!!!

Try it first before you buy it.
I find it to small to handle properly and the electronic viewfinder is

just

a pain.

But I like mine… but then again my hands are smaller than yours. (I hope!) And I rarely use the electronic viewfinder, usually only for weirdo tight spots like… well just a tight spot.

—
Sally Beacham
www.dizteq.com / www.lvsonline.com
Paint Shop Pro, Filter Frenzy, Xara X
sallyATdizteq.com

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

Ok Doc, you make a good point! I’ll keep it just to have something to capture stuff with… But I’m gonna get that Nikon 5700. I just got to

have

it!!!

Oh, you’re going to keep it? You know, I do make a good point. What strikes me as funny is I’m out shopping today, with the Boxing Day sales and all, and I’m checking out the prices of the 2-3 pix cameras. I didn’t get one, not being an impulse buying kind of guy, but I’m thinking I still haven’t bought myself anything for Christmas… Um, any recommendations? For instance what did you get and how much do you want for it. Ha ha.

"Dr. J. Smith" wrote in message

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

Ok Doc, you make a good point! I’ll keep it just to have something to capture stuff with… But I’m gonna get that Nikon 5700. I just got to

have

it!!!

Oh, you’re going to keep it? You know, I do make a good point. What

strikes

me as funny is I’m out shopping today, with the Boxing Day sales and all, and I’m checking out the prices of the 2-3 pix cameras. I didn’t get one, not being an impulse buying kind of guy, but I’m thinking I still haven’t bought myself anything for Christmas… Um, any recommendations? For instance what did you get and how much do you want for it. Ha ha.

Take it from a photographer who always used Nikon: buy a Canon.

Stephan

did u know that nikon is the only brand with a true WYSIWYG viewfinder in the digital format cameras?
other brands add to the sides and or top so the result is not exactly what you thought when framing the shot

"Stephan" wrote in message

"Dr. J. Smith" wrote in message

"BlackVelvet" wrote in message

Ok Doc, you make a good point! I’ll keep it just to have something to capture stuff with… But I’m gonna get that Nikon 5700. I just got to

have

it!!!

Oh, you’re going to keep it? You know, I do make a good point. What

strikes

me as funny is I’m out shopping today, with the Boxing Day sales and

all,

and I’m checking out the prices of the 2-3 pix cameras. I didn’t get

one,

not being an impulse buying kind of guy, but I’m thinking I still

haven’t

bought myself anything for Christmas… Um, any recommendations? For instance what did you get and how much do you want for it. Ha ha.

Take it from a photographer who always used Nikon: buy a Canon.
Stephan

"steph" wrote in message

did u know that nikon is the only brand with a true WYSIWYG viewfinder in the digital format cameras?
other brands add to the sides and or top so the result is not exactly what you thought when framing the shot

Not so important detail really.

Stephan

"Stephan" wrote in message

"steph" wrote in message

did u know that nikon is the only brand with a true WYSIWYG viewfinder

in

the digital format cameras?
other brands add to the sides and or top so the result is not exactly

what

you thought when framing the shot

Not so important detail really.

Stephan

Stephan, can you elaborate more on your original statement as to why the switch to Nikon? It might even merit a new thread. BTW, I presently own a low-mid model Olympus and am pleased with it, but I am running into its limitations. I’m following and filing this discussion so I can make a better choice for my next camera purchase.

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 21:32:06 GMT, "Major Malfunction" wrote:

"Stephan" wrote in message

"steph" wrote in message

did u know that nikon is the only brand with a true WYSIWYG viewfinder

in

the digital format cameras?
other brands add to the sides and or top so the result is not exactly

what

you thought when framing the shot

Not so important detail really.

Stephan

Stephan, can you elaborate more on your original statement as to why the switch to Nikon? It might even merit a new thread. BTW, I presently own a low-mid model Olympus and am pleased with it, but I am running into its limitations. I’m following and filing this discussion so I can make a better choice for my next camera purchase.

If you’re going to get a compact, even if it’s an advanced 0one, get an Olympus or a Canon. if you’re getting a digital SLR then get a Canon. I like Nikon lenses, but I’m not so keen on their cameras compared to Canon. And independent Sigma EX lenses are as good as both Nikon and Canon IMHO (and the opinion of several photo magazines).

