| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/16/2002 09:48:17 AM · #26 |
dude!
GREAT light and framing : ) .. that little thing was actually able to render that scene very nicely.
now just don't let those 2 mpx go to your head , k? ; )
Originally posted by wingy:
Just to chip in my two cents, about 4 months ago when I was considering getting into digital photography I dragged out the family's .7 megapixel model that was top notch in '98 to see if I had any capabilities at all. I managed to get this portrait of my little brother with it.
Luckily now I'm a high roller with my 2 mp coolpix 2500, which is responsible for all my entries here. It's nice now that I don't have to worry about the limitations of less than top of the line technology anymore. = )
|
|
|
|
11/16/2002 09:49:19 AM · #27 |
lol
you know that you just put yourself on 'spook' databases all over the world just because you asked that question publicly, don't you? ; )
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Doesn't anyone have one of those wristwatches with the spy camera in it? (I mean, someone who can REVEAL that they have it.)
|
|
|
|
11/16/2002 09:50:11 AM · #28 |
Cool! How much do I get? :) :) :)
Originally posted by myqyl:
Thanks :) I'll mail you the check :)
She does read sometimes.
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
[i]does she read the forums on dpchallenge? : )
truly, an f717 is a much more capable camera. and i'm not positing that this cheap camera could ever replace it. certainly you could never do super macros or fast action or long exposure photography with the $200 A-10.
but as a platform on which to learn basic composition, framing and lighting, and enter a shot or 2 in a contest, a lesser camera, if wisely chosen, can, i believe, certainly be worthy :)
Originally posted by myqyl:
[i]Originally posted by magnetic9999:
[i]and for someone upgrading, this shows you dont have to break the bank to get something that works ok.
Shhhhh!!! I've got my wife convinced that I absolutely NEED the Sony F717... If she reads this thread I will NOT be a happy puppy :)
[/i]
[/i]
[/i]
|
|
|
|
11/16/2002 09:53:18 AM · #29 |
hehe,
here in the 'big city', because on-street parking is so limited, everyone pays to park in a lot. The lot is always managed by a guy or 2 who askes you when you're leaving. Then he places your car based on letting out earlier people first, kind of like layering a cake or a lasagna.
sometimes if you get there late but need to stay a long time, he will take your keys, so he can move your car around when you're not there. these lots are usually run by big companies who's marque is seen all over the city, so you can generally trust the guy with your car.
hth
: )
Originally posted by Sonifo:
These pictures turned out better then I expected. It does take a good picture. My son has been wanting to buy a camera with 2.o and I might just let him now. I still think he should save for a better one.
What is up with that parking lot? How in the world are some of those folks going to get out? lol
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
[i]here's some shots just taken out the window of my office, through glass, mind you. it's a gray day but should give u some idea of what's possible .. : )
out the window 1
out the window 2
Originally posted by Sonifo:
[i]Wow! those are some really good pictures. I noticed that they are all close ups. What do the pictures look like from a distance?[/i]
[/i]
* This message has been edited by the author on 11/16/2002 9:51:44 AM. |
|
|
|
11/16/2002 05:48:12 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
lol
you know that you just put yourself on 'spook' databases all over the world just because you asked that question publicly, don't you? ; )
Originally posted by GeneralE:
[i]Doesn't anyone have one of those wristwatches with the spy camera in it? (I mean, someone who can REVEAL that they have it.)
[/i]
No...tell me more (if you're allowed to). I suspect it will be a minor addendum to my old FBI files...BTW -- I don't have ANY wristwatch, much less one with a camera. Of course, we will all soon have telephones with cameras and GPS units, and we'll all be little dots crawling around on a giant map under Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado... |
|
|
|
11/16/2002 10:00:28 PM · #31 |
Before I bought my Kodak I had a Fujifilm DX-9 zoom. It was 640 X 480 pixels. HERE are a few pictures I took with it. I'd still use it occasionally but it doesn't work with my Gateway for some odd reason, and my old Packard Bell is down for the count. I use my old laptop with it but the monitor on this is never really clear.
I bought my first digicam when I used to sell stuff on eBay. It was a real workhorse of a little camera.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2002 10:34:46 PM · #32 |
You know, with all the great examples of shots I'm beginning to think Mag might have a great idea with a 640x480 or 480x640 challenge. I know I've had to think a lot more on this shot to try to overcome some of the limitations of the little 1.3 Megapixel.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2002 11:50:47 PM · #33 |
Sidetrack...
I saw an expose' on tv recently about valet parking at big name restaurants and clubs in Cali. They had the guys on camera stealing from the cars. They took money, sunglasses, etc .. anything they could find and they really looked good. Of course you couldn't PROVE they'd taken anything. One of the owners interviewed just said "the ticket says not to leave any valuables in the car". Owner beware. |
|
|
|
11/19/2002 12:09:37 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
'it's not the camera, it's the photographer'
i hate to break this to you, but it's the camera.
and yours is STILL better than mine.
my friends and i who compete on here are constantly getting shot down in the votes area for reasons that sum up to the fact that our cameras blow. the say things like "focus" and "dof" and "jpeg compression" but they mean "get a better camera"
|
|
|
|
11/25/2002 11:27:01 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by Arachnophilia:
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
[i]'it's not the camera, it's the photographer'
i hate to break this to you, but it's the camera.
and yours is STILL better than mine.
my friends and i who compete on here are constantly getting shot down in the votes area for reasons that sum up to the fact that our cameras blow. the say things like "focus" and "dof" and "jpeg compression" but they mean "get a better camera"
[/i]
The camera is a factor, but certainly not the only factor. But you have to try to work within the features of the what the camera can do. If you are getting focus comments, or DoF comments you are probably too close for what your camera can do. My 1Mp HP camera doesn't even focus,
its set to infinity all the time - so you sure can't get close to anything with it. Macros aren't any good with it. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 09:27:57 PM EDT.
