Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Which Digital Camera should I Look For?

  1. #1

    Default Which Digital Camera should I Look For?

    Hi,
    I'm looking for some advice here. I'm want to know which will be the best digital camera to get which the picture taken will required the minimum or no PS. Meaning the picture taken will be correctly exposed, right color tones and etc, just nice for viewing or printing.
    Camera range will be from DSLR like the class of D100, S2Pro to pro-comsumer camera like 5700, A1, S7000, G5 and etc.

    Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Best pictures straight out of camera which I've seen are shot by a S2pro.

  3. #3

    Default

    Thanks justarius , that is also what I heard of too. Maybe S2Pro is a better choice for me next time when I saved enough.

  4. #4

    Default

    Actually if the take the pictures well, there's no need to PS.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cursor
    Hi,
    I'm looking for some advice here. I'm want to know which will be the best digital camera to get which the picture taken will required the minimum or no PS. Meaning the picture taken will be correctly exposed, right color tones and etc, just nice for viewing or printing.
    Camera range will be from DSLR like the class of D100, S2Pro to pro-comsumer camera like 5700, A1, S7000, G5 and etc.

    Thanks in advance.
    I own or have owned various digital cameras, from P&S to prosumer to DSLR. I currently have a 300D, an A1, and a Pentax S4i, one camera from each category :-).

    All of them benefit from some post processing. That's the way it is dude.

    Photos may look fine out of the camera, but 2 minutes in Photoshop and your photo is noticeably sharper, snappier, and more vivid.

    Also, I believe many cameras allow you some options to adjust color saturation/vividness, sharpness and contrast as an option. Therefore, it really isn't very accurate to compare pics straight out of the camera since each camera may have its settings set to different values. The photo from the S2Pro may look "better" out of the camera, but it doesn't mean another camera with a more aggressive setting cannot produce an equally "good" image.

    Finally, many cameras will produce images at the right exposure, with good colours, etc etc. So your requirement for this will probably be covered by 80% of the cameras out there. But still, it can be further improved with a little post processing. If you can find a camera that consistently produces images that PS cannot improve, let me know. I'll be keen to buy one too

    From your post, you sound rather inexperienced. I would advise you AGAINST blowing big bucks on a high-end body that you don't know how to use. Instead, I suggest spending a small small of money ( $400-700 ), and buy a capable but cheap camera like a A80 or a used G3/G5 instead. When you have gained more experienced, and are sure you like digital, then go ahead and splurge on your favourite DSLR. Nothing is more wasteful then buying a $2000 body and then not using it.

  6. #6

    Default

    Thanks for the advice chriszzz, point noted.
    To me as long as the picture direct from the camera had the correct exposure and color tones for viewing and printing, I will consider it as no PS required. Of cos these pictures sure can be PS to further fine tuned to be better but that is another issue from my views.
    Acturally I had been using film camera for quite some time and just about two years ago got a Digital Ixus and about half a year ago got an A80. Well, maybe it is just me but I find that the picture taken by these digital camera always look rather under-exposed, hence I always need to do a slight PS before I sent for printing. This is OK if it is less then 20+ picture you need to PS. But if I came back from a short holiday trip or friends party, I can easily end up with over 100 pics using a digital camera. PS those before sent for printing or burn to CD for friends will take up too much time and effort. I enjoy taking photos and looking thru them, but I don't enjoy taking hours or days sitting infront of a PC doing PS.
    So most of the time, I ended up taking pictures with my F80, and just sent to the lab for develop, print and scan. The results always look better then the picture from digital camera, no PS needed for most pictures after scanned by the lab (or maybe the lab already did it for me ). But problem with flim photography is money, always need to buy negative and pay for developing. Worst part is I can't be very confirm the picture taken is good.
    So I ask this questions is becos I encounter such problem. And hope if someone can suggest a solution if they know one. Maybe there is just no solution to such problem beside giving up on digital, but hey no harm asking right ...

  7. #7
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    ClubSNAP community
    Posts
    2,775

    Default

    Digitals all tend to be a tad under. Your other option, if you feel that you've taken good shots, is to instruct the labs to print with "adjustments to density only". The good labs will only up it but 1-2 stops and print, without adjusting your colours.

    And, yeah, I'd vouch for the S2 too. But then again, almost any good prosumer camera can hold its own in term of accurate colours. You may just need to tweak the cam a bit. Look at Germ_boi's recent cat posts in the Meow-Meow-Meow thread, those were taken on a CP4500, most of them are what-you-see-on-screen-iswhat-you-see-on-site/real-life.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •