Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 6MP digital camera for on the road

This is topic 6MP digital camera for on the road in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004993

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 03-10-2007, 04:54 AM:

What's a good, handy, reasonably solid and versatile 6MP (+/-) camera for good point-and-shoot on the road? I looked at the Canon PowerShot series, which some review sites seem to favor, but one thing I don't like is that you can adjust shutter and aperture manually.
Any recommendations/warnings?

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 03-10-2007, 08:00 AM:

I have a Powershot S2IS and adore it. It's a 5mp

The S3IS is the 6mp version and is the same camera virtually. On the "AUTO" setting, you don't have to worry about manual shutter and aperture settings

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-10-2007, 08:50 AM:

Michael,
My Nikon 2200 died last weekend... stuck lens. This is the 6th pocket digital camera I've bought in the last 7 years to die. So I can't reccomend any pocket type cameras any longer to anyone... except to the feeble that only use it at Christmas or a birthday. Pocket digitals just don't last and are to expensive to repair that its cheaper to get a new one... think of them as throw aways. Look at something more flexible like the Nikon D-50 or Canon Rebel... both about 6 mp although the Nokon blows the Canon out of the water with its top mounted LCD screen that reads out all functions.... many of these readouts are duplicated in the viewfinder as well. At least these cameras are SLR and have interchangable lenses and both cameras are VERY light... just a little over a pound with lens. Discount camera stores sell them pretty reasonably or watch for sales. The thing with these cameras are that they are expensive enough to justify a couple hundred dollar repair and not just throw aways....

Overall pocket cameras suck big time!

Mark

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 03-10-2007, 07:36 PM:

I have an older Canon PowerShot S50, 5MP. It's ok but I'm not crazy about it. The thing I really hate about these tiny cameras is even if they allow manual exposure adjustments, they're very "fiddly". Lots of tiny buttons, menus to scroll though, etc. I rarely have the patience to thrash my way through all these options, so I usually just point-and-shoot and hope for the best.

I should dig out my very old Minolta SRT-102 and see if it still works. Talk about an easy camera to operate, especially setting the exposure. Sometimes the old ways are better. Too bad it weighs 5 lbs. though. [Wink]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-10-2007, 08:05 PM:

My brother-in-law just bought a Kodak EasyShare Z650, and is very pleased with it:

quote:
Intense zoom. Incredible simplicity.
6.1 MP for prints up to 20 × 30 in. (50 × 75 cm)
10X SCHNEIDER-KREUZNACH VARIOGON Optical Zoom Lens
2.0 in. (5.0 cm) indoor/outdoor color display
Picture enhancing features
KODAK Color Science Chip
Auto options and manual modes

Kodak EasyShare Z650

My three year old Kodak DX6490 is still going strong, and is similar in design.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 03-11-2007, 05:41 PM:

Both the Kodak and Nikon look very nice (I know the D-50, my mother has it), but I am really looking for something more compact for point-and-shoot operation. Of course, maybe it really doesn't matter so much then, as long as the camera has all the basic functions and doesn't fall apart after two weeks. I guess if I get more into taking pictures better than just taking a lot of snapshots while driving around, I will end up buying one of those nicer cameras anyway. But right now, I am looking for something more compact and pockety.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 03-11-2007, 06:04 PM:

WE just got the Sony Cybershot ds something 100, at Costco for $200, it's an 8.1mp camera, and has a nice big viewfinder on the back, so far it's working great and it's nice and compact as well.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-11-2007, 06:38 PM:

I like some of the Canon PowerShot models. Some use a longer lasting Lithium Ion battery instead of the AA batteries that seem to drain after only a few shots. Certain PowerShot models feature a handy flip out viewfinder that makes it easier to take photos of yourself with other people or standing in front of some landmark.

Kodak has a lot of decent models in a wide range of price points.

Posted by Jennifer Pan (Member # 2035) on 03-11-2007, 07:10 PM:

I have the Powershot A620 7.1 MP, had it for about a year or so and it works well for a point and shot camera. Probably heavier than the average point & shoot but it is durable. I've dropped it quiet a few times... so yeah it still works great. [Smile]

The flip out viewfinder is really handy as well.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-11-2007, 07:13 PM:

quote: Michael Schaffer
I looked at the Canon PowerShot series, which some review sites seem to favor, but one thing I don't like is that you can adjust shutter and aperture manually.

Why would you not want to be able to adjust shutter speed and lens aperture manually? Or did you mean to type "can't"?

