A Digital Camera for Modeling Questions...

[sillystringtheory]

I am planning on buying a digital camera for Christmas so I can share pictures of my layout, rolling stock, projects etc. I know the basics of 35mm photography, but almost nothing about digital cameras. Can any of you recommend one with the right features, that is suitable for both modeling and railfanning? I can spend about $450.00. Megapixels? Smart card? Compatability with my computer?..... Is this the right route, or would a scanner be better? Someone, please enlighten me. :confused:

[yankinoz]

I'm doing the same thing smile.gif

One of the most important features you need to be looking at is close up focus.

For that - the Nikon Coolpix seem to be the way to go - both the 775 and the 995 focus down to 2 or 3 cm. The 775 is closer to the price point you are talking about but the 995 has this way cool flip action that works well for seeing what you are photographing up close with out having to contort your body.

Someone is bound to disagree but: Don't get hung up on megapixels. I have seen high megapixel images that are not sharp because the lens used was not sharp. The lens controls how sharp the image is. The number of pixels controls how big you can print your image and have it look good. Unless you are going to print 8x10 and bigger, the 2 megapixel range will most likely suffice.

[Colonel]

I have moved this topic to the photography forum to hopefully give you more advice.

[Paul Templar]

Hi,
Right now on the market there are a number of excellent digital camera's that will do all the above jobs well, I tried a few before buying my Olympus C-700 Ultra Zoom, here's the website for it for you to look at the specs.

http://cf.olympus-europa.com/consumer/digimg/intro.cfm?id=C-700+ULTRA+ZOOM

This camera isn't cheap by any means, but well worth it for Model photography. Macro lets you get down to 1" from the subject, here's a photo up-close.
http://www.paultemplar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/macro.jpg

http://www.paultemplar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/webadd.jpg (http://www.badger-creek.co.uk/)

[ 13 November 2001: Message edited by: Paul Templar ]</p>

[Gats]

My personal choice for close-up digital photography is the Nikon Coolpix. I have the 950 - a 2.1 mega-pixel unit.
Have a look at www.steves-digicams.com (http://www.steves-digicams.com) to get the low-down on features of just about every camera available and then do a search around the 'net for Nikon and Olympus, etc. to gauge prices.
When you have narrowed the field down, hit a camera store and try them. Take a model with you and use the macro function to see if it does what you want it to do. As Rob pointed out, the Nikon 995 it has a twist body (like my 950) which allows you to get in close and still see the screen. Biggest trouble I have is getting the enough light onto the subject!!!

I have a personal aversion to proprietry anything. With digital cameras the primary memory cards are Smart Media, Compact Flash (CFI/II) and Memory stick. A couple of other formats have popped up but are minor players at this point.
Memory Stick is Sony (propriety) only and you pay the price for it. The Smart Media and Compact Flash are used by different brands and in some cases are both used in one camera. They are more common and hence cheaper to buy additional memory cards.
Downloading images is easier now with USB connections becoming more common. My Nikon has a serial port but it is so slow it's worth having a card reader connected to your PC (I use a PCM card in my notebook with the CF card).

All the above issues can be answered on Steve's Digicams site plus any others you may find. Any other questions you have, please feel free to post here.

As for scanners vs. digital cameras, each has their reasons. A good digital camera has a similar start-up cost to a good SLR but suffer from not having the same flexibility in shutter/aperture settings and operation as a SLR. But the upside is you don't need to take a photo and have it developed, printed, and if it is suitable, scanned. The digital shot is easily deleted and retaken without the wait of processing.

My 2c. smile.gif

Gary.

[Martyn Read]

I have an Olympus C860-zoom, which is only a 1.3 megapixel camera but does pretty well for net pictures and the like. I'm not sure they still make the C860.....but that's tech industries for you smile.gif

Here's a pic from our HO scale Rock Springs layout, this was taken with the baseboard outside in natural sunlight, which does make a big difference.

