Rails,I would like to buy a digital camera so I can post pics of my layout,UP trackage in LA,Etc. in TBoard..My question is: Is it OK to buy THEE MOST inexpensive one available? Is this a mistake,say,resolutionwise, or some other photo problem not in the high end ones?I can't even afford a Y6b I'd love right now.But the camera 'thing' is another craving I want to satisfy ASAP.Bear in mind I have no aspirations to win photo contests and such.I just want the minimum I can capture stuff with and be able to download to the forum with..I.E.What's the best cheap one?Or,any digital will work?...
Perhaps more than any other item I can think of, in a digital camera intended largely for model, layout, or prototype photography, coupled with a desire to display images on-line...you will get what you pay for. The cheap, point-and-shoot, digital cameras may initially seem to provide acceptable images but will soon reveal themselves as inadequate to what you really want to accomplish with them. You honestly need to seriously consider an SLR-type (Single Lens Reflex) digital camera at the outset, so that the camera will still be able to meet your needs as your imaging abilities begin to quickly advance. This doesn't necessarily mean buying a top of the line camera at the outset but you don't want to absolutely handicap yourself from the word go either. Particularly in the case of model photography, independent user control over both exposure and aperture are pretty much essential. Such independent control is rarely to be found in the less expensive point-and-shoot camera lines. There are other determining factors, as well, to be considered. NYW&B
Well it depends on what you thank is saticfying. Ill tell you the truth I have a Sanyo VPC-603 cost $117 and I was suprised with the results its amazing!!!!
Maybe a good second-hand Coolpix 995? Should be cheap enough since it's a few years old. The 990 had an ordinary macro, the 950 before it (which I have) was the benchmark at the time. All have twist bodies to get up close and personal. Otherwise, have a look for cameras in your price range and then hit Steve's Digicams or Digital Camera Review and see if any meet your requirements.
All of the advise you have received above are solid suggestions, Mark. *If* you do not intend to enlarge your photos to 8.5" X 11" or larger, you can get along fine with most lower cost SLR's. As do computers, any camera you buy as 'up to date' today, will be obsolete tommorow. So find yourself something that will do the job you want it to do and that you can live with for awhile. I suggest you make a list of what you would like to do with a digital camera and then go to one or more of the multitude camera stores down there in Los Angeles and talk it over with a person who has knowledge of what camera(s) will do the best job for you. I'm sure you will have several to choose from. Good luck and we look forward to seeing your pics here in Trainboard. :thumbs_up:
I purchased a used digital. At first I was amazed with the pictures I got however that had more to do with my perceived quality. I thought the DC's were worthless pieces of junk and shot worse then a box camera or those throw away cameras. Actually, I got better pictures with my granddad's box camera. Today, I abhore my _______ (you fill in the blank with any negative expletive and you will be correct) digital camera. Go to my railimages of a layout in progress and you will see the problems I've had. The flash that came with my DC, either washes out everything close up or doesn't throw enough light to capture the whole scene. Ask me off line on the PM and I will share with you which camera not to buy. As said earlier, "You get what you pay for". I paid $50.00 and got taken to the cleaners. Look around and check out the camera's that have been suggested here and take a minute or two to drool over the expensive Nikon's, Olympus, Canon and others. Now, I'm sure that everything said here has already been said by others. Just tossing in my two cents and experience. I thought you might find it helpful.
Don't forget a tripod if you are going to photo your layout. Probably more important than the camera. One of the things I often see is insufficient depth of field, especially with point-and-shoots, but also with the next level up. This is where the DSLRs really come into their strength. Barstow Rick's raised the point about flashes. The usual advice is to turn off the flash--if you can. A flash, unless it can be controlled very carefully, will burn out your image.
Gents,thanks for such fast and informative info.I'd probably wind up(no pun)with the Sanyo NSFan14 mentioned.And,yeah,a tripod.Money's tight now.Hmmmm,...Y6b..,K4,...Sanyo..??
Stretching a bit for a DSLR in 2003 changed my life. I'd started as a news photographer in 1967, then lost interest when I found that writing was easier and made more money. I hadn't taken a serious photo in about 15 years when I bought a D100. Wow, now I'm back into it because of the ease and the non-expense. With a digital, you're just wasting photons, which are pretty cheap compared to film.
