Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Very rusty photographer needs advice

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
June 27, 2005 8:59:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

To any kind person out there.

I could use some help in figuring out what camera to purchase.

Background: I was very much involved in photography for years, mainly
taking pictures involving activities with my kids. I used two
Canon ftb manual bodies and a twin lens Rolli. I had a good working
Bessler based darkroom and spent a good bit of time in there, really
enjoying this more than taking pictures by itself. About 10 years
ago, I put my equipment into storage and pretty much quit taking
pictures. I find myself beginning to become interested again and am
looking at a digital camera. I plan to look at some version of
Photoshop and focus on still life and landscapes probably with
emphasis on what I can do with the picture after I take it.

I do not want to spend a lot of money at first until I see where I am
going to go with this if anywhere.

I am currently looking at two cameras, the Canon A95 and the Olympus
C60 (both CU best buys.) I can land the Olympus for around 350 with
512 memory and the Canon for around 300. The 6mp Olympus will probably
be a little sharper but the Canon appears to be a better picture
taker. I need manual control as this is how I think (generally did not
use a meter). Both have this. I am leaning toward the Canon as it
seems to be somewhat better designed. I suspect I will be doing a
fair amount of cropping and enlarging. A major issue: I do not know
how much weight to put on the extra mp of the Olympus.

Any thoughts or advice would be very much appreciated. This is a new
world for me and is quite a bit different from the cameras I was
familiar with.

These decisions are really tough when you basically do not know what
you are doing.

Yours,

Mike Forrest
Anonymous
June 27, 2005 8:59:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mike Forrest wrote:

> <snip>
> I do not want to spend a lot of money at first until I see where I am
> going to go with this if anywhere.
>
> I am currently looking at two cameras, the Canon A95 and the Olympus
> C60 (both CU best buys.) I can land the Olympus for around 350 with
> 512 memory and the Canon for around 300. The 6mp Olympus will probably
> be a little sharper but the Canon appears to be a better picture
> taker. I need manual control as this is how I think (generally did not
> use a meter). Both have this. I am leaning toward the Canon as it
> seems to be somewhat better designed. I suspect I will be doing a
> fair amount of cropping and enlarging. A major issue: I do not know
> how much weight to put on the extra mp of the Olympus.


Mike,

You'll likely get a number of opinions on either of those cameras, but
as most respondents will have one or the other, none (or very few) will
be in a position to give a balanced opinion based on experience. So I'd
suggest you read the "professional" reviews, starting with
http://www.steves-digicams.com . Its very seldom that a camera will
get a *bad* review, but you can read through the feature lists, and
carefuly compare full-size images from each camera to form your own
opinion. For my vote, I have the Canon A95, and have been very
satisfied with it. (I previously had the canon 2.1 mp A40, and before
that the 1.3mp A50, so I guess I'm "a canon guy" :-)

As regards your specific question: 5mp vs 6mp, I have 2 answers:
- with megapixels, more is generally better. 3 mp is noticably better
than 2, 4 better than 3, etc. But at a diminishing rate of return...
- My A95 gives me images of 2582 x 1944 pixels. Extrapolating that to
6mp would translate to around 2816 x 2112, so the increase in "dots" is
around 10% in any dimension.
A crisp 5mp image can give you an excellent 11x14inch print. 6Mp will
give you 12 x 16 at about the same quality. So I would suggest that the
difference is marginal, unless you plan to make a lot of larger prints.

HTH.

/S
June 27, 2005 8:59:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mike Forrest wrote:
> To any kind person out there.
>
> I could use some help in figuring out what camera to purchase.
>
> Background: I was very much involved in photography for years, mainly
> taking pictures involving activities with my kids. I used two
> Canon ftb manual bodies and a twin lens Rolli. I had a good working
> Bessler based darkroom and spent a good bit of time in there, really
> enjoying this more than taking pictures by itself. About 10 years
> ago, I put my equipment into storage and pretty much quit taking
> pictures. I find myself beginning to become interested again and am
> looking at a digital camera. I plan to look at some version of
> Photoshop and focus on still life and landscapes probably with
> emphasis on what I can do with the picture after I take it.
>
> I do not want to spend a lot of money at first until I see where I am
> going to go with this if anywhere.