In general, I would think that the ability to turn off any automatic features would be a good thing for any camera, even for users who would do so only rarely.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-11-2007, 08:22 PM:

quote: Scott Norwood
In general, I would think that the ability to turn off any automatic features would be a good thing for any camera, even for users who would do so only rarely.

That was really the point I was trying to make above.... Not to be able to have manual control over things is nonsense. I will never own another pocket camera again. They are just not durable enough. 6 drops it may still work ok but on the 7th..... [Mad]

Mark

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-11-2007, 08:32 PM:

quote: Michael Schaffer
Both the Kodak and Nikon look very nice (I know the D-50, my mother has it), but I am really looking for something more compact for point-and-shoot operation. Of course, maybe it really doesn't matter so much then, as long as the camera has all the basic functions and doesn't fall apart after two weeks. I guess if I get more into taking pictures better than just taking a lot of snapshots while driving around, I will end up buying one of those nicer cameras anyway. But right now, I am looking for something more compact and pockety.

True that the Kodak EasyShare D650 is not a "compact and pockety" camera. But it does offer a Schneider 10X zoom lens, that can focus at a macro level for real close-ups. Manual control of shutter and aperture is available and easy. It has both an electronic viewfiner, as well as a large display screen.

Posted by Paul Trimboli (Member # 1509) on 03-11-2007, 08:46 PM:

Bobby it is actually better to use a compact camera that used AA then the Lithium Ion packs, for the simple fact you can buy lots of AA NiMh so you have some spare and in a bind you can use alkaline. The cost of doing that with the battery packs is alot more.You are meant to use AA rechargeable in them and not just the normal Super Heavy Duty stuff. Buy the highest mAH batterys you can find and they will last ages. The number of cameras we get in for repairs and people complain about battery drain is to many to count, you open the battery door and you find crappy batteries in there......no one ever reads their manuals!

All of the Powershot range of cameras are really good, or the IXUS range (think they are IXY Digital or Digital Elf in US).

There is no one brand of camera that will withstand being dropped more then another. If you do plan on dropping it then please stay away from the higher end stuff like a D50. SLR cameras once dropped can cost alot of money to get working right. Any impact on them will normally put you mirror angles off which means you AF is way out of calibration. You will ruin the parallelism of the body which will show up as soft images on one side of the image (the lens and CCD are no longer parallel, this mean time consuming shimming of the CCD or worst case replacement of the main casting). The AF sensor itself will probably come out of alignment. Shutters on most SLR digitals are affected by impact, normally the locking cam does not re engage to lock the shutter. Bottom line is if it going to give the camera a ruff life get one of the lower end models, sure you might go through a few of them but it will be cheaper then the repairs of the higher end stuff.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-11-2007, 10:39 PM:

quote: Paul Trimboli
There is no one brand of camera that will withstand being dropped more then another.

Not to mention what might happen to a mechanical type SLR... The thing here is that pocket cameras tend to end up in the shrt pocket... bend over and they slide out.... kabam. SLR's normally hang around your neck and yes are less convenient but stand less chance of getting dropped. I've never dropped one! Pocket cameras are also rarely worth reairing at all whilst an SLR type digital is worth even a few hundred dollar repair(or more). SLR's are not throw aways...

When I worked at Canon the Autofocus series of cameras was just comming out... thank god I didn't have to work on em... absolute junk. But we did come up with a good nickname for them "Canon Outoffocus"

Paul... Now on to another thing.... Why does the lens in my Nikon Coolpix 2200 stick sometimes and is it worth repairing? I took it apart and the lens mechanism is binding... giving me a lens error on the screen... the motor and associated position encoder seems fine. Does the entire lens assy. have to be replaced or should I just add it to my pile of dead pocket digitals?

Thanks!

Mark

Posted by Paul Trimboli (Member # 1509) on 03-11-2007, 11:05 PM:

Hi Mark

When you remove the zoom gear (the gear that couples the outer lens barrel to the gear box) does the lens still bind when driving the barrels in and out by hand? Then apple 3 volts to the motor (or is that a stepper motor hmmm can't remember off the top of my head) and see if it runs along and that the gear box is running smoothly. Does it have any sand in it at all? Sometimes one grain of sand can do that. I will check the parts manual when I head in to work and let your know if its a whole lens unit or you can get individual parts.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-11-2007, 11:06 PM:

quote: Paul Trimboli
Bobby it is actually better to use a compact camera that used AA then the Lithium Ion packs, for the simple fact you can buy lots of AA NiMh so you have some spare and in a bind you can use alkaline. The cost of doing that with the battery packs is alot more.

The big problem with AA batteries: you have to change them more often. That's going to get in the way when you're trying to take pictures. I can shoot hundreds of photos with just one Li-ion battery in my D-SLR camera.

Lithium ion batteries do cost more and then there's that fear the battery model for your type of camera may get discontinued. OTOH, I have had a Kodak EasyShare camera for a few years and gone through quite a few NiMH AA rechargeable batteries (2500 mAh) at around $8-$9 per four pack. When shooting regularly I'd get around 3 months of life per pack before the batteries lost much of their ability to hold a good charge. The cost of those AA rechargeables adds up after awhile. A good Li-ion battery can work for a good year or two of regular use before needing to be replaced.

On the subject of dropping cameras...

The upper end D-SLR cameras, such as the Nikon D2X and Canon EOS 1D series are weather sealed, more ruggedly built and can withstand some abuse. Expensive lenses that fit those cameras...now that's another matter. Just don't drop them whatever you do.

And that's just it. I'm not dropping a camera. I don't care what kind of camera it is. I absolutely will take precautions, like attaching the geeky neck strap to the camera and putting it around my head. In the unlikely event the camera is going to fall, such as tipping over a tripod, I'll throw my body under the thing if I have to do so.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-12-2007, 09:22 AM:

quote: Paul Trimboli
When you remove the zoom gear (the gear that couples the outer lens barrel to the gear box) does the lens still bind when driving the barrels in and out by hand?

Hi PAul,
The motor does run fine and pretty quiet with the gear removed. The lens barrels do seem to bind though. That motor is just a smallish DC PM motor. There is a plastic encoder wheel just inside the gear box to count the revolutions. It could surely be sand considering where this camera has gone.

quote: Bobby Henderson
And that's just it. I'm not dropping a camera. I don't care what kind of camera it is. I absolutely will take precautions, like attaching the geeky neck strap to the camera and putting it around my head. In the unlikely event the camera is going to fall, such as tipping over a tripod, I'll throw my body under the thing if I have to do so.

Bobby,

Ha! I'll remember that paragraph next time I'm repelling part way down a 1500' mine shaft.... [Eek!]

I'd rather hear the camera splash than feel the water at the bottom and or the timbers on the way down. I say if the camera's going to fall let it! [thumbsup]

Thanks!
Mark

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-12-2007, 01:52 PM:

Who would repel down a mineshaft holding onto a camera attached to a tripod? What's next, an example of a camera and tripod falling toward a molten river of lava?
[Roll Eyes]

I'm not afraid to dive into the grass or even gravel if it's what I must do to keep a tripod and camera from taking a terrible impact. But, again, I am going to take precautions and offer a middle finger or worse to others who think I'm silly for doing so. It's my camera equipment, others can go break their own if they're into taking serious risks -such as keeping a camera in a shirt pocket.

Posted by Paul Trimboli (Member # 1509) on 03-12-2007, 09:19 PM:

Mark well it sounds like the gears are OK, check that there are no broken teath on the outside barrel and the same goes for the last gear just before the zoom gear. If that is OK, you can dismantle the rest of the lens unit. You probably just need to clean out the grit from the guides. When you dismantle the lens unit be careful of the shutter flex, you normally zoom the lens to the tele position and thread it back though. Then to take the barrels apart twist them back to the wide side and then a little bit further and you will feel them click, score the outter barrel and the barrel that is about to come out so you can get the postion of everything again, if you don't do that good luck being able to work out how to fit all the barrels back together!!!!! There are 4 barrels on that model I think, blow the sand from the guides and apply a very small amount of light grease to all of them. Also while the back of the lens is off twist the AF relay lens thread and check it is free, set it in the middle postion and when you put the barrels back on have them set out at tele so the camera will reset all the postions itself. I might be able to find you a good second hand lens barrels if you still have trouble and sort out posting them to you. Good luck! [thumbsup]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-12-2007, 11:08 PM:

Thanks Paul!

I will give it a try... I did notice the shutter flex... have not discinnected it yet... Will try this in a few days.

Thanks!
Mark

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 03-15-2007, 12:14 PM:

Right now, I am thinking hard about this camera:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_a630.asp

It's actually 8MP, but I think I can live with that.
Really the only slight disadvantage (for cameras in this class) I could spot from the specs and reviews is that it uses NiMH batteries instead of Li-ion (why don't all manufacturers use these?). But it does have the manual functions I missed from some other models, plus you can take the lens off and use accessory lenses for wide angle and tele.

Any objections?

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-15-2007, 12:26 PM:

Mark will object since it has the Canon brand name!
[Razz]

I think the PowerShot A630 is a pretty powerful camera for something priced under $250.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-15-2007, 04:49 PM:

No objections even though its a Canon.... remember I used to work for them. Like any pocket camera I only give it a two year life span though. If it breaks down the day after the warranty expires its not worth fixing either.

Mark

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 03-15-2007, 09:01 PM:

Well, my Pentax Optio 330GS still works, more or less, the only problem it has after 4 years is that sometimes, you have to push the trigger a few times before it actually takes a picture. That does suck, I have to say. It can't be a massive repair though, so once I have the new camera, I will probably see if I can open it and see what's inside and if I can't fix that.

But I wanted to upgrade a little anyway, at least in resolution, and I find the option of using adapter lenses attractive, especially for wide angle, as I live in the scenic West, and there are a lot of wide angle shots around here waiting to be taken.

There are adapter lens kits which are fairly cheap by a company named "Opteka", but that also *sounds* cheap, I guess these lenses are maybe not a good idea, they are probably made in China or in the former Eastern Block (or worse, in the US [Wink]

).

My mother bought the Nikon D-50 spontaneously while we were travelling around NV and UT two years ago, and after only a little while, I wanted to have one, too, but since I then went into a phase in which I didn't take too many pics, I waited, and right now, I think it's best to go with a more basic camera like the Canon A630, see if I really get into the photo thing, and then I will be able to decide whether or not I want to invest in a "real" camera, and also which one is eventually best for me.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-23-2007, 07:20 PM:

Just to piss off Michael [uhoh]

I ordered a Canon Digital Rebel XTi today. After looking everything over(in person) this camera seems to fit me best mainly because of its very light weight and the large LCD screen that doubles as the readout of camera functions is great. But what really set it apart for me is the far less cluttred looking readout than on the Nikon's top mounted and somewhat dim in dark places LCD readout, its bright and super easy to see in dark places. You also stay behind the camera when using it... Not like on the Nikon where you are looking at the top LCD readout and then looking through the viewfinder in back... The Canon keeps you
at the back of the camera where the photographer belongs!! I thought I liked the Nikons readout better(my N65 has the same readout the D-80 has) till I took a look at the Canon's. The XTi also uses the 9 point autofocus sensor from the more expensive 30D. The one thing I am still apprenhesive about is the Canon Glass but it gets good marks in all reviews and hey this is just photography anyway.... If I can have decent 16X20s made once in a while I'll be happy.

Mark

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-23-2007, 07:33 PM:

Awwwww Mark, and here I just bought a Canon to spite YOU!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-23-2007, 10:50 PM:

Ah ha.... we both beat Michael to it.... [Cool]

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 03-24-2007, 05:23 AM:

Sorry to disappoint both of you, but yesterday morning, I went and bought said Canon Powershot A630. At first, I went to Fry's, after calling to see I they had any in stock - they said they had 11 - but then they couldn't find them. They looked all over the place for 20 minutes. Pretty impressive feat, misplacing 11 digital cameras...somebody there is definitely on his way to "Employee of the Month". In the meantime, I called Ritz Cameras and the guy said they had 1, so I asked him if he could check if it's actually there and put it on hold for me. Then I evacuated myself from the Fry premises and proceeded to Ritz. So now I have that camera.
I have only played around with it a little, so I can't say much about the quality and versatility yet, but it seems like a good point-and-shoot camera to me, not the smallest compact camera out there, but not too large for it to go on the road in a small bag or in the laptop case. The one feature which influenced my decision most was probably that you can take the lens off and use other lenses. So I can play around with that for a while and see if I really want to continue in that direction, and then decide if it makes sense for me to get a more elaborate camera or not.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-27-2007, 04:56 PM:

My Rebel XTi came today and initial use shows impressive results. I got both the cheapo 18-55mm lens and the 28-135mm zoom with all the bells and whistles. Eventually I will aquire several prime lemnses to replece the cheap zoom... although its performance is not too shabby either and its VERY light, its speed is just a bit slow. The 28-135's performance is impressive. The autofiocus is extremely fast and quiet. Have not tried the image stabilizer part of this lens yet.

