Chest of Colors forum

so it's the same as mine. now I have the stabilized kit lens too, after my original kit lens got broken...

mahon wrote:that's the problem with DSLR cameras - the pics usually need a bit more processing than from compact cameras. and that's why I am really surprised they are purchased by people who know little about photography and photo-edition. and no, it's not quite true that DSLR takes better photos. Actually compact cameras are better for photos of minis.

If you use a DSLR camera for miniatures and don't have a SUPER-SHARP lens, turn off all the sharpening in camera, and apply a slight sharpening filter before resizing the photo in the photo editing application of your choice. That is much better than the less-than-stellar algorithm used in the camera...

Mahon

God I'm so glad to hear you say that... I thought I was going crazy. I keep trying and trying to learn how to use my hubby's DSLR and it's been pretty frustrating for me. While I can run the camera and take pictures, they're just not very good at all. I still feel like the ones I get with my compact camera are better. Of course it might just be an uneducated opinion! And I haven't really been all that sold on the value of the macro lens we bought *specifically for shooting minis*!

Can you give me an evaluation of my two camera options? I have

*Cannon EOS Rebel XT with macro lens (a Canon EFS lens, "EF-S60mm f/2.8 Macro USM". I also have another lens: Canon EFS 18-55mm <flower symbol>)
vs.
*Kodak EasyShare z740


Okay this is probably going to be a stupid question but what are "kit lenses" and "image stabilizers"? Is this some kind of fancy DSLR lens that reduces image blur?

Jen

first of all
"Cannon EOS Rebel XT" in other worlds :Canon EOS 350D - lets keep thing simple
it is exacly same stuf Mahon have -so yup you mey took good mini photos with it
BUT in RAW mode !
(about exact configuration ask Mahon - he exacky kne what rurn off ehat on en on wich value in this model)


"kit lenses": lenses you get buing a set from shop a "body" + lense (usualy 18 /55 for this model )
they are made from plastic so thous are light end with Auto focus end so - they are not particulary bad but good neither - they work end thats important

"image stabilizers" - thous are the real anty shaking systems not some caind of "super iso" "eye blink" or other cheting
in Canon Cameras this system is mounted into the lenses in Sony / Pentax in to the matrix in Fujij well depend some times in matriks some times in lenses other times in bouth
this dont make pictures less blury or somthing - this alowe to took stady unmoven photos on lower shutter speed

Can you give me an evaluation ??

by the prize or by the quality ??
or eny other ?

I still feel like the ones I get with my compact camera are better.

better lenses ?? end real working "auto" setings (in DSLR Auto is just for Show .. they work moustly in semi manual )

so it's the same as mine. now I have the stabilized kit lens too, after my original kit lens got broken...

checked - your camera is heavier - so it works iven better with this

@Midnight Lurker - usually "auto" mode in DSLRs is added only for marketing purposes. DSLRs are not made for people who want to use auto settings, these cameras are all about manual settings. so the auto mode is there only to sell the camera to people who wouldn't buy it witout the mode.

compact cameras are usually made for people who WILL use the auto mode, and so the auto modes are usually better.
if you are lucky enough to buy a compact with good lens (and if you spend as much as for a DSLR, you deserve to get good lens) you will probably take better pics with much ease.

or to put it in different words:
- with good compact camera you take good pics with very little effort,
- with good compact camera you take very good pics with some effort,
- with DSLR camera and kit lens you take decent pics with very little effort,
- with DSLR camera and kit lens you take very good pics with some effort and knowledge,
- with DSLR camera and good lens you take decent pics with very little effort,
- with DSLR camera and good lens you take good pics with some effort and some knowledge,
- with DSLR camera and good lens you take excellent pics with some effort and much knowledge,

So if one wants to learn about photography, practice it, and buy additional lenses - go for DSLR.
If one doesn't want to start a longer trip into the land of photography - go for a compact. The downside may be that you will be unable to use additional lenses, but will you need any if you choose the right compact for your needs?

I think I would go for the Kodak. It has a great zoom, 5mpix is more than enough for miniature pics, access to manual and semi-automatic settings, can focus even at 12cm (wow!).
Bad thing about it: no manual white balance. You would have to apply any corrections in post-processing, but the auto settings are not bad (and good for outdoors).
Noise is acceptable up to ISO 200, higher it may become a problem.