Photoshop will add about $600 to your hobby - and although it's a great
tool for the professional, it's definitely not worth it for the amateur
- there are a lot of other tools available that'll do the job for
nothing. Get GIMP for Windows (if you're Windows based, of course),
RawShooter Essentials, Picasa 2.0, Autostitch, and Irfanview with the
plugins pack - you'll have most of the functions of Photoshop. If you
must, Photoshop Essentials 3.0 is supposed to be OK.

> I am currently looking at two cameras, the Canon A95 and the Olympus
> C60 (both CU best buys.) I can land the Olympus for around 350 with
> 512 memory and the Canon for around 300. The 6mp Olympus will probably
> be a little sharper but the Canon appears to be a better picture
> taker. I need manual control as this is how I think (generally did not
> use a meter). Both have this. I am leaning toward the Canon as it
> seems to be somewhat better designed. I suspect I will be doing a
> fair amount of cropping and enlarging. A major issue: I do not know
> how much weight to put on the extra mp of the Olympus.

The Canon is nice and has a good reputation. If you're going to spend
that much on an Oly, at least consider the Olympus C-7070 for ~U.S.$400
- bigger, but a MUCH better camera than either of the ones you
mentioned, and it takes CF as well as xD cards. It'll last you for as
long as you want - it's like the Rollei you used to own, a really nice
piece of equipment, that'll do just about anything with a bit of skill.
It has complete manual controls, as well as aperture and shutter
priority auto-exposure. The picture quality is top-notch and it does
take RAW files (like digital negatives - very important if you like to
mess with digital processing) - the A95 and C-60 don't have this
capacity. An external flash is all it really needs for accessories.

> Any thoughts or advice would be very much appreciated. This is a new
> world for me and is quite a bit different from the cameras I was
> familiar with.
>
> These decisions are really tough when you basically do not know what
> you are doing.

I started into digital cameras by reading lots of reviews and tutorials
at several sites - there's a ton of good info to be gleaned:
www.dpreviews.com
www.steves-digicams.com
www.imaging-resource.com
www.megapixel.net
www.luminous-landscape.com
and many others....

> Yours,
>
> Mike Forrest

Good Luck!
ECM
Related resources
June 27, 2005 8:59:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dang! Sorry, that's supposed to be www.dpreview.com - not the other
thing.

If you're in the U.S., I just noticed that the C-7070 is available for
as little as $360 at www.beachcamera.com and www.buydig.com - just shop
around a bit for a CF card - the camera is priced rock-bottom to get
you to "come in" and then they get you with overpriced accessories.
Check at www.newegg.com for memory cards.

ECM
Anonymous
June 27, 2005 11:34:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mike Forrest wrote:
> To any kind person out there.
>
> I could use some help in figuring out what camera to purchase.
>
> Background: I was very much involved in photography for years, mainly
> taking pictures involving activities with my kids. I used two
> Canon ftb manual bodies and a twin lens Rolli. I had a good working
> Bessler based darkroom and spent a good bit of time in there, really
> enjoying this more than taking pictures by itself. About 10 years
> ago, I put my equipment into storage and pretty much quit taking
> pictures. I find myself beginning to become interested again and am
> looking at a digital camera. I plan to look at some version of
> Photoshop and focus on still life and landscapes probably with
> emphasis on what I can do with the picture after I take it.
>
> I do not want to spend a lot of money at first until I see where I am
> going to go with this if anywhere.
>
> I am currently looking at two cameras, the Canon A95 and the Olympus
> C60 (both CU best buys.) I can land the Olympus for around 350 with
> 512 memory and the Canon for around 300. The 6mp Olympus will probably
> be a little sharper but the Canon appears to be a better picture
> taker. I need manual control as this is how I think (generally did not
> use a meter). Both have this. I am leaning toward the Canon as it
> seems to be somewhat better designed. I suspect I will be doing a
> fair amount of cropping and enlarging. A major issue: I do not know
> how much weight to put on the extra mp of the Olympus.
>
> Any thoughts or advice would be very much appreciated. This is a new
> world for me and is quite a bit different from the cameras I was
> familiar with.
>
> These decisions are really tough when you basically do not know what
> you are doing.
>
> Yours,
>
> Mike Forrest
>
With your film background, I rather suspect you will not be happy with
anthing less that a DSLR. In that area, I believe Canon has the edge.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 3:30:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mike,
As a 40 year shooter of film, I had largely set photography aside
for a few years, even though having 35mm SLR, MF SLR, and even a view
camera and darkroom equipment. Although I had not indicated a desire
for digital, my wife purchased a Canon G2 for Xmas, and I was suddenly
in the new digital world. Having lived with it for about 3-4 years, I
love the G2 for its fast lenses and shooting flexibility previously
offered by my film cameras. She could not have chosen a better camera
for me. At 4Mpixel, I can't say I yearned for more, as I actually would
not use it at full resolution for many of the things I took! Sending a
4Mpixel image on email to someone is not a way to keep friends if they
don't have DSL. But in living with the camera, I found that my hatred
of the shutter delay especially prevalent in point-and-shoots, was
losing the precise timing found in my manual film cameras, for event or
sports photos. So now a DSLR is in my life, after having played around
with my son-in-law's DSLR and finding no appreciable shutter delay. I
still love my G2 for snapshots where shutter delay is not an issue.
Just some insight for your thinking.

