Calling all photographers

Listen, I really want to help you out, and I already have a few models lined up in my head for you, but I'm so god damned brain-dead and tired that I would probably fuck this entire post up. I'll catch up with you in the morning.

 

May I suggest buying a traditional manual camera as a first? I can't remember who does them, its the classic camera, manual wind, metal frame, 49mm. They're ideal to learn on.

I have a Pentax K1000, really simplistic controls and it'll help you get the basic theory under your belt, like Apeture settings, f numbers, shutter speeds, correlation between for depth of focus, focusing, exposures, etcetc

To me theres something much more agreeable about traditional (non digital) cameras. Its probably a combination of the fact they're cheap cameras themselves, and if you process your own film and buy in bulk its not expensive in that regard eithe, and its so much nicer having photographs than digital images..

 

I am strictly digital (I am not flaming analog cams). I use a Casio Exilim EX-S600 (picture below). Its a 6 MP digital compact. I love it!! Below are also some pics I have taken with it to show you the quality.

 

I'm also interested in a camera around $300 thats the ebst of the ebst for it's price. Crisp, colorful images, good macro, ect. Digital, as well...

 

That casio I have is now only $189.99 and Best Buy. I paid $350 for it 2 years ago. Solid camera.

 

i got a sony cyber shot 7.2 megapixels that needs a new lens i`ll sell to anyone here for 20$ i was told it would cost like 150-200$ to fix and im to lazy to do that so if anyone wants it to fix up let me know then its a pretty nice camera pratically brand new used like 4 times till some douchebag dropped it and now the lens wont is stuck half open

 

I have a couple cameras. The first is an Olympus SLR film camera. The thing is fully manual, with shutter speed adjustments, f-stops, lighting, asa, all that fun jazz... The only problem is getting proper film and development. If you're planning on taking mostly black and white pictures and have the means to learn developing on your own i'd say go for it. The supplies are cheap enough and it lets you be creative not only with the camera but also in the dark room... Developing color photos on your own is damn tricky... plus the chemicals are really nasty... getting them developed at a store can be a bit pricey...

I also have a canon digital camera. That is what i'd recommend for a beginner. You can usually mess with image lighting and shutter speed... plus you can see your pictures and delete the one's you don't like. especially under 300. If you want a more manual control you gotta up your price. Canon EOS are professional digital cameras and they can go from anywhere from 300-1200.

go with the easy point and shoot to begin with. and if you get some extra cash, sell it and get more control

just my two cents

peace,
Hippy

 

While I do agree with Highbinder in that you should be learning traditional photographic theory, such as aperture, shutter speed and ISO and how to incorporate them into your pictures, you don't necessarily have to do that with a fully manual film body. I learned those basics on a Canon Powershot A95 with a Manual control option and, while some film shooters scoff at me for even learning on a digital, I brought all of that knowledge to the film world with me and did very well.

The first thing I want you to do is write down this web site and commit it to memory; http://dpreview.com/ They have pretty much all of the information you're going to need for future purchases, including extensive reviews, sample photos and all that jazz. I use it all the time when I'm daydreaming about that new $8000 Canon body that I will never, ever, ever, ever have...

As far as your price range goes, there's a whole fuck load of point and shoots you could go for, but I'll run through a few that I saw would be good to start off with.



The Canon Powershot A640 is about $265 on Amazon and, from what I'm seeing, is highly recommended for a beginner to pick up on all fronts. The macro mode is supposed to be superb and it also offers manual focusing for low light situations. It has P mode (for just point and shoot situations where you don't want to get too artsy), Shutter Priority (Control of the shutter speed), Aperture Priority (Control of the aperture), and fully Manual mode (control of both). One down side, ISO 800 is supposed to be very noisy in low light situations (ISO controls exactly how the sensor handles light, you would use ISO 400 or higher in a dark room for clear pictures but the problem is that when you raise the ISO, digital noise becomes more and more unbearable in the picture.. looks very grainy) but that's to be expected with a point and shoot. Other than that, it looks like it's all systems go for this one.

Here are a few samples from the A640. I'll do some more hunting and find a few more cameras for you to choose from but, until then, just chew on these for a while.

 

Eh, I've been looking at a lot of the Nikon point and shoots and, short of buying one for $400 or more, there really isn't much that offers any creative flexibility or control. Most of them are kind of shitty as far as giving the shooter any way to shoot to their liking.. so.. I dunno man, I'll take a look at Pentax and Kodak for you.

If you want my honest opinion, stick with Canon, and that's not just me being biased because I shoot Canon, they just offer far more control and stability for a new learner. I could be wrong though, I've just always had better luck with them.

I'll keep looking though.

 

if i were you...i would save another 300 and get a nice Nikon D40, it's sooo worth the money.

 

Oh yeah, I haven't even gotten into what you could do with a DSLR and a nice all-around lens. I don't know how deadset you are on the $300 price range, but I recommend you start off with a point and shoot anyway. You don't know if you're going to be a 'photopath' until you've shot with one for a few days and I'd hate to see you invest a shit load of money in a nice SLR setup right off the bat, only to find out that photography isn't your thing.

Just my two cents.

 

For what its worth... for a long time I used a Canon A70, which I'm assuming was updated with the A95 Durchii posted above. I wanted to step out of having a point and click but I wasn't yet ready for an SLR, and the camera was perfect.

It gives you all the tweaking and control you could want to mess around with and learn, but if you just want a photo it will do that for you as well.

I took this photo a week after I bought the camera, brand new to all the grace and glory of aperture and shutter settings...

 

everyone likes taking pictures, you dont have to run around and take pictures for fun, you can just have a high quality camera to take picture of the things you love. how could you not like doing that? lol, wether it be tities, or bud. your call

 

It'd be sweet not having that massive photo on the page before if you could edit that by any chance.

Also, this "High Quality" you are talking about is only really beneficial to someone who wants to dedicate the time and energy to learning (and earning) a digital SLR. You can get the same amount of megapixels and a well functioning unit for much less.

An SLR is not a requirement for taking a good photo.

 

African is right, I've taken some great photos on my A95. In fact, if I don't want to lug my 30D along on a trip somewhere (Doesn't happen often, believe me [hugs his camera]) I'll take my little point and shoot and snap away.

 

I do my duty with a Nikon and wouldn't even consider recommending anything other than a Canon to someone with an interest and a will to learn.