BTW, don’t be fooled by the Fuji, "we use extra sensors so 3 MP is as good as 6 MP adverts. They aren’t.

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui

"Major Malfunction" wrote in message

"Stephan" wrote in message

"steph" wrote in message

did u know that nikon is the only brand with a true WYSIWYG viewfinder

in

the digital format cameras?
other brands add to the sides and or top so the result is not exactly

what

you thought when framing the shot

Not so important detail really.

Stephan

Stephan, can you elaborate more on your original statement as to why the switch to Nikon? It might even merit a new thread. BTW, I presently own a low-mid model Olympus and am pleased with it, but I am running into its limitations. I’m following and filing this discussion so I can make a

better

choice for my next camera purchase.

Not the switch to but from!
Briefly put: Canon is light years ahead of Nikon
When I turned pro EVERYBODY was using Nikon, like an idiot I sold my Contax and my Carl Zeiss babies to follow the pack.
Today, look at stadiums, catwalks, any kind of event you find pros, 99% of the lenses are beige: Canon!
I shoot mostly manual exposure and manual focus so it should not make much of a differenceto me except that the last Nikon lenses I bought suck. My previous 85mm f:1.4 was a gem, the new one (old got stolen) is "muddy" My new 50mm 1.4 is also pretty bad.

Stephan

Not the switch to but from!
Briefly put: Canon is light years ahead of Nikon
When I turned pro EVERYBODY was using Nikon, like an idiot I sold my

Contax

and my Carl Zeiss babies to follow the pack.
Today, look at stadiums, catwalks, any kind of event you find pros, 99% of the lenses are beige: Canon!
I shoot mostly manual exposure and manual focus so it should not make much of a differenceto me except that the last Nikon lenses I bought suck. My previous 85mm f:1.4 was a gem, the new one (old got stolen) is "muddy" My new 50mm 1.4 is also pretty bad.

Stephan

Nikon probably got it’s biggest sales boost from pics of war correspondents crawling around in combat zones with 2 or 3 Nikons hanging and banging around their necks. A hard earned reputation. It doesn’t mean you’ll get better wedding pictures than a Canon but people will look at your camera and nod approvingly. ~Dr.J.

"Dr. J. Smith" wrote in message

Nikon probably got it’s biggest sales boost from pics of war

correspondents

crawling around in combat zones with 2 or 3 Nikons hanging and banging around their necks. A hard earned reputation. It doesn’t mean you’ll get better wedding pictures than a Canon but people will look at your camera

and

nod approvingly. ~Dr.J.

Right, You should always carry a F3 around when shooting in dangerous places.
It wont take better photos but swinging at the end of its neckstrap it becomes an effective and reusable close combat weapon.

Stephan

"Stephan" wrote in message

"Dr. J. Smith" wrote in message

Nikon probably got it’s biggest sales boost from pics of war

correspondents

crawling around in combat zones with 2 or 3 Nikons hanging and banging around their necks. A hard earned reputation. It doesn’t mean you’ll get better wedding pictures than a Canon but people will look at your camera

and

nod approvingly. ~Dr.J.

Right, You should always carry a F3 around when shooting in dangerous places.
It wont take better photos but swinging at the end of its neckstrap it becomes an effective and reusable close combat weapon.

Stephan

I hear you. Puts a whole new twist on ‘halt or I’ll shoot’. Hmm, AR-15, M-16, F-16… F3! Kind of fits right in there doesn’t it? Canon seems to have missed this marketing strategy completely. I’ve got a digital Rebel with a plastic body I wouldn’t trust to beat off the neighbor’s "frisky" poodle. What’s more, the built in flash sucks too.
~Dr.J.

I suspect the biggest boost for Nikon over Canon back in the go old days was the that Canon didn’t try to compete with Nikon at the professional photographic level. Nikon introduced their F in April 59 and the Photomic in April 62. While Canon did make some attempts with the FP in April of 64 it was not until the F1 appeared in February of 72 that they really flexed their muscle. Now days they make cameras that are every bit as good as Nikon and in the eyes of some better. In any event competition is good for the market.

Grant

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 20:28:00 GMT, "Dr. J. Smith" wrote:

I hear you. Puts a whole new twist on ‘halt or I’ll shoot’. Hmm, AR-15, M-16, F-16… F3! Kind of fits right in there doesn’t it? Canon seems to have missed this marketing strategy completely. I’ve got a digital Rebel with a plastic body I wouldn’t trust to beat off the neighbor’s "frisky" poodle. What’s more, the built in flash sucks too.
~Dr.J.

The "Rebel" os a consumer camera. Try lifting an EOS 1 or 3 or 10Ds for that matter. All metal bodies and definitely in the offensive weapon class 😉

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui

"Hecate" wrote in message

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 20:28:00 GMT, "Dr. J. Smith" wrote:

The "Rebel" is a consumer camera.

One look at my last bank statement confirms that. Actually it’s been designated a ‘prosumer’ model, which I understand means it can wrestle for profit with fat Japanese gentlemen in loose undies. At least that’s why I bought it.

All metal bodies are definitely in the offensive

weapon class 😉

I’m not offended, yet, but if this trend catches on we could see such innovations as spikes and razor edges. In the meantime just keep in mind I can definetely throw the "Rebel" further than a 1Ds and I can build an arsenal for the same price as one. ~Doc

"Dr. J. Smith" wrote in message

"Hecate" wrote in message

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 20:28:00 GMT, "Dr. J. Smith" wrote:

The "Rebel" is a consumer camera.

One look at my last bank statement confirms that. Actually it’s been designated a ‘prosumer’ model, which I understand means it can wrestle for profit with fat Japanese gentlemen in loose undies. At least that’s why I bought it.

Not quite right, Prosumer means crap made to look pro in the eyes of "consumers" who think: big and lots of buttons equals pro Pros dream of small, light and only one or two buttons, (think contax G, Leica)
The tragedy is that clients also think Pro equals big and lots of buttons.(think monster F5)

All metal bodies are definitely in the offensive

weapon class 😉

I’m not offended, yet, but if this trend catches on we could see such innovations as spikes and razor edges. In the meantime just keep in mind

I

can definetely throw the "Rebel" further than a 1Ds and I can build an arsenal for the same price as one. ~Doc

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 09:11:42 GMT, "Stephan"
wrote:

"Dr. J. Smith" wrote in message

"Hecate" wrote in message

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 20:28:00 GMT, "Dr. J. Smith" wrote:

The "Rebel" is a consumer camera.

One look at my last bank statement confirms that. Actually it’s been designated a ‘prosumer’ model, which I understand means it can wrestle for profit with fat Japanese gentlemen in loose undies. At least that’s why I bought it.

Not quite right, Prosumer means crap made to look pro in the eyes of "consumers" who think: big and lots of buttons equals pro Pros dream of small, light and only one or two buttons, (think contax G, Leica)
The tragedy is that clients also think Pro equals big and lots of buttons.(think monster F5)

Yep. I use Canon 100s (which were expensive consumer models back in the days when no one had heard the word "prosumer") 2 reasons, one was an almost silent wind/rewind which is a definite benefit when you take mainly nature pictures, the second was a two dial system which meant I could access aperture/speed/bracketing/flash bracketing etc by holding one button and turning one or either of the dials. Easy and quick to use. I’m not sure if their modern cameras are the same.

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 08:06:32 GMT, "Dr. J. Smith" wrote:

All metal bodies are definitely in the offensive

weapon class 😉

I’m not offended, yet, but if this trend catches on we could see such innovations as spikes and razor edges. In the meantime just keep in mind I can definetely throw the "Rebel" further than a 1Ds and I can build an arsenal for the same price as one. ~Doc

LOL! If you really want an offensive weapon get a loan and buy a ‘blad 😉

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui

in article , Hecate at
wrote on 12/29/03 5:28 PM:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 08:06:32 GMT, "Dr. J. Smith" wrote:

All metal bodies are definitely in the offensive

weapon class 😉

I’m not offended, yet, but if this trend catches on we could see such innovations as spikes and razor edges. In the meantime just keep in mind I can definetely throw the "Rebel" further than a 1Ds and I can build an arsenal for the same price as one. ~Doc

LOL! If you really want an offensive weapon get a loan and buy a ‘blad 😉

—
Finally someone that actually has an idea of quality.
Gotta love those little rockets.