--Wilt
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 4:02:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

ecm wrote:
> Dang! Sorry, that's supposed to be www.dpreview.com - not the other
> thing.
>
> If you're in the U.S., I just noticed that the C-7070 is available for
> as little as $360 at www.beachcamera.com and www.buydig.com - just shop
> around a bit for a CF card - the camera is priced rock-bottom to get
> you to "come in" and then they get you with overpriced accessories.
> Check at www.newegg.com for memory cards.
>
> ECM

ECM gave you good suggestions here above in his posts and I second his.


Until you know where you're going I would suggest you use the GIMP
(it's available for all main platforms and there are plenty of
tutorials online, just google or ask on usenet if you need any), and
not buy photoshop just yet. In fact, almost anything you're likely to
need to do with photoshop can be done just as well with the GIMP. Once
you get used to it, it's a delightful piece of software.

As for the camera, I'm not keen on the A95, having considered it a
while ago, it and the Oly c-60, and decided against them. I went for
the fuji f810 and would wholeheartedly recommend it for you as it has a
similar size profile to both cameras but is vastly superior.
June 28, 2005 5:18:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter wrote:

> Mike Forrest wrote:
>
>> To any kind person out there.
>>
>> I could use some help in figuring out what camera to purchase.
>>
>> Background: I was very much involved in photography for years, mainly
>> taking pictures involving activities with my kids. I used two Canon
>> ftb manual bodies and a twin lens Rolli. I had a good working
>> Bessler based darkroom and spent a good bit of time in there, really
>> enjoying this more than taking pictures by itself. About 10 years
>> ago, I put my equipment into storage and pretty much quit taking
>> pictures. I find myself beginning to become interested again and am
>> looking at a digital camera. I plan to look at some version of
>> Photoshop and focus on still life and landscapes probably with
>> emphasis on what I can do with the picture after I take it.
>>
>> I do not want to spend a lot of money at first until I see where I am
>> going to go with this if anywhere.
>> I am currently looking at two cameras, the Canon A95 and the Olympus
>> C60 (both CU best buys.) I can land the Olympus for around 350 with
>> 512 memory and the Canon for around 300. The 6mp Olympus will probably
>> be a little sharper but the Canon appears to be a better picture
>> taker. I need manual control as this is how I think (generally did not
>> use a meter). Both have this. I am leaning toward the Canon as it
>> seems to be somewhat better designed. I suspect I will be doing a
>> fair amount of cropping and enlarging. A major issue: I do not know
>> how much weight to put on the extra mp of the Olympus.
>> Any thoughts or advice would be very much appreciated. This is a new
>> world for me and is quite a bit different from the cameras I was
>> familiar with.
>> These decisions are really tough when you basically do not know what
>> you are doing.
>>
>> Yours,
>>
>> Mike Forrest
>>
> With your film background, I rather suspect you will not be happy with
> anthing less that a DSLR. In that area, I believe Canon has the edge.
>
>
I suspect that you are correct in that manual control of camera where
adjustments have to be made by accessing a menu system or pressing odd
combinations of buttons, no direct manual focusing, no direct manual
zoom etc, is bettered considerably by a DSLR. The limitations of a
small sensor camera - with regard to using DOF and diffraction affected
resolution loss are other factors.
I'm not sure how Canon has an edge. Their product range starts at a
significant price premium when you include a comparable lens, and there
are now several other good choices available at around Canon's entry
price - which is about 3 times higher than the OP indicated he was
looking at spending.
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 5:18:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