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1533613&a=12866783&p=50803240

The Olympus came with a photo editor program that also "sucks" the images off the camera via a cable, which takes a little while, but does work well. (I bought a mains adaptor for the camera whilst it's doing this as these camera's devour batteries)

It uses a smartmedia card, I usually get in the region of 38 standard images (the one I posted here was a standard image which has been cropped for composition) on the 8mb card it comes with.

Hope that helps. smile.gif

[rush2ny]

I use a Toshiba PDR-M60, 2.3 megapixel. It has 2.3x optical zoom and 3x digital zoom. I have had good results with it and it was under $300- for the whole package. My only misgivings is that for a good close up you need adequate lighting. (I still prefer my 35mm and a scanner)

Herman, I suggest that you take Paul's advice. He is a great photographer and his closeups always look great.(His photos speak for themselves)

Happy Railroading!
http://www.trainboard.com/sigbreak.gif
Russ
Hoffman Valley RR (http://rush2ny.users5.50megs.com/hvrrpage.html)
http://hometown.aol.com/rush2ny/logo.gif

[yankinoz]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Martyn Read:
(I bought a mains adaptor for the camera whilst it's doing this as these camera's devour batteries) <hr></blockquote>

For the "Queen's English challenged" here, that's an AC Adapter.

When I first moved to Oz the term "mains adaptor" confused me on a couple occasions. smile.gif

[sillystringtheory]

Well, I now have a lot information to absorb. Thanks again. :cool:

[chessie]

I really like my Canon G1 powershot. It is very compact, yet has many of the same features of my 35mm Canon auto-focus SLR. It has a 3x optical (quality) lens (7-21mm; 35mm equivalent 34-102mm)along with a 2 & 4x built in digital teleconverter. It focuses using TTL autofocus, but can be focused manually. The shutter speeds are from 8(sec.) to 1/1000th; has adjustable ISO equivalency adjustments, various metering options as well as built in flash + hot shoe & sync terminals. It can shoot ~ 1.7 images per second, and supposedly will shoot macro down to 2 inches. It comes with Lithium Ion battery pack, large LCD (swiveling) viewfinder, Adobe Photodeluxe LE, takes CF I and CFII cards (plus micro-drives), plus many, many more features. It is a 3.3 megapixel camera, but they have just released its successor, the G2, which is rated at 4.2 megapixels.
So why did I pick this model over others? One reason is that I have owned numerous Canon cameras over the years. I was already familiar with many of their program modes, plus enjoy the flexibilty of full manual control when I want it. Another reason was size; this camera offers much more than others, but in a smaller package. Another big factor was storage; I already had a 64 mb CompactFlash card, but knew that would not be enough for my habits. I had to have something much larger, which when I bought the camera early this year, there were not any other cost effective options besides the IBM micro-drives. [I looked at the Nikons, but they did not take micro-drives at the time.]
So what have I learned from actually using the camera? It is fantastic! I usually take images in the "large" image mode: 2048x1536 pixels. (Check out my website at: http://www.trainweb.org/ncrail/ most of the pictures taken in 2001 are with my Canon, albeit significantly reduced in size. ) (If you have high speed Internet access, I can e-mail you an "unedited" picture, typically around 1mb in size).
Any negatives? Well, I learned that the micro-drive is slower (at recording data) and uses more battery power than the CompactFlash card. [I recently picked up a 256mb CF card at a very reasonable price, and an VERY happy with it). Also, using the LCD viewfinder zaps a lot of battery quickly, although I usually don't use it to compose my shots, only to review the final product in the field. I do enjoy the ability to upload via USB (which is fast) however I cannot image trying via serial port. I also like the fact that you can use the Canon software to upload from (and to) the camera from your computer.

Sorry for rambling on.... One other note, whoever recommended Steves Digi-cams website is right on track!

Harold

[yankinoz]

http://www.trainboard.com/smiles/019.gif
It's making my head spin. I have narrowed it down to the Canon G2 and The Nikon 995. For every point there's a counter point.

It's all making my head spin.

I think I need to take a model down to the camera shop and have a play with both of 'em.

