[at-l] Cameras - Say Cheese!

[icw39@ncfreedom.net (Clark Wright)]

As somewhat of a camera bug, and at the risk of coming in on the end of
this thread [I read my e-mails from latest to earliest], I would offer
some personal experience-based thoughts.  First, I personally would
recommend forgetting digital cameras for the trail; the cheapest
disposaable camera will take better grained and richer pics, and then
all you have to do is get a reputable processor to put the pics on disk
when you have them developed.  The better ones will put your pics on a
CD-ROM, and give you 4-5 different jpg picture file sizes, so you will
have everything from thumbnails to e-mailable size to monster, rich
depth and size files, all on one disk.  Second, I would highly recommend
the newer nikon line of compact cameras; I am still an old 35 mm SLR
guy, but the newer compact sized nikons all have glass lenses, and have
a panorama feature while still using 35 mm film - not a bad combo. 
There are many other great compact cameras also - the famous Canon Elphs
and Olympus makes good ones, too (among others).  As to film, I
recommend FUJI over Kodak, as much as I hate saying that; as to speed, I
recommend 100 and 200 for most outdoor situations - the grain is better
than in 400, and for outdoor shots, 100/200 is more than adequate. 
HOWEVER, for shots inside shelters, tents, buildings, etc. it is good to
have 400 speed . . . for those "flash" pic times.  One catch-22 you will
find is that if you take a roll of pics that has, say, 80% outdoor shots
on it, but a couple of indoor or in-shelter flash shots, it is VERY hard
to find a good processor that individually evaluates each exposure
BEFORE developing and printing to give you the best outcome for that
roll.  In all events, I recommend taking the time and trouble to take
PEOPLE shots; the scenery will always be there - and many times will
disappoint you in how poorly a 2-dimensional long distance mountain or
stream shot turns out, versus shots of all the great people you met, and
soon may forget without that happenstance photo you or a buddy took . .
.

Hike On!

Thru-Thinker
[Clark Wright]

Bob Cummings wrote:
> 
> "...1.3 megapixel (1280 x 960 = 1.3) for $259. at Kmart (Ebay has them for
> around $150 now)."
> 
>  It all depends on what you want. 1.3 megapixel is great for snapshots up to
>  maybe 4"X6". But you truly need a far more expensive camera and far more
>  expensive storage to make prints much larger.
> 
>  I like to show slides. I need photos for publication. I sent out a winter
> solstice card to my land trust directors that required five by eight inch
> prints. From time to time I make calendars from my photos. That requires 8.5 by
> 11 prints. Remember five by eight is almost twice the size of 4 X 6. (40 square
> inches vs 24.) Each fall I run a booth at a country fair for a non profit
> organization. I need 11 X 17 prints for a decent display that will attract
> people to come investigate. A 1.3 pixel camera for such uses would have been
> totally inadequate.
> 
> Yes, you can create digital slides and show them to a room full of people. The
> advantage? You can crop the slides before showing them. It's a luxury I still
> dream about. Why just dreaming? A decent projector sells for around $4,000.
> 
> BTW if you choose 35 mm film, shop around for both the film and processing. I
> haven't looked recently, but in batch lots in the past, I could buy 36 exposure
> film with processing  by a quality mail order lab for around $10-$12. However,
> don't skimp on film speed. For use in most light weight point and shoot cameras,
> you need at least a 200 speed film. 400 is better under most trail conditions.
> 
> Weary
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AT-L mailing list
> AT-L@mailman.backcountry.net
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l