frederick wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>> Mike Forrest wrote:
>>
>>> To any kind person out there.
>>>
>>> I could use some help in figuring out what camera to purchase.
>>>
<< Snipped bits out >>
>>>
>> With your film background, I rather suspect you will not be happy with
>> anthing less that a DSLR. In that area, I believe Canon has the edge.
>>
>>
> I suspect that you are correct in that manual control of camera where
> adjustments have to be made by accessing a menu system or pressing odd
> combinations of buttons, no direct manual focusing, no direct manual
> zoom etc, is bettered considerably by a DSLR. The limitations of a
> small sensor camera - with regard to using DOF and diffraction affected
> resolution loss are other factors.
> I'm not sure how Canon has an edge. Their product range starts at a
> significant price premium when you include a comparable lens, and there
> are now several other good choices available at around Canon's entry
> price - which is about 3 times higher than the OP indicated he was
> looking at spending.

My take is also that with your background, you'd be better off getting a
used or entry level dSLR.

As to X vs. Y vs. Z, this has been hashed out ad naseum in this NG, so
I won't go there. A bit of searching through the NG will reveal much.

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 5:18:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John McWilliams wrote:
[]
> My take is also that with your background, you'd be better off
> getting a used or entry level dSLR.

Alternative, now may be the time to break out of the mould, and leave
behind the large and heavy cameras with their dust problems and even more
expensive lenses.

PhotoShop is very expensive for what it is - look at Paint Shop Pro as one
alternative.

Mike may like to look at the delightfully light Panasonic FZ5,
particularly if he wants something towards the long end of the telephoto
range (36 .. 432mm). You can take wider-angle pictures simply by taking
multiple photos and stitching them together - software like the currently
free AutoStitch can completely automate this task. The image
stabilisation in the Leica lens of the FZ5 and similar cameras makes
hand-holding at the 432mm focal length much more successful. Yes, you can
get IS lenses for DSLRs, but at a high price.

Good luck, Mike, whatever you choose.

David
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 5:18:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

You consider $600 "expensive" for the best image editing application ever
made?

"David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
message news:1U6we.57860$G8.47782@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> John McWilliams wrote:
> []
>> My take is also that with your background, you'd be better off
>> getting a used or entry level dSLR.
>
> Alternative, now may be the time to break out of the mould, and leave
> behind the large and heavy cameras with their dust problems and even more
> expensive lenses.
>
> PhotoShop is very expensive for what it is - look at Paint Shop Pro as one
> alternative.
>
> Mike may like to look at the delightfully light Panasonic FZ5,
> particularly if he wants something towards the long end of the telephoto
> range (36 .. 432mm). You can take wider-angle pictures simply by taking
> multiple photos and stitching them together - software like the currently
> free AutoStitch can completely automate this task. The image
> stabilisation in the Leica lens of the FZ5 and similar cameras makes
> hand-holding at the 432mm focal length much more successful. Yes, you can
> get IS lenses for DSLRs, but at a high price.
>
> Good luck, Mike, whatever you choose.
>
> David
>
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 5:18:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Doug Robbins wrote:
> You consider $600 "expensive" for the best image editing application
> ever made?

For someone who says: "I do not want to spend a lot of money at first
until I see where I am going to go with this if anywhere." yes.

For what I need, and for what I suspect for someone just starting into
digital might need, much cheaper programs than PhotoShop will allow them
to do the job just as well, perhaps more easily and more transparently,
and may allow them another $500 to spend on getting a better camera or
extra cards, lens etc. If they find that they enjoy digital photography
and wish to spend the extra money, then they can do so.

David
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 5:18:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:
> Doug Robbins wrote:
>
>>You consider $600 "expensive" for the best image editing application
>>ever made?
>
>
> For someone who says: "I do not want to spend a lot of money at first
> until I see where I am going to go with this if anywhere." yes.
>
An alternative: Take a class in Photoshop and you can buy the whole
Adobe Premium Suite for under $400.

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 5:23:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thanks all for the well thought out and informative responses. I
cannot tell you how much I appreciate it.