Harold - I'm glad to hear you are happy with your Canon. Have you done much close up work with it?

[chessie]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by yankinoz:
http://www.trainboard.com/smiles/019.gif

Harold - I'm glad to hear you are happy with your Canon. Have you done much close up work with it?<hr></blockquote>


I have not done much close up work of static models or scenery. [I prefer to take prototype photos that I can model]. I have taken some photos of models for posting on eBay, which you know don't have to be great quality. I know that Canon offers close up lens attachments, but I have no experience with them.

A minor correction to my original post is that the Canon G2 is only 4.0 megapixels (not 4.2). Also, since it has replaced the G1, you can get great deals on the G1's, such as this:
http://www.abesofmaine.com/productpage.cfm?pku=cnpsg1pp

Harold

[sillystringtheory]

Well....I did it. I put a digital camera on layaway today. I am open to any pro or con opinions on it. It is the Samsung Digimax 210SE. It has 2.1 megapixels, 3x optical lens with 2x digital zoom and a 1.8" LCD screen. It is advertised in today's Kmart ad for $279.84 after a $50.00 rebate. My brother-in-law is store manager at a Columbus, Oh. Kmart and is reserving it for me at his additional 10 or 20% discount. I couldn't find much out about it on the digital camera sites except the basics. It seems to have about everything I would need as a first digital camera and I don't think I could beat the price on a compairable camera. I hope I am doing the right thing. :confused:

[yankinoz]

Do you know how close you can focus it? You might want to take a box car down to the store with you so you can see how close you can get with it. If you can't get close, you may want to back out of the deal. I know we talked a lot above about features of some high end cameras and there are cameras under 300USD with close up focus abilities (Fuji FinePix.) Unfortunately these cameras do not have optical zoom lenses. To get both close focus and an optical zoom the prices are more like 400USD.

The best bang for you close up digital buck is probably the Nikon Coolpix 775 - if focuses to 3cm, has a optical zoom and can be found on-line for 399USD.

I hope this helps. I wouldn't want you to be disappointed.

FWIW - I'm starting to lean toward the Canon G2 smile.gif but am keeping an open mind. I have a few weekdays off the first week of December and am going to take a boxcar down to the shop and see how I go with the two cameras before I decide. And I will buy from the shop, not on-line - it is not fair to the sales staff to take up there time with hands on testing and then going home to order the camera on-line to save fifty bucks.

[Gats]

Sounds like the Samsung will do the job nicely. I can't say anything for the close-up abilities, but a 2.1MP with 3x optical zoom for the money you are paying sounds a fair deal. If it doesn't do the deed with close-ups (which I hope it does), I feel it will make a very nice railfanning unit.

Good luck with it and lets us know how you go with it.

Rob, where are you heading to test the camera? Chatswood?

Gary.

[sillystringtheory]

I believe the Samsung site's ad said 21cm close-up focus. I can't imagine getting as close as 3cm to anything I would photograph. :eek:

[chessie]

That is close... I don't know that I'd want any of my work seen that closely tongue.gif I saw a new Canon G2 today.... very nice!

Harold

[yankinoz]

As a rule the 'close up' focus measurement advertised is the size of the smallest object you can photograph. That is to say you can't get 3cm close with the Nikon 775 for example, but you can fill the frame with a 3cm object - such as the nose of an N scale locomotive - or the area that Paul Templar illustrated before. Usually this is at the telephoto setting on the lens so you are actually several inches away from the subject.

A 21cm min most likly means that the smallest area you can photography is 21cm wide. You can fill the frame with a 40' HO Scale box car.

Gary - I'll probibly go to Foto Reisel as they are a Canon Pro dealer and everytime I have been there I have had fantastic service. I would expect on a weekday them to let me have a good long play with the two cameras.

[Paul Templar]

With the Olympus C-700 Ultra Zoom, it will get down to 1" from the subject, here's a pic I took at 1". of my H0 little people.
It was taken using Macro.
http://www.paultemplar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/close.jpg
http://www.paultemplar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/webadd.jpg (http://www.badger-creek.co.uk/)

[ 24 November 2001: Message edited by: Paul Templar ]</p>

[yankinoz]

Ooooooooh I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK....

The bits of dust scale down to woodchips! That's good enough reason to switch to a logging railroad.

[sillystringtheory]

....I work all night, and I sleep all day..... :D

[Gats]

I go to work, I eat my lunch, I go to the lavatory...

[yankinoz]

On Wednesdays I go shoppin'
And have buttered scones for tea.

[Alan]

An HO figure with an axe sends everybody nuts :confused:

:D :D :D

My digital camera is ok for close ups of N scale equipment, except 89ft cars, they are just outside the "macro" range, which is around 8 - 18 cm. If I photograph 89 footers in "normal" mode, they are not very clear at all. But for railfan photographs it is fine. But it is only an entry-level camera, to get me used to digital, and sooner or later I will be looking for a better one. I saw Gary's Coolpix when he came over, and it looks great for all uses. What I would really like, is one like an SLR, which uses the same type of lenses. A camera for all uses?

[yankinoz]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Alan:
What I would really like, is one like an SLR, which uses the same type of lenses. A camera for all uses?<hr></blockquote>

They exist - both Nikon and Canon sell digital SLR bodies that use the same lenses as their 35mm SLR's. I have EOS lenses and would love to have an EOS D30 to go with them, but for $5500.00 Aussie Peso's I think I'll stick with the compacts.

One of the disadvantages of these SLR's (other than cost) is that the CCDs are a fair bit smaller than a 35mm frame, so the exisiting lenses act like more telephoto lenses than they do on 35mm cameras. What I am waiting for is the full 35mm frame digitals (Pentax built a prototype but is not going to market it) that cost less than 2500 Aussie. Then I am on board.

[Gats]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Alan:
An HO figure with an axe sends everybody nuts :confused: <hr></blockquote>

Nuts? Sorry Sir, fresh out of nuts...

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>
I would really like, is one like an SLR, which uses the same type of lenses. A camera for all uses?<hr></blockquote>

Oh, yeah! In some ways I am kicking myself not buying buying a Nikon F-60 SLR when I was working in HK. I guess with forethough and advanced knowledge (before the SLR digitals came out :D ) I would have gone the Nikon route so I could then purloin a Fuji S1-Pro digital SLR (based on the F-60 body) later and used the same lenses!
But... I did see a Pentax ad on the idiot box the other night for a point and shoot. Maybe there's is hope of a Pentax digital SLR coming that will use the same lenses I have for the MZ-10? smile.gif

Gary.

I cut down trees, I skip and jump, I like to press wild flowers...

[yankinoz]

Thanks Gary - I almost forgot:

I put on women's clothing and hang around in bars!

[John Nutt]

Just came from Officemax and they have a RCA 2.3 megapixel digital for $199. Has 12x zoom[3x optical,4x digital],auto focus/auto exposure witha 1.8"LCD screen and AC adaptor. Does anyone know anything about this unit? Normal price $399.

[Gats]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by John Nutt:
Just came from Officemax and they have a RCA 2.3 megapixel digital for $199. Has 12x zoom[3x optical,4x digital],auto focus/auto exposure witha 1.8"LCD screen and AC adaptor. Does anyone know anything about this unit? Normal price $399.<hr></blockquote>


If it's the CDS6300, have a look at the 60 page manual (http://www.rca.com/product/viewdetail/0,2588,PI45905-CI313,00.html?). It's the only digital RCA have on site and it matches your description. The macro function works in the 5-50cm range.
They are selling it at $299.00. I don't know what it is, and it doesn't match anything on Steve's Digicams' site, but it looks like a rebadged Kodak to me. The price seems very good. smile.gif

Gary.

[sillystringtheory]

Wink..wink...nudge...nudge...Say no more! :D

[Kraydune]

I have an olympus but nikon makes a great camera to so I cant help much with that choice. I wanted to say this for batteries. I bought mine off of ebay they are nexcell NIMH batteries, I forget how many mah but the more the better you can pick them up with a charger for a pretty good price.I bought 12 batteries, they can take awile to charge and you dont want to leave them sitting long after charge they will drain slowly, but they are better ni-cads by far. A card reader for loading them to a pc saves battery life.

[HemiAdda2d]

I have a Kodak DC3400. I got it over ester,a nd have shot almost 800 photos. GREAT railfannin' cam, and does OK for N scale photos in Macro mode. Only has a 8" min close range, tho. The tripod is really essential to me,a s I shake too much for clear shots. I got it for 400$, and Walmart had it for 200 last week. Worth looking into for an entry level cam. Also get a 32MB+ compact flash memory card. My cam came with a free card reader... My only beef with it is no ability that I know of to change the shutter speed... And it takes about 4-5 sec or longer to process a large file between shots.

[yankinoz]

Canon G2 uses a proprietary rechargeable battery. This is the biggest negative on the camera for me. I have found some really good macro photography done with the Canon with the addition of 58mm close up lenses. It's not as close as the Nikon but I don't model in N…

Anyway - I'm gonna see if I can find the 995 and G2 in stock in a shop in Sydney this week. I side by side comparison is in order.

[Gats]

Rob, if you can't find the pair in the one shop, find the G2 and if you do this Wed, Thurs, or Fri I can meet up with you with the 950, if you like. It's got very similar capabilities to the 995 but a lower megapixel count and hence smaller image.

BTW, got some images on a CD coming from the sidecar open day last Sunday at Oran Park, taken by a collegue with a Canon D-30 (their SLR digi-cam). His shots look GREAT!

Gary.

[John Nutt]

Thanks Gats for your reply on the RCA digital. I think I'll keep looking before I purchase. The more the megapixals the larger the image-is that correct?

[Gats]

You're welcome, John. smile.gif

In a word, yes. The megapixel rating is directly attributed to the size of the CCD pickup.
But, I must say that the image quality is always reliant on the lens quality, as it is with film cameras, and the quality of the electronics that 'process' the image. That is something you need to take into consideration when comparing cameras and Rob is doing the right thing in comparing the two similar cameras he is interested in side by side.
The cameras may have the same pixel rating but could have different colour and sharpness and a lower pixel camera may have a more desirable image in your eyes. It is subjective as you can appreciate.

Gary.

[yankinoz]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gats:
Rob, if you can't find the pair in the one shop, find the G2 and if you do this Wed, Thurs, or Fri I can meet up with you with the 950, if you like.
<hr></blockquote>

Thanks for the offer Gary - the real issue is finding a G2 in Sydney. Canon Australia is backordered (apperently the last shipment into Oz was 20 cameras - all pre-sold) I don't want to make a rush decision based upon the availablity of the 995 or the hype of the G2, so I will probably have to wait til after X-mas.

Maybe by then Nikon will add a mic and a million pixels to the 995, or better yet drop the price by a few hundred bucks smile.gif

[Gats]

No probs, Rob. (hey, that rhymes!) The offer is there when you are ready and need it. smile.gif

What about a Dimage7? ;)
One of the camera joints is cataloguing at AU$2899. Steve's announces it is now US$999 - a A bit of a difference even taking in account the exchange rate!

Will give you a bell tonight.

Gary.

[chessie]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by yankinoz:
Canon G2 uses a proprietary rechargeable battery. This is the biggest negative on the camera for me. I have found some really good macro photography done with the Canon with the addition of 58mm close up lenses. It's not as close as the Nikon but I don't model in N…

Anyway - I'm gonna see if I can find the 995 and G2 in stock in a shop in Sydney this week. I side by side comparison is in order.<hr></blockquote>

Rob,
I have had very good luck with the battery life of my Canon G1. Yes, it is proprietary, but it good. I saw an ad for a "replacement" battery made by AC/Delco, which was cheaper than the Canon brand and supposedly same specs. The biggest drain on the battery life is the LCD display. I have taken 300+ pictures on a single charge (not using the LCD display).

Harold