Re: [CR]Recommendations on digital cameras

(Example: Framebuilders:Doug Fattic)

From: <BobHoveyGa@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 11:50:19 EST
Subject: Re: [CR]Recommendations on digital cameras
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org


Ken:

Great tips! If I may, let me add one more... anyone who is looking at the higher end consumer cameras (say, $600 and up) should strongly consider stay ing away from the fixed-lens models and get an SLR, even if it is one of the cheapest models like the Canon Digital Rebel or the Nikon D50, and you might even consider used. In addition to the verstility and quality of interchangeabl e lenses, these cameras usually have larger image sensors, which makes them fa r less susceptible to noise. Anybody who has seen the rich velvety blacks an d continuous-tone areas that these cameras produce, compared to the oatmeal-textured look of most fixed-lens cameras, can vouch for this. It's even more important these days because the pixel count keeps climbing to six and eight

megapixels, while the CCD's are staying pretty much the same size.... when y ou keep the same small physical dimensions of the sensor but decrease the size of the receptor sites, noise is going to increase.

One other thing that I've found helpful with many digital cameras is to underexpose slightly (maybe 1/2 to 1 stop), for three reasons... first, the colors in some consumer cameras can be a bit washed out and this helps give them a bit more richness if your camera has no saturation adjustment. Second, it is usually MUCH easier to rescue detail in the shadows with Photoshop than it i s to rescue detail in a blown-out highlight. Third, if your camera uses auto-ISO, underexposing will sometimes allow your camera to jump to a lower ISO setting, which produces less noise.

Bob Hovey Columbus, GA

In a message dated 3/27/06 3:04:49 PM, Ken writes:


>
> In a message dated 3/27/06 11:37:31 AM, raydobbins2003@yahoo.com writes:
>
>
> > This topic came up in the past and one of the best photographers on the
> > list has a webpage that details his setup.
> > http://www.raydobbins.com/garagesetup.htm One look at his photos is all it
> takes to understand you don't have to
> > spend a fortune on a camera to get great photos
> >
> Hi C-R members.
>
> If I may, I would like insert higher end of digital photography info. 
    Of
> course, these (and this)
> info is killing our business (professional photgraphers/studio and labs).
>
> 1) The size of chip (sensor's) mega-pxile (say from 4 to 8 MB) does not ma ke
> as much as
> difference in quality, IF you use high end image procesing software like
> Adobe Photoshop.
> If you are professional, it is MUST have CS-II version, and learn to use
> histogram control.
>
> 2) For image capture, use "RAW" file (a close kin to TIFF), forget about
> "auto while balance".
>
> 3) Use Adobe 1998 color space or create your own, stay away from s-RGB col or
> management.
>
> 4) Lean about light source and their characters, lightings and perspective
> controls, always
> DO NOT use wideangle setting (short zoom setting), if you can obtain enoug h
> depth of field
> use long/tele setting as much as possible.
>
> KEN TODA, High Point, NC, still trying to survive in photography business,
> and will see you
> all at Cirque 2006!