I am beginning to settle on the Canon A95 but need to do some more
research. In my past photography, I settled on pretty simple. The
Canon ftb was an all manual match needle camera. I normally took out
the battery and used my judgement (trusted this more than the meter.)
I normally kept a 100 mm lens on and used this for 95% of my shooting
(I had a 35 and a 20 occasionally used for specific applications). The
twin lens rolli is what it is. I still own it and would not let it go
for anything. I know I cannot match this simplicity with a digital but
I would like eventially to find a camera that will give the the
control that my old cameras gave me.

My major problem is not having experience with digital camera and not
having a basis to judge the different aspects and specifications. With
my film cameras, I had gone through several different cameras before
settling on a specific setup.

For this reason I am probably going to stay with a cheaper camera and
if I find myself doing a lot of work then will invest in a better one
armed with the experience and a better knowledge of what I need. I
have been given names a couple of other cameras (Panasonic FZ5 and
Olympus C-7070) to look into and am in the process of researching
them. For approxametly a hundred extra, who knows. My big concern
about getting a better camera is that it may end up in a drawer and
seldom used. I live in east Texas and I really do not find a lot that
excites me..(big green trees, medium green trees and small green
trees.) If I begin to find scenes that pique my interest then I can
justify the better camera. Just taking shots is no longer of much
interest to me, making really good pictures is.


Thanks for the advice on the programs. I used photoshop just as an
example. When I buy a camera I will began to research the programs. I
do know that I will want to end up with detailed control of the
lighting and the colors. Again I will probably start simple and when I
am ready I will spend the money having a much better idea of what I
need.

Again thanks to all.

Yours,

Mike Forrest
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 7:02:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:
> Mike Henley wrote:
> []
> > Until you know where you're going I would suggest you use the GIMP
> > (it's available for all main platforms and there are plenty of
> > tutorials online, just google or ask on usenet if you need any), and
> > not buy photoshop just yet. In fact, almost anything you're likely to
> > need to do with photoshop can be done just as well with the GIMP. Once
> > you get used to it, it's a delightful piece of software.
>
> However, GIMP does have a steep learning curve, and for a beginner to
> digital photography there may be more suitable programs.

For a beginner I think Picasa would be more than enough.
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 7:28:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mike Forrest wrote:
> Thanks all for the well thought out and informative responses. I
> cannot tell you how much I appreciate it.
>
> I am beginning to settle on the Canon A95 but need to do some more
> research. In my past photography, I settled on pretty simple. The
> Canon ftb was an all manual match needle camera. I normally took out
> the battery and used my judgement (trusted this more than the meter.)
> I normally kept a 100 mm lens on and used this for 95% of my shooting
> (I had a 35 and a 20 occasionally used for specific applications). The
> twin lens rolli is what it is. I still own it and would not let it go
> for anything. I know I cannot match this simplicity with a digital but
> I would like eventially to find a camera that will give the the
> control that my old cameras gave me.
>
> My major problem is not having experience with digital camera and not
> having a basis to judge the different aspects and specifications. With
> my film cameras, I had gone through several different cameras before
> settling on a specific setup.
>
> For this reason I am probably going to stay with a cheaper camera and
> if I find myself doing a lot of work then will invest in a better one
> armed with the experience and a better knowledge of what I need. I
> have been given names a couple of other cameras (Panasonic FZ5 and
> Olympus C-7070) to look into and am in the process of researching
> them. For approxametly a hundred extra, who knows. My big concern
> about getting a better camera is that it may end up in a drawer and
> seldom used. I live in east Texas and I really do not find a lot that
> excites me..(big green trees, medium green trees and small green
> trees.)

It may not excite you much but may still excite others. Put your
pictures on some website and see; sometimes something that may seem
quite mundane to you is far from it for others.

> If I begin to find scenes that pique my interest then I can
> justify the better camera. Just taking shots is no longer of much
> interest to me, making really good pictures is.
>
>
> Thanks for the advice on the programs. I used photoshop just as an
> example. When I buy a camera I will began to research the programs. I
> do know that I will want to end up with detailed control of the
> lighting and the colors. Again I will probably start simple and when I
> am ready I will spend the money having a much better idea of what I
> need.
>
> Again thanks to all.
>
> Yours,
>
> Mike Forrest
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 11:15:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mike Henley wrote:
[]
> Until you know where you're going I would suggest you use the GIMP
> (it's available for all main platforms and there are plenty of
> tutorials online, just google or ask on usenet if you need any), and
> not buy photoshop just yet. In fact, almost anything you're likely to
> need to do with photoshop can be done just as well with the GIMP. Once
> you get used to it, it's a delightful piece of software.