Mark

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 03-27-2007, 05:27 PM:

The XTi sure is an attractive piece of equipment from a feature/price perspective. It's nice that Canon caters to those of us who would like the flexibility of interchangeable lenses but don't need the high end features and build quality that pro photographers do. With the lenses being compatible, there's always an upgrade path without ditching everything and having to start over!

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts about the sensor cleaning feature on the XTi.

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 03-31-2007, 09:50 AM:

All this chatter, yet nobody has posted any pictures! Isn't anyone going to show off? Would those pictures belong here or on the random pictures thread?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-31-2007, 10:07 AM:

There's really no point on putting hi-rez photos here with the 200kb file size alloted to posting. I could post some on my Yahoo photos site though and you can see those at full rez.

All we can say is that it works.... And the dog musta been dam cold since this was yesterday in Farmington Canyon!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-31-2007, 01:34 PM:

Mark, did you shoot the picture of your dog in the creek using the kit lens or your EF 28-135mm?

Which primes are you considering? I may get a couple for lower light indoor use, such as the EF 50mm f/1.4 or 85mm f/1.8. The choice is a little tricky using a camera with a 1.6x crop factor in the sensor. Canon has a couple f/1.2L primes, but damn they're expensive. I hear a lot of good things about the EF 135mm f/2.0L lens. Some say it is the sharpest lens Canon makes.

I am also trying to make up my mind on a couple other zooms, the EF-S 10-22 ultra wide angle zoom and the EF 100-400. Both serve very different purposes. Neither is anywhere near as fast as the two f/2.8L zooms I already have for the 24mm thru 200mm range. The 100-400 is especially slow (f/5.6 at 400mm), but a lot of people like it and it is image stabilized.

That's the bad thing about D-SLR camera. You wind up spending a ton on lenses. It's a good thing the lenses hold their value a lot better than the camera bodies.

quote: Greg Anderson
All this chatter, yet nobody has posted any pictures! Isn't anyone going to show off? Would those pictures belong here or on the random pictures thread?

I agree with Mark. Even if the F-T server would allow high res files to be shown, a 3888 X 2592 image saved in JPEG from the camera can run 2MB-4MB pretty easy. RAW files are huge.

Also the model of camera body isn't going to mean as much to image quality as these two things:
#1. The glass attached to the front of the camera body.
#2. The photographer using the equipment.

Camera bodies can make a difference in certain areas. High end models shoot faster frame rates. Some are weather sealed (but that's only good if the lens you're using is also weather sealed). The high end models have more points of control in auto focus and can maintain auto focus stopped down to tighter apertures -that can be an issue when using 1.4x and 2x lens extenders. If trade-offs have to be made I think it is better to spend more on a good lens and less on a camera body than the other way around.

The only significant thing the Digital Rebel XTi lacks (compared to bodies like the EOS 30D and 5D) is spot metering. There's ways to overcome that limitation (bracketing, getting E-TTL help from an external flash, etc.).

I uploaded three photos onto a personal Panoramio page, all taken with the Digital Rebel XTi (but also using lenses that cost significantly more than the camera body itself). I'm going to upload more scenic shots from around my part of Oklahoma soon. The "original" images viewable there aren't 10.1 megapixel, but are high enough in res to fill a decent computer monitor.
http://www.panoramio.com/user/267183

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 03-31-2007, 04:36 PM:

Yes, it would be nice to see full-resolution pictures (or even screen-filling pictures) from all of you with your fancy cameras. But I still enjoy looking at small pictures. I get a lot of great ideas just seeing pretty snapshots. So... here's what I shot yesterday with my Nikon Coolpix 8700. It's bigger than your average point-and-shoot and has an 8x optical zoom, but it's not an SLR. I've decided that it strikes a good balance between cost and quality... although I'd get an SLR if this thing suddenly stopped working.

Of course, I'll claim that this picture is breathtaking in a screen-filling version.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-31-2007, 05:42 PM:

Come on guys, do what various photography websites do. Post a picture reduced to 550 pixels wide, then below it post a 550 pixel wide "clip" of that image at full resolution. That way we can not only see the picture as a whole, but we can also nitpick the details. [Cool]

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-31-2007, 05:58 PM:

I have a few posted in the "wallpaper" thread. My last few laptop wallpapers have all been from stuff taken with my D-SLR.

I was nervous taking this photo. I was standing on a man made path extending out into a lake of freezing water. The path was coated with 2"-3" of slippery ice. And I was holding $2000 worth of camera gear.

Mike Heenan's comment: [sleep]

Naturally, the word balloon from the prairie dog was later added in Photoshop. Yes, it did look like he had some shit hanging from his face. The debris is highly visible in the full res photo.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-31-2007, 10:34 PM:

The dog was shot with the Kit Lens. Its not as bad as they say. Two complaints I have about it are at wide angle there is some barrel distortion or bending of horizon if it is near the edge of the frame and its entire barrel is made of plastic... but its also VERY light, the 28-135 is over a pound by itself. I consider the kit lens a throw away... You only actually pay about 55.00 for it! I'll use it down in mines and places that damage might come easy.

I was out at a friends mine claim in the west desert today and took these photos. One thing I am going to be set on is to record all my stuff just as RAW images. The flexibility of that file type is beyond belief and conversion to JPEG is fast and easy.

One of the most amazing parts of this camera is the built in flash... Its eveness of coverage at the 18mm focal length setting that all these photos were taken at is exemplary. These were all done in Program Mode. Also I used only the center AF sensor to shoot these so I could aim the camera at the subject of interest and have that in focus. With the small tunnels and such the side walls would have driven the sensor crazy and most photos would have been out of focus.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-31-2007, 11:23 PM:

Those are pretty good mine photos. I'm surprised the built in flash on the XTi gave you that much coverage. Were you running at ISO 100 or did you have the gain cranked up any?

The 18-55mm kit lens is not a bad lens at all for the money. Factoring in the 1.6x crop factor it actually works like a 28-88mm zoom, which isn't bad for a general purpose walk-around lens. The only problems I have with the kit lens is the barrel distortion at the wide end and that it is prone to chromatic aberration when shooting some high contrast subject matter, such as bare tree branches against a bright sky. For anyone looking to buy a Digital Rebel, I normally recommend getting the package which includes the kit lens.

The only decent justification I can see for avoiding the kit lens is if a Digital Rebel buyer is going to buy a much better lens covering that focal length. Specifically, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is THAT lens. It costs $1000. It is image stabilized and often compared to two "L" class Canon lenses in terms of quality (the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L and the EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS). The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is a truly great zoom lens, but it is not compatible with high end Canon EOS "full frame sensor" bodies.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 04-01-2007, 06:53 AM:

Well, I took this highly artistic image of "ghost trees" on Pebble Beach, CA (between Monterey and Carmel) yesterday.

The liquid stuff in the background is the Pacific Ocean.

I shot it with my new Canon camera. But, of course, the camera is only the tool, the artistic eye and mind of the operator is what counts.

You can order handsigned prints of this impressive picture from me. The price is $175 for each print (without frame).

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-01-2007, 07:46 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
The only significant thing the Digital Rebel XTi lacks (compared to bodies like the EOS 30D and 5D) is spot metering.

The XTi does have three metering modes and one is a center weighted mode....I feel its the most useful mode and its similar to what I am used to in my other SLR's. BTW: I came up with a good way to protect the camera while I was down there... take an extra large plastic zip lock bag and pole a large hole for the lens to stick through. Put the camers in the bag and seal it. Tahe a rubber band and gather up excess bag at the back of the lens and secure with a rubber band. It won't keep it dry if it hits deep water... but it wull keep dust off the camera body.

Ya know Michael... I saw a tree similar to that near Green River Lakes in Wyoming last Summer [Cool]

. I don't know what on earth causes trees to become squashed down like that..... lots of snow on top of it year after year I guess... Also, I didn't have to Photoshop in the water in the background like you did.....

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 04-02-2007, 07:07 AM:

No, no photoshopping, all that water was really there. Like I said, they call it the "Pacific Ocean", and allegedly, if you keep going in that direction, you get to Hawaii. I couldn't see any of that from where I was standing, though. So I have no idea if it's true, and I didn't want to swim or boat out to check - that's much too dangerous, I would be afraid of following off the edge of the world.

I have no idea why these trees are so flat. I doubt it's because of snow, though. That doesn't really happen in that area. I think the trees just come like that.

This is the "lone cypress", the symbol of Pebble Beach on the Monterey peninsula. Inside the bay on the left is Carmel By The Sea (yes, where Clint Eastwood was mayor).

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-02-2007, 04:54 PM:

Michael, You must have known that I was just pulling your leg there. I know that tree too. My tree was definately compressed with Photoshop but the water was also there.... spring fed and very clear and cold too.

Mark