Picture quality on low end cameras

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

salgud wrote:
> Still researching low priced digital cameras (<$200). My 2 biggest
> concerns are picture quality, especially color quality) and
> reliability. Can anyone suggest which manufacturers have the best
> picture quality? I understand that in this price range, most cameras
> will be designed to "exaggerate" certain colors. Particularly push
> blues, for nice blue skies, and maybe reds or yellows. Which
> makes/models in general do less of this? I'm not a fanatic or an
> expert, but I would like something as faithful as I can get in this
> range.
> Thanks for the help!
>

Keep in mind that the camera is only part of the equation. How prints are made is
another. How a computer monitor or a TV shows the pictures is another. The good news is
that you can control the color, starting with the camera. (How you set white balance, for
example.) You can also control your monitor (but not themonitors of thise whi get an
e-mail picture from you), and the prints as well if you do your own printing or work with
a cooperative service. Think of the file that comes from the camera as if it is a
negative, not the final product.

Of course, you don't have to fuss over every photo. If you are like many of us on this
NG, you only print some of the photos you take, and color isn't that critical even on all
of those. You may even want to accentuate it in some cases, like a dramatic sunset.

As to a camera at $200 or less, consider the low-end cameras of companies that deliver
good color in their more expensive cameras. A good place to check them out is at
www.dpreview.com.

When I used film, I didn't like the way Kodak's films overdid some colors, like the blue
skies. I thought Fuji did a little better. I have more control of the end result now
than I ever had.

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

Marvin wrote:
> salgud wrote:
> > Still researching low priced digital cameras (<$200). My 2 biggest
> > concerns are picture quality, especially color quality) and
> > reliability. Can anyone suggest which manufacturers have the best
> > picture quality? I understand that in this price range, most cameras
> > will be designed to "exaggerate" certain colors. Particularly push
> > blues, for nice blue skies, and maybe reds or yellows. Which
> > makes/models in general do less of this? I'm not a fanatic or an
> > expert, but I would like something as faithful as I can get in this
> > range.
> > Thanks for the help!
> >
>
> Keep in mind that the camera is only part of the equation. How prints are made is
> another. How a computer monitor or a TV shows the pictures is another. The good news is
> that you can control the color, starting with the camera. (How you set white balance, for
> example.) You can also control your monitor (but not themonitors of thise whi get an
> e-mail picture from you), and the prints as well if you do your own printing or work with
> a cooperative service. Think of the file that comes from the camera as if it is a
> negative, not the final product.
>
> Of course, you don't have to fuss over every photo. If you are like many of us on this
> NG, you only print some of the photos you take, and color isn't that critical even on all
> of those. You may even want to accentuate it in some cases, like a dramatic sunset.
>
> As to a camera at $200 or less, consider the low-end cameras of companies that deliver
> good color in their more expensive cameras. A good place to check them out is at
> www.dpreview.com.

Thanks. That's where I've been looking, among others.

>
> When I used film, I didn't like the way Kodak's films overdid some colors, like the blue
> skies. I thought Fuji did a little better. I have more control of the end result now
> than I ever had.

As I remember, Kodachromes punched up the reds and yellows a bit,
Ektachromes punched up the blues. I used to try to have both on hand,
depending on what I was taking at the time. By the time I lost
interest, I was carrying 4 rolls of film, miniumum, most of the time.
Kodachrome, Ektachrome, a roll of fast b&W (asa400, often pushed to
800) and a roll of slow b&w (asa25). All of them got rolled back up
into the canister, then rolled back out when I used them again. Was
saving up for a extra back to minimize some of this. Maybe that's why i
got tired of it!

Thanks for all the suggesions!