However, GIMP does have a steep learning curve, and for a beginner to
digital photography there may be more suitable programs.
Anonymous
June 29, 2005 3:09:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John McWilliams wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>
>> Doug Robbins wrote:
>>
>>> You consider $600 "expensive" for the best image editing application
>>> ever made?
>>
>>
>>
>> For someone who says: "I do not want to spend a lot of money at first
>> until I see where I am going to go with this if anywhere." yes.
>>
> An alternative: Take a class in Photoshop and you can buy the whole
> Adobe Premium Suite for under $400.
>

Another option is Paint Shop Pro if you will not be submitting photos
for printing (with printing press). PS has unmatched pre-press aids,
but if you are not doing CMYK and color seperation to make plates for
printing press, PSP is fine and gives excellent editing capability.
Anonymous
June 29, 2005 3:09:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Don Stauffer wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>
>> David J Taylor wrote:
>>
>>> Doug Robbins wrote:
>>>
>>>> You consider $600 "expensive" for the best image editing application
>>>> ever made?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> For someone who says: "I do not want to spend a lot of money at first
>>> until I see where I am going to go with this if anywhere." yes.
>>>
>> An alternative: Take a class in Photoshop and you can buy the whole
>> Adobe Premium Suite for under $400.
>>
>
> Another option is Paint Shop Pro if you will not be submitting photos
> for printing (with printing press). PS has unmatched pre-press aids,
> but if you are not doing CMYK and color seperation to make plates for
> printing press, PSP is fine and gives excellent editing capability.

But psp is limited to the Windows based computers, whereas PS is
multi-platform.

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 9:51:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 11:07:12 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:

> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Doug Robbins wrote:
>>
>>>You consider $600 "expensive" for the best image editing application
>>>ever made?
>>
>>
>> For someone who says: "I do not want to spend a lot of money at first
>> until I see where I am going to go with this if anywhere." yes.
>>
> An alternative: Take a class in Photoshop and you can buy the whole
> Adobe Premium Suite for under $400.
And how does someone who is retired and on a limited pension get to afford
prices like that?

--
neil
delete delete to reply
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 12:41:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John McWilliams wrote:
> Don Stauffer wrote:
>
>> John McWilliams wrote:
>>
>>> David J Taylor wrote:
>>>
>>>> Doug Robbins wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You consider $600 "expensive" for the best image editing application
>>>>> ever made?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For someone who says: "I do not want to spend a lot of money at
>>>> first until I see where I am going to go with this if anywhere." yes.
>>>>
>>> An alternative: Take a class in Photoshop and you can buy the whole
>>> Adobe Premium Suite for under $400.
>>>
>>
>> Another option is Paint Shop Pro if you will not be submitting photos
>> for printing (with printing press). PS has unmatched pre-press aids,
>> but if you are not doing CMYK and color seperation to make plates for
>> printing press, PSP is fine and gives excellent editing capability.
>
>
> But psp is limited to the Windows based computers, whereas PS is
> multi-platform.
>


Ah, I didn't realize the original poster was a Mac user.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 12:19:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Mike Forrest" <mforrest@bwoodtx.com> wrote in message
news:jit0c1ldphir74j1123afm4jdmek1tiv61@4ax.com...
> To any kind person out there.
>
> I could use some help in figuring out what camera to purchase.
>
> Background: I was very much involved in photography for years, mainly
> taking pictures involving activities with my kids. I used two
> Canon ftb manual bodies and a twin lens Rolli. I had a good working
> Bessler based darkroom and spent a good bit of time in there, really
> enjoying this more than taking pictures by itself. About 10 years
> ago, I put my equipment into storage and pretty much quit taking
> pictures. I find myself beginning to become interested again and am
> looking at a digital camera. I plan to look at some version of
> Photoshop and focus on still life and landscapes probably with
> emphasis on what I can do with the picture after I take it.
>
> I do not want to spend a lot of money at first until I see where I am
> going to go with this if anywhere.
>
> I am currently looking at two cameras, the Canon A95 and the Olympus
> C60 (both CU best buys.) I can land the Olympus for around 350 with
> 512 memory and the Canon for around 300. The 6mp Olympus will probably
> be a little sharper but the Canon appears to be a better picture
> taker. I need manual control as this is how I think (generally did not
> use a meter). Both have this. I am leaning toward the Canon as it
> seems to be somewhat better designed. I suspect I will be doing a
> fair amount of cropping and enlarging. A major issue: I do not know
> how much weight to put on the extra mp of the Olympus.
>
> Any thoughts or advice would be very much appreciated. This is a new
> world for me and is quite a bit different from the cameras I was
> familiar with.
>
> These decisions are really tough when you basically do not know what
> you are doing.
>
> Yours,
>
> Mike Forrest
>