To quote a good review:

Conclusion - Pros

Excellent color, generally very good exposure
Versatile 38-380mm zoom range
Very compact
Good handling and easy access to most photographic controls
Good flash performance
Good white balance in most situations
Both screen and EVF work well in low light
Generally accurate focus
Lots of features, easy point-and-shoot use
Huge range of scene modes and simple explanations of features/functions
Simple, automated picture sharing with supplied software suite
Good battery life
Very good price

Conclusion - Cons

Slightly soft images and lower than average resolution
Can feel unresponsive in use
Over-aggressive noise reduction at ISO 200+ (very soft ISO 400 images)
Some problems with high contrast/wide dynamic range scenes
Lack of image stabilization limits use of long end of zoom to bright scenes
Very slow buffering/card writing: camera freezes for up to 40 seconds after 5-shot burst
No image quality options, images very compressed
No custom/manual white balance
Very stiff, very awkward power switch
Movie mode not up to much

some sample pics: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/revie ... ew-samples
check them out at full zoom and wait for them to load completely of course. otherwise they will look bad...

It might not be the camera of my choice but it's a good general purpose camera I think.
Maru may correct me...
@Maru - oh yes, heavy it is..

not much to correct
Kodak EasyShare z740
is a camera from 2005 it relise prise whas about $349 (to 450 with adicional stuff)
a canon 350D from 2005 relise prise whas about $899 (KiT)
so as you mey see at this point they are not eqal at leqast with prize - the real evaluation is - how much it cost now ?

Canon for about 200$ (second hand - resonable prise ther are ppl shouting for it 535 $ - for wich you mey get camera from 2008 / 9 ) end kodac new 1 $349 (thats suprising) secend hand $120
so one of thenm loos 3/4 of its orginal prise another a litle more then half

so time whise Kodak whas beter investment but no perfect - for me it lacks Manual WB - but is realy smal end light end his prise of $120 todey is just prise of his lenses - end good camera from 2003 cost same if lenses whas good.
well chepest DSLR. at this point secoun hand will be Nicon D series 40 ~60 for about 170$
thats told you somthing about Quality of this stuff (thats cameras from 2006 ~2008)

ther are also compacts with exchengable lences but thats new end is over prised
about 700$ when DSLR with same parameters 500$ - end compact with good optic well iven with better (end with full manual) 500$

so thats about prising

so what i would choos ..... if i would not like to bother my mind with all totaly cool camera setings .. i would go for compact or Hybrid (i got Hybrid at this moment)

end for minis - well seted DSLR + alot of knowlege
or Compact - just make photos a litle to dark - so you will be able to make them bright without loosing shadows (or make em RAW .. if you compact got such)

I think that most decent compacts have the RAW capability...
that was quite my feeling that the two cameras are by no means comparable price-wise. but for an inexperienced user I would still recomment a compact.

yeah, hybrids.. not a bad choice either. still haven't got used to their presence on the market...

well Hybrids is not a new idea
first 1 apered about 9 yares ago Minolta DiMAGE 5 - that actualy hybrid - the thingi i got on Hussar whas semi brother of DiMAGE 5 - hevy as brick size of DSLR only difrence - lences mounted not exchengable but • 35 - 420 mm

the new ones are a difrent ideas

important
" i got flash as a light source .. what to do ? - help !"

ok you need to dyfuze it :
- you mey buy dyfuzor on your flash
or
made 1 your salve
https://home.comcast.net/~dougsmit/bounceflashtoys.html
end for "pop ups"
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/do-y ... ash-2.html

"How about Quality"
well if you make 1 your own with clear not dyed plastic - no difrence beside price - your own will be cheper

Thanks so much for the information Maru , i've been toying with the idea of investing into a decent digital camera for a very long time now as i've always known mine was not very good. Any recommendations of any in particular I should look at?

ther are two aproach to this
1. is "how much i mey spend money on that"
- after answering this question you mey start serching
2. is "I don't know what type of camera I want"
- in this case you need first decide what is your goal ... end that would be quite long article -_-' so i give you links as other ppl alrdy answered that
https://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/equipm ... se-it.html
https://www.photoble.com/photo-gear/how- ... step-guide
https://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Guides/ ... ide_01.htm

but if it go for mini painting you will need manual settings on White balance , Aparture end so - more manual better

if you decide what type of it is the one for you let as know we mey help in selection actual firm end model ^-^