antinomies ([info]joraina) wrote,
@ 2009-06-03 10:23:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
The desire for a replacement of my beloved Konica Minolta DiMage Z6 grows. It's now been over half a year since I wrecked the lens by dropping it on a marble counter. As I look at other cameras, some seem decent but none am I familiar with as intimately as the DiMage. It seems as though no other set of controls are as easily, or as comfortable to manipulate with my fingertips as my old friend. And even though I know it would be best to slowly pool money until I can buy the best camera I can get rather than settle for less (I could buy another Z6 for $150 on eBay since it's now an ancient model--it was originally $500), I feel pressed for time because I have received a number of commissions lately to do casual photography. These are predominantly unpaid requests from friends, but I still feel ashamed to show up with my puny Sony DSC-P10. The camera is over six years old now and does not look professional or take professional pictures. Woe betide me, I am nowhere near anything but an amateur photographer but I desperately long for something more.

My alternatives, unaffordable but with potential are the following:

SONY CYBER-SHOT DSC-H5 (7.2 MP) - another old model, it seems to have some difficulty with dark shots and graininess but overall not too bad for $135 on eBay
CANON POWERSHOT G10 (14 MP) - a much newer model and subsequently about four times as expensive, I actually am okay with the controls for this one even though the scrolling button is a little bit wacky; $465 on eBay

If I had the money I would probably want to upgrade to a DSLR, but seeing as I don't technically genuinely understand what an SLR is, I don't think I deserve to be buying one. I really wish I could take a photography class.

Perhaps someone could clear up a little confusion, though: There are small point-and-shoots, and large point-and-shoots. I've always perceived the bigger ones to be superior. But really, do they have any advantage? I've always thought the larger, longer lens yielded a better macro image, but this is only an assumption.

*EDIT: Okay, after reading the above review for the Canon, I kind of really want it now, more than I did before. Help, I am becoming attached to it. I wonder if the G9 is relatively comparable? It's certainly quite a bit cheaper.

(11 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]tolfea
2009-06-03 03:51 pm UTC (link)
Actually I would steer clear of the cybershot. My first camera was a cybershot and it was awful; the second Sony camera I had also sucked.

Sony altogether is probably bad and should be steered clear of. (toshiba laptops cough cough)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]joraina
2009-06-03 04:11 pm UTC (link)
Yeah. I've generally formed the opinion that Sonys are not so great. However, when I was talking to the camera specialty person at Ritz, she said Sonys are actually pretty good. I hate taking advice from specialists because depending on the individual, you might completely agree OR disagree with them. Having owned a Sony, I would veer to the side of disagreement. But this camera gets good reviews, including picture quality, so I don't know.

But I'm definitely veering towards the Canon. It's just so much more expensive. :|

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]syncopated_time
2009-06-03 10:53 pm UTC (link)
SLR means 'Single Lens Reflex' and it was much more applicable in the days of film cameras, when the mirror behind the lens (which bounced the image coming through the lens up to the eyepiece) would flip up and expose the film behind it, capturing the same image you were seeing through the viewfinder.

Honestly I don't know how these new digital 'SLRs' work, but I bet you they have no flippy mirror in the inside. :p

Really, the difference between DSLR and the digital point-and-shoot cameras these days is that the DSLRs have all the manual controls of their old film-using counterparts -- manual ISO, aperture and film speed control, mostly. The digital point-and-shoots have computers that judge all those things for you, giving you overall good photos, but no artistic control for pushing, pulling, depth of field, stuff like that. The big DSLRs will do that too, but if you're not going to be using those features there's really no point to having manual control (IMHO).

I don't know much about the comparison of the larger-bodied point-n-shoots vs. the smaller ones, unfortunately. :-\

I want a new camera too. My old Canon Elph (which I love) is showing its age after all these years... *is torn*

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]joraina
2009-06-04 05:19 pm UTC (link)
Hey, thanks for the explanation. I like the idea of a manual, but I've also been working so long with automatic controls that the former seems unnatural to me. I think the motivation behind my interest in buying a DSLR is fueled by my desire to be "accepted" and "acknowledged" by the elite class of photographers of which I aspire to be a part, all of whom have DSLRs or at least SLRs. Which, really, is a poor motivation and I should be concerned more with what's most comfortable with me but also allows me to grow as a photographer. I guess an SLR is good for that, but you never know, I could end up not liking manual settings at all.

Sometimes manufacturers of technology that make quickly successive upgrades (e.g. computers, phones) offer discounts on new products if you sell them back your old device so they can refurbish it and re-sell it. Do you think they might do this with your ELPH?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]syncopated_time
2009-06-04 05:43 pm UTC (link)
I don't think I can sell them back the Elph -- I've had it for 5 or so years now and it's probably so outmoded now. Which is a shame because it's a good little point-and-shoot!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]joraina
2009-06-04 11:58 pm UTC (link)
Well, if it's still in functioning condition, you can probably put it on eBay, no matter how old it is, and someone will bid on it. Sometimes people even buy broken cameras, although of course the going rate is much lower. But ELPHs are nice from what I've heard and if I were you I would hold onto it until it completely dies ;)

You know, I think I remember the post you made when you bought your camera. You posted a macro of yarn, or something. I seriously cannot believe five years have passed! :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]septentrio
2009-06-03 11:22 pm UTC (link)
I have a Canon EOS Digital Rebel. It's nice, but the lens is what matters most for me. It makes the biggest difference and is why I got an SLR. Megapixels only matter if you want to print large versions of your photos.

You don't really need to know how to use an SLR if it has an automatic setting, which makes it function just like a point and shoot, but with way more control over focusing. (Although they usually have auto-focus, too, that you can toggle on and off.) You can learn to use the manual camera controls, though, so you can grow into the camera.

I don't know if you ever tried using a film SLR, but it really sucks if you don't know what you're doing. What's lame is if you set the aperture and f-stop wrong, you'll let in too much or too little light for anything to show up at all (you'll get all black or all white instead of a photo), and you don't know that until you go to get it developed.

But with digital, you can see what you get immediately, so if you have a lot of patience and time, you can actually teach yourself what works and what doesn't with the manual controls. If it's too dark right then, you can let it in a little more light until it shows up, or vice versa, and just experiment with it.

It's really not that hard to get a basic picture out of an SLR. I'm not sure I can explain it well, but basically by messing with the f-stop and aperture setting buttons (which will vary depending on your camera), you let in the right amount of light to get a picture to show up.

It's not that hard if you have a new SLR because they all have the an exposure meter built in. You just look through the lens and usually press down half-way (not all the way) on the shutter button and it'll show the exposure meter at the bottom or to the side of your viewing area in the lens.

Essentially, the exposure meter looks like a timeline or a number line, with negative and positive numbers and a 0 in the middle. We'll say negative will let in more less light, and positive will let in more light. So the correct amount of light needed for a picture to show up will be marked on the timeline somewhere, probably to the left or right of 0, the center mark. 0 would represent perfect lighting conditions, which you probably won't be in, so you have to fake it by letting in more light or less light, depending on what you're focused on. Does that make sense? If it doesn't I'll figure out a better way to explain it.

(Basically just imagine a sort conveyor belt running from your left to your right. Above the conveyor belt is a red mark right in the center, the "sweet spot." And to the right is a mark on your conveyor belt. So you have to crank the conveyor belt on the left to bring the mark over so it's perfectly under the sweet spot.)

I think I'm way over-explaining this, haha. Sorry. :)

Personally, though I have a really nice SLR, I want a point and shoot. The photos don't compare, but the last year or so, the camera has been so cumbersome at places like Disneyland and Comic Con that I haven't even brought it, or if I do bring it, I keep it in my backpack all day. I haven't taken a single photo at Comic Con in like two years, and it's just because I'm way too lazy to carry around that huge camera when I'm walking through 100,000 sweaty nerds. The SLR is awesome for things like presentations, where I'm just sitting down for a long time in dark lighting conditions (especially if I had a tripod). But for times when it's like, "Oh holy crap, [such and such celebrity] is right there!", point and shoot wins every time, for me. I'm just not quick enough at manually focusing (let alone setting the exposure) to get a good photo in those situations.

Also, a point and shoot can fit in your pocket and usually comes in colors. ;)

Seriously though, if you have the money, for the sort of thing you want to do, you probably want an SLR. But if you don't have the money right now, you can get VERY good photos with a point and shoot, and it's much cheaper and convenient to get one. It all depends on what you need it for.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]joraina
2009-06-04 06:16 pm UTC (link)
I get what you're saying about the exposure meter, because I spent most of the time on my Z6 in the Shutter mode. Your metaphor works for me except my timeline would be vertical because I had to use the up-and-down buttons to adjust it.

My mother offered to let me use her SLR, but required that I read the manual first. *sigh* I HATE using manuals. I'm one of those people who expects to kind of just fiddle around to find out how to do something, and I do tend to have that degree of successful intuition, you know? So it sucks to hear that they're a pain to grapple with.

I was of the impression that there are different-size point and shoots. My Konica Minolta is a "point and shoot" even though it's not tiny, in that it's an automatic.

I am quite jealous of your Digital Rebel. ;) Thanks so much for explaining these things to me, there's no need to apologize for going into detail because I really appreciated this comment. :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]joraina
2009-06-04 11:59 pm UTC (link)
P.S. I totally agree with you about the megapixels. I will probably NEVER end up needing 14 megapixels...I'd be fine with half that and a discount. :P

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]toiletdog
2009-06-06 02:53 pm UTC (link)
'ello! So, I found you after doing an Anthropologie interest search, and after reading a bit of your blog, I think we may be long-long twins. Would you care for a new friend?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]joraina
2009-06-06 04:00 pm UTC (link)
I sure would! I'm adding you right now :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(11 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…