I switched to digital from a long history of using real cameras (mainly TLR
and SLR) and darkrooms, and the very biggest thing I miss is the joy of
focussing.

When the review and the spec say it's got manual focussing, do not imagine
this means a nice fat knurled ring you turn while viewing the image on a
large screen. No! you press little buttons IN or OUT while viewing a screen
so tiny you can't see what difference it makes.

Try before you buy!

That said, the ability to edit, frame and print my own photos within minutes
of taking them, and without a darkroom, has been a tremendous boost and
liberation to my photography.

You will also miss the classic proportions of the 2.25 square negative...

Lol
Anonymous
July 2, 2005 1:00:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In message <I07xe.60032$G8.28212@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
"Lol" <l.d.wilmer@NOJUNKMAILblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>I switched to digital from a long history of using real cameras (mainly TLR
>and SLR) and darkrooms, and the very biggest thing I miss is the joy of
>focussing.

>When the review and the spec say it's got manual focussing, do not imagine
>this means a nice fat knurled ring you turn while viewing the image on a
>large screen. No! you press little buttons IN or OUT while viewing a screen
>so tiny you can't see what difference it makes.

>Try before you buy!

>That said, the ability to edit, frame and print my own photos within minutes
>of taking them, and without a darkroom, has been a tremendous boost and
>liberation to my photography.

>You will also miss the classic proportions of the 2.25 square negative...

How many digital cameras have you seen?
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 6:46:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mike Forrest <mforrest@bwoodtx.com> wrote:
>To any kind person out there.
>
>I could use some help in figuring out what camera to purchase.
>
>Background: I was very much involved in photography for years, mainly
>taking pictures involving activities with my kids. I used two
>Canon ftb manual bodies and a twin lens Rolli. I had a good working
>Bessler based darkroom and spent a good bit of time in there, really
>enjoying this more than taking pictures by itself. About 10 years
>ago, I put my equipment into storage and pretty much quit taking
>pictures. I find myself beginning to become interested again and am
>looking at a digital camera. I plan to look at some version of
>Photoshop and focus on still life and landscapes probably with
>emphasis on what I can do with the picture after I take it.
>
>I do not want to spend a lot of money at first until I see where I am
>going to go with this if anywhere.

Tsk. Poor sod.

I was in much the same place you are. My first digital was a 2mp
Fuji FinePix 2600. Now I've got a Canon dSLR and five lenses.

Regardless, two bits of info people haven't mentioned:

5MP vs. 6MP is no difference. A sharp lens on a 5MP will beat
a soft lens on a 6MP camera and other quality/control issues will
dominate.

Photoshop Elements is a good starter program. Capable, easier to
use than Photoshop CS, and can be had for around $60.

>I am currently looking at two cameras, the Canon A95 and the Olympus
>C60 (both CU best buys.) I can land the Olympus for around 350 with
>512 memory and the Canon for around 300. The 6mp Olympus will probably
>be a little sharper but the Canon appears to be a better picture
>taker.

Then get the Canon.

Simple, eh?

> I need manual control as this is how I think (generally did not
>use a meter). Both have this. I am leaning toward the Canon as it
>seems to be somewhat better designed. I suspect I will be doing a
>fair amount of cropping and enlarging. A major issue: I do not know
>how much weight to put on the extra mp of the Olympus.

None. Go with cheaper and better designed for now. In a couple of
years if you're still doing it then look at a real camera.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
!