MSD

"WharfRat" wrote in message

in article , Hecate at
wrote on 12/29/03 5:28 PM:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 08:06:32 GMT, "Dr. J. Smith" wrote:

All metal bodies are definitely in the offensive

weapon class 😉

I’m not offended, yet, but if this trend catches on we could see such innovations as spikes and razor edges. In the meantime just keep in

mind I

can definetely throw the "Rebel" further than a 1Ds and I can build an arsenal for the same price as one. ~Doc

LOL! If you really want an offensive weapon get a loan and buy a ‘blad 😉

—
Finally someone that actually has an idea of quality.
Gotta love those little rockets.

MSD

Has anyone tested the firepower of those "Cannons" I occasionally see references to in this newsgroup?

mm

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 02:02:07 GMT, WharfRat
wrote:

in article , Hecate at
wrote on 12/29/03 5:28 PM:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 08:06:32 GMT, "Dr. J. Smith" wrote:

All metal bodies are definitely in the offensive

weapon class 😉

I’m not offended, yet, but if this trend catches on we could see such innovations as spikes and razor edges. In the meantime just keep in mind I can definetely throw the "Rebel" further than a 1Ds and I can build an arsenal for the same price as one. ~Doc

LOL! If you really want an offensive weapon get a loan and buy a ‘blad 😉

—
Finally someone that actually has an idea of quality.
Gotta love those little rockets.

<g> When I first started out in photography I was bemused by seeing a camera with a square format. What use is that I thought? Then I saw some transparencies from a ‘blad. And how you could crop them whichever way you wanted. And how, occasionally, a square image was *exactly* what you wanted. And, one day, I hope to find a nice bank manager… 😉

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:31:20 +1000, "max morrison" wrote:

Has anyone tested the firepower of those "Cannons" I occasionally see references to in this newsgroup?

I believe the "muzzle velocity" is up to 10 fps 😉

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui

"Hecate" wrote in message
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:31:20 +1000, "max morrison" wrote:

Has anyone tested the firepower of those "Cannons" I occasionally see references to in this newsgroup?

I believe the "muzzle velocity" is up to 10 fps 😉

—

Now now Hecate don’t get carried away with your outlandish guesses the Canon EOS 1V can only achieve a meagre 9 fps. 😉

Grant

"Hecate" wrote in message

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 02:02:07 GMT, WharfRat

<g> When I first started out in photography I was bemused by seeing a camera with a square format. What use is that I thought? Then I saw some transparencies from a ‘blad. And how you could crop them whichever way you wanted. And how, occasionally, a square image was *exactly* what you wanted. And, one day, I hope to find a nice bank manager… 😉

Blads are incredibly cheap now, just look on eBay.
The first studio I worked for was all Blad (Hasselbl

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 17:48:31 GMT, "Stephan"
wrote:

"Hecate" wrote in message

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 02:02:07 GMT, WharfRat

<g> When I first started out in photography I was bemused by seeing a camera with a square format. What use is that I thought? Then I saw some transparencies from a ‘blad. And how you could crop them whichever way you wanted. And how, occasionally, a square image was *exactly* what you wanted. And, one day, I hope to find a nice bank manager… 😉

Blads are incredibly cheap now, just look on eBay.
The first studio I worked for was all Blad (Hasselblöd in German, blöd = stupid).
There was always at least one lens in the repair shop at any time. The bloody shutter is always freezing.
When you find your banker look at this:
http://tinylink.com/?sPuenIqseb
(me want one too! (camera I mean))

Happy new year too you

Stephan

Nice 🙂 I do like Contax, but I’m looking for something bigger 😉 I quite like the Pentax 67 and the Mamiya 7 II as well 😉

Even nowadays, nothing beats a big transparency 😉

And a Happy and prosperous New year to you 🙂

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui