kodak sport video camera problems image
tek1
I have it narrowed down to these 2 cameras. I have read about some problems with the battery on the Kodak but it is cheaper and it is faster. Is the Kodak a good quality camera?
Answer
I would go with the Panasonic. Panasonics have historically been (in my opinion) of higher construction quality versus anything from Kodak- those feel cheap and I worried constantly that I would break the body in half if I even tapped it against anything.
The Panasonic can create higher resolution video clips than the Kodak- 848x480 (good for widescreen, HDTV) versus 640x480.
The Panasonic has greater flexibility when it comes to manual setting of the shutter speed- longest shutter speed of 60 seconds (1/2 second on Kodak) to 1/2000 (1/1000 on Kodak). The maximum shutter speed will really make a difference if photographing sports or any fast-moving objects.
If you're into macro photography or getting closeups of anything, the Panasonic can focus in macro mode down to 5cm (~2 inches), while the Kodak requires 12cm (~5 inches).
The other poster mentioned noise in the images, and that's pretty much standard for any camera whose sensor is smaller than that of a digital SLR, so I wouldn't consider it to be that much of an issue.
I would go with the Panasonic. Panasonics have historically been (in my opinion) of higher construction quality versus anything from Kodak- those feel cheap and I worried constantly that I would break the body in half if I even tapped it against anything.
The Panasonic can create higher resolution video clips than the Kodak- 848x480 (good for widescreen, HDTV) versus 640x480.
The Panasonic has greater flexibility when it comes to manual setting of the shutter speed- longest shutter speed of 60 seconds (1/2 second on Kodak) to 1/2000 (1/1000 on Kodak). The maximum shutter speed will really make a difference if photographing sports or any fast-moving objects.
If you're into macro photography or getting closeups of anything, the Panasonic can focus in macro mode down to 5cm (~2 inches), while the Kodak requires 12cm (~5 inches).
The other poster mentioned noise in the images, and that's pretty much standard for any camera whose sensor is smaller than that of a digital SLR, so I wouldn't consider it to be that much of an issue.
What is the best Camera for a Beginner Photographer?
subzero123
Hi im looking for a Camera that take all type of photography Street,Sport,ETC
I also would like a Camera that take good videos
and i want a Camera that is Easy to upload to my laptop
price range around 300 to 600 hundred $
Answer
"Which one is a good camera to buy?" is a VERY common question here on YA.
A quick search would have given you hundreds of instant replies (without having to wait for answers), but once again here is my 10 cents on the subject:
I don't like to give recommendations for particular cameras because there are too many choices and too many variables in what people are looking for. I find it much more useful to help you think this over, then make up your own mind.
Point & Shoot cameras are wonderfully handy because of their small size.
When light conditions are ideal, they even take really nice photos - all of them do.
However, they all DO have limitations - they don't do very well in low light situations (i.e. noisy photos, hard to avoid blur, etc). The little onboard flash is very harsh at close range, and doesn't reach very far.
Many of them have no manual functions, so you are limited to only very basic photos, you can't compensate for unusual situations, or do many fun "tricks" and special effects.
P&S's also suffer from frustrating shutterlag and many of them chew through batteries rather quickly.
If you're ok with all those limitations, then go ahead and pick one, most of them (the same type and same price range) are rather similar. Personally I would pick either a Canon or a Nikon, and would certainly stay away from Kodak and Vivitar.
A higher end P&S will give you more manual options and better quality. Many of those even give you the option of adding a proper flash (which makes a big difference to your flash photos).
Don't worry too much about megapixels - all modern cameras have plenty enough, plus there is a limit to how many pixels you can squash into a tiny P&S sensor before you actually LOSE quality rather than gain it. 6 megapixels is about the upper limit for those little sensors.
Don't worry about digital zoom, in fact, don't EVER use it. It simply crops away pixels, i.e. destroys information. The only real zoom is optical.
Some people ask for a camera that "doesn't take blurry photos". Blur is the photographer's problem, NOT the camera's. Even the most expensive camera will take blurry photos if the person behind it doesn't know what they're doing.
Some words about special effect features such as color accent, or even just b/w or sepia:
About applying any sort of effect in camera: DON'T DO IT !
Imagine if you just happen to take the best photo you ever took - surely you would want to have it in all its glory, right?
Always set your camera to biggest size, best quality (and to color).
That way, you start with the best possible photo as your original.
Then you make a copy and edit it to your heart's content.
You have much better control over any editing on your computer, even something as simple as b&w will look MUCH better when it was processed properly instead of in camera.
You can do all sorts of things to it PLUS you get to keep your original.
Decide which features are important to you, and look for cameras that have that feature.
Then go compare a few models on www.dpreview.com .
The very best thing you can do for your success is to borrow some books and learn about photography. A bit of knowledge will make a much bigger difference to your photos than your choice of P&S camera can.
For what it's worth - if I was in the market for a P&S camera right now, my choice would be a Canon Powershot SX40 HS http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras/powershot_sx40_hs#Specifications
"Which one is a good camera to buy?" is a VERY common question here on YA.
A quick search would have given you hundreds of instant replies (without having to wait for answers), but once again here is my 10 cents on the subject:
I don't like to give recommendations for particular cameras because there are too many choices and too many variables in what people are looking for. I find it much more useful to help you think this over, then make up your own mind.
Point & Shoot cameras are wonderfully handy because of their small size.
When light conditions are ideal, they even take really nice photos - all of them do.
However, they all DO have limitations - they don't do very well in low light situations (i.e. noisy photos, hard to avoid blur, etc). The little onboard flash is very harsh at close range, and doesn't reach very far.
Many of them have no manual functions, so you are limited to only very basic photos, you can't compensate for unusual situations, or do many fun "tricks" and special effects.
P&S's also suffer from frustrating shutterlag and many of them chew through batteries rather quickly.
If you're ok with all those limitations, then go ahead and pick one, most of them (the same type and same price range) are rather similar. Personally I would pick either a Canon or a Nikon, and would certainly stay away from Kodak and Vivitar.
A higher end P&S will give you more manual options and better quality. Many of those even give you the option of adding a proper flash (which makes a big difference to your flash photos).
Don't worry too much about megapixels - all modern cameras have plenty enough, plus there is a limit to how many pixels you can squash into a tiny P&S sensor before you actually LOSE quality rather than gain it. 6 megapixels is about the upper limit for those little sensors.
Don't worry about digital zoom, in fact, don't EVER use it. It simply crops away pixels, i.e. destroys information. The only real zoom is optical.
Some people ask for a camera that "doesn't take blurry photos". Blur is the photographer's problem, NOT the camera's. Even the most expensive camera will take blurry photos if the person behind it doesn't know what they're doing.
Some words about special effect features such as color accent, or even just b/w or sepia:
About applying any sort of effect in camera: DON'T DO IT !
Imagine if you just happen to take the best photo you ever took - surely you would want to have it in all its glory, right?
Always set your camera to biggest size, best quality (and to color).
That way, you start with the best possible photo as your original.
Then you make a copy and edit it to your heart's content.
You have much better control over any editing on your computer, even something as simple as b&w will look MUCH better when it was processed properly instead of in camera.
You can do all sorts of things to it PLUS you get to keep your original.
Decide which features are important to you, and look for cameras that have that feature.
Then go compare a few models on www.dpreview.com .
The very best thing you can do for your success is to borrow some books and learn about photography. A bit of knowledge will make a much bigger difference to your photos than your choice of P&S camera can.
For what it's worth - if I was in the market for a P&S camera right now, my choice would be a Canon Powershot SX40 HS http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras/powershot_sx40_hs#Specifications
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment