"Cheap" digital camera

[Fishhead]

This is a decision that I've been agonizing over for several weeks now. (This isn't like me. I usually have no problem tossing $$$ around. However, anything more technologically advanced than chewing gum causes me to cinch up like Ned Beatty.) I'd like to buy an inexpensive ($30 to $50) digital camera to allow myself to share my diseased rocketry visions with those similarly infected, but I can't pull the trigger on the deal. Lack of information seems to be the culprit. Has anyone splurged and bought one of the low end cameras whose performance has been noteworthy in either a good or bad way?

 

[KermieD]

I don't know what's out there in that $30-$50 range, but I personally wouldn't bother with a camera that has less than 640 x 480 resolution. That's what the one I have now has (it's oooold) and I'm getting to where I'm not happy with that. I won't be upgrading any time soon, though, since I seem to have discovered this huge money drain...

 

[swimmer]

Hey, Fish, e-mail sandman, He bought a $30.00 digital camera and has posted pics here on the forum. He would be able to give you some advice.

Swimmer

 

[sandman]

The $30.00 digital was from Mejer but be warned.

I have to take about 50 shots for everyone I keep.

But the 50 shots don't cost anything...just delete the ones ya don't want.

I tried to take launch shots...not pretty.

Launch shots are with a throw-a-way cardboard camers and the prints get scanned...it works.

Cameras and picture taking are not my thing...but we GOTTA have pictures!

sandman

 

[jflis]

to buy the right digital cam, you have to ask yourself what you want to use it for...

a 640 X 480 would make fine pix for email and perhaps the web, but that's about it. Don't expect to print any, assuming you want nice prints...

1MP (Mega Pixel) is about as low as you want to go for prints. at this resolution you can print *fair* 4X6 prints and *good* 3 X 5 prints

2.1MP will print fantastic, up to 5X7 and *very good* up to 8X10.

In all cameras, you have the ability to take lower resolution pix and you can always resize smaller on your pc, before mailing or putting up on the web.

cam prices are always coming down. The most frustrating thing is that right after you buy your camera (any digi cam), you will see the same or better at a lower price. You just have to live wiht that...

Right now, typical prices are about $100 per MP, so you can find a good 2.1MP for right around $200 (i know, far more than you were expecting to pay)

again, it depends on your use. You can easily get a 640 X 480 for the 30-50 range.

Personal recommendation would be to buy Olympus or Nikon as you not only get the resolution you want (they both have all sizes) but you get the best lens and the best software (a 2.1 MP olympus will take better pictures than a 3+ MP sony, for example).

jim

 

[DPatell]

Digital cameras as a whole are not good for lift off pictures. The shutter delay that is required for the camera to process the picture is sometimes hard to manipulate, unless you have it down really well. And once you do get it down, the pictures may be blurry. Regular, old, film cameras are great for liftoff shots, while digitals are better for posting in this forum

 

[Jase]

Dan, I'm afraid I must disagree with you on parts of that.

I've only ever used a digital camera (the one I use is from work. a Sony Mavica) for taking liftoff pics. While I will concede that 35mm cameras give you more flexibility for shutter speed and image quality, you can easily get good liftoff shots with a digital camera.

The only blurry take off pics I get are ones that SCREAM off the pad. Otherwise, I've gotten a lot of very nice liftoff photos. It does take practice, but it's not difficult to master at all.

The only thing I don't like about it is I can't take a succession of pictures fast since it writes to a floppy disk. Phil has a digital camera that takes these very nicely.

My $.02 worth. Change is expected.

 

[jflis]

DPatell,

While i agree that consumer based digital photography isn't up to 35mm standards, it is still incredibly good, and in about 1-2 years will rival anything 35mm can do.

It's all a matter of understanding digital photography and knowing your intrument. I have an Olympus C2020 and have gotten used to the delay (most of the delay is in the autofocus anyway and you can eliminate that delay completely many ways)

by way of example, at last years Grand Rocket Day, i took nothing *but* digital pix and have many good ones.

You can check out that photo album at: https://jflis.com/hobbies/rocketry/grand_rocket/grand_rocket_day.htm

Severl choice pix from that album include:

https://jflis.com/hobbies/rocketry/grand_rocket/images/P5190067.jpg
https://jflis.com/hobbies/rocketry/grand_rocket/images/P5190027.jpg
https://jflis.com/hobbies/rocketry/grand_rocket/images/P5190018.jpg

and even an impressive cato:
https://jflis.com/hobbies/rocketry/grand_rocket/images/P5190016.jpg

and, these are the low resolution images. The high res are 1600 pixels X 1200 pixels.. just beautiful!

jim

 

[DPatell]

That CATO looks bad. Nice pic too!! Wow, I guess I'm wrong, I better work on the digital camera techniques to get pictures like that!! I was just reflecting on past expieriences, and so it's only fair that I give it another try and hope for the same results that you've had. It's a great camera for still shots, with all 4 mega pixels Next launch is this weekend, so I'll try to post some of the pictures that I take.
Hopefully none of them will be like your CATO picture

 

[Jase]

Dan,

With mine, as the countdown starts, I press the button 1/2 way to get the autofocus to lock in.

I also get the area that I want in the viewfinder and then look with eyes not camera at the rocket. As soon as I see smoke or hear noise I shoot.

It works for me quite often. My biggest problem is usually jumping the gun before the motor has come to pressure.

You can see some of my pics, launches and stills HERE

 

[DPatell]

Thanks for the info, i'll try it this weekend. When it's ready, I'll have to take a picture of my Magnum on an I, it should be going slow enough

BTW, nice looking Armageddon!! 1/2" plywood won't break!!

 

[Fishhead]

Thanks, gentlemen. I knew I could count on you for the info. At this point it sounds like the cheap-o camera will serve me best. I just want to post the occasional picture here and on EMRR, so I guess I'll be scouring Meijer and Wal-Mart come payday.
Jim, your photo album was excellent. Assuming that I learn to use my computer as something other than a typewriter, I hope to be able to put something like that together one day. I'll look at an Olympus digital when the time comes to upgrade.

 

[KermieD]

It's amazing how many people miss the 1/2way press of the button to lock the focus, be it a digital cam or a film cam. If you're just looking to post pics or send them for web use, 640 x 480 will be just right if you can get it in that price range. If you do want to print, then yes, you want a much higher resolution.

As to brand names, find one that's relatively known and you'll be fine. You'll get a lot more out of a launch shot on a Canon or Sony with a a 5x optical zoom than you will out of a top-of-the-line brand with a 3x optical zoom. If you're taking wedding pictures in a dark hall, it may be a different story, but in the daylight, you won't know one lens from the other even if you're a pro. The real key when you upgrade (for launch pics, at least) is the optical vs. digital zoom. All the digital zoom does is effectively crop the picture. You can do that yourself with any software you get with the camera. The optical zoom is the one that's going to give you the clear picture and make it look closer without losing resolution.

 

[Mike]

Well I've got a cheapo digital camera, only had it for a while and it serve's my purpose. I've attached a picture of my Estes Wizard lifting off that I took with my camera. OK quality isn't good (you probably couldn't tell what rocket it was if I hadn't told you) but you get the drift.