New Toy!
 

I posted awhile back that I was getting a new digi camera.

Thanks to my parents and my partner in crime I have purchased pretty camera.

It's name shall be Shiny Jr. Kidding! Or am I?

It's name should be Lena Lovich.

If the camera is Shiny Jr., who is Shiny Sr.?

Congrats, and I'll second NA's suggestion - Lene Lovich (alert - my spelling is correct.) Remember, "If it's Lene, you'll Lov-ich."

Congrats, by the way. My digital camera is bulky and uncomfortable to hold. (But it was free. from Kodak, no less.)

Lene Lovich?

Cute Elph. Toy indeed! :)

Thanks! I'm really excited to have a camera that will fit nicely into my pocket or purse. It's debut will be at the Ducks game tonight.

Why my laptop is Shiny Sr. And my car is Shiny too. Well she will be after she gets washed.

I just got mine, too!



I don't think it has a name.

NA and I are referring to Lene Lovich's not-quite-a-hit NEW TOY, written by Thomas Dolby. (See title of thread) It's a fun song, but a couple of years ago, it was used as the background for a Target ad. I hate it when songs I like get co-opted by retail. Grrr.

I checked out a clip and it sounds familiar. I probably heard it in a Target ad ;)

O - E - O

But we used to sing the lyrics as "Nude Boy"

Yeah, what he said!

I guess it must be true
My Lucky Number's two...

Oh oh OH oh!

I can't be the only one who thought BTD bought a new vibrator?

No, you wern't, but at least I didn't say anything. ;)

Yeah, my first thought was a sex toy - but it's a camera, so that's close enough

Wir Leben Immer Noch...

"A driver of a flesh machine is what you really are
And you can't stop a rebel just by smashing up his car"

-You Can't Kill Me (Flex)

I can't tell you how happy I am that Lene hijacked this thread.

But just to stay kinda on track, BTD, please do show off with some pretty pictures soon. DP

You can see some photos here

photo number 4 - You have an otter? (cyoot!)

I need a digi camera... Why did you choose a Cannon? Was it price or features or a combo of both?

I hate David's, too bulky and a pain to use. Nickolas and I are heading to DLR Saturday (mainly for breakfast) and I would love to have a new camera by then. I love my old camera, but have serious issues getting film developed.

It was a mixture of both, and the reviews. I have an older Canon S30 that I purchased with the reviews of Euro and NA. I really wanted the Canon S80 but I couldn't spend that kind of money right now (It's $500).

This camera is very thin, will fit in my pocket or a small purse. It doesn't require a dock to download from or charge the battery with (another brand does). I was debating between the Canon and the Pentax Optio S6. In the end the Canon got slightly better reviews.

Yes. And he hears no evil.

it is a photo taken of a peice of a postcard I have

I have the same camera, 'cept mine's only got 5 megapixels. I like it a lot.

I love my new camera. Does anyone know where I can buy flashbulbs?

:D

I'm going the wrong way (or, what I like to call the right way) with cameras. Everybody else's keep getting smaller and mine keeps getting bigger. But now that I've reacclimated myself to an SLR I don't know that I can ever go back again.

Someone's going to have to define for me what people mean by "SLR" in the digital age. Because by the definition I know, my camera, which apparantly is not considered an "SLR" has the distinguishing charactersitic of traditional SLR.

The definition I know for "SLR" (Single-Lens Reflex) is that an SLR camera is one in which the image you see through the viewfinder is the same image you that the lens sees. As opposed to a stnadard camera where the viewfinder is separate from the lens, but slightly offset. The advantage to an SLR being that you see exactly what is in the frame of the lens, rather than being off by a hair.

Traditionally, this has been achieved using prisms to split the image. But with the advent of digital, that's no longer necessary. The image that's shown on the LCD view screen of a digital camera is taken directly from the lens, (as evidenced on my camera when the automatic lens cover gets stuck half-open, leaving weird black shadows at the edge of my view screen).

So it that's no longer the distinguishing characterstic of an "SLR" camera, what the heck does it mean?

Aside from the S80 I was quasi-seriously considering this one.

Essentially it still means the same thing but functionally the key difference in a Digital SLR is that the lens body is mounted and removable where non-SLR cameras all use fixed-body lenses.

There is still a technological value to a mirror SLR over simply using LCDs to compose the image. That benefit is in focusing. No camera-back LCD currently on market (and definitely no view-finder LCD) offers sufficient resolution for accurate focusing.

Finally, the digital SLRs on market now all offer a significant improvement of image quality at the same resolution since they CCDs inside the cameras are larger than the ones inside small digital cameras. Also, the optics of even the standard lenses tend to be better than the micro-lenses found on most standard digital cameras.

So in the digital age "SLR" is essentially a catch-all term for a bundle of features common to SLRs that aren't necessarily dependent on the actual SLR mechanism. There are a few manufacturers of prosumer digital cameras that have interchangeable lenses but do not actually use an SLR mirror.

I have the first generation Digital Rebel and it should be good enough for a very long time (really, unless you're making billboards anything over 6 megapixels starts to move into overkill territory). Slowly I've been getting some decent lenses.

Since I prefer landscape and wildlife photography I'm loving my new 75-300mm lens.

Please share, Alex!

I miss having changable lenses. My old Minolta was so wonderful to toy around with. But, even my Digital Cannon (which is broken at the moment) has been wonderful to play with.

Cool, thanks for the clarification, Alex. That's kinda what I figured, but wondered if I was missing something else.

When looking for our current camera, I briefly considered an Olympus SLR that was relatively compact, as SLRs go. But seeing as it would be our only camera, and seeing as the brick-like qualities of our previous camera continually lead to us prefering to leave it at home, we decided that compact was the way to go. We compromised by getting one with a rather impressive 5x optical zoom, but still pocket sized.

Should that one last a while, and if I ever feel like spending the money for a secondary camera, I'll likely get an SLR, but as a primary camera, portability is priority 1.

Here are the keepers from a trip to the Oakland Zoo. I don't have them set up in a gallery though.

warthog
sunbear
meerkat
meerkat #2
meerkat #3
giraffes
crane
elephant
camel
bobcat
grooming monkeys
not grooming monkeys

KITTY!

Thanks! Great animal shots.

I love this one:





Now, who does this remind me of?

George and Laura?

:evil:

that ended up being our assessment, too. We were initially looking at the point and shoots that mimic some SLR traits (like the Canon S3 IS) but eventually decided we'd be better off getting a more portable one now for the obligatory holiday snaps and later get an actual DSLR.

With me it was the reverse. We had about a half-dozen small digital cameras and ended up never using them because neither Lani nor I have much interest in casual snapshots (I almost never take pictures of people, it just never occurs to me) so they'd just bounce around the house until they were lost. So eventually it was "why keep buying cheap small cameras we never use, I might as well just spend a couple thousand on a camera and lenses and at least I'll use it."

For me, photography is the closest thing to an "artistic" activity I have.

We have a family history of photo-taking- well, on my dad's side. Lots and lots of family photos. Birthdays, Christmas, Easter, holiday, school events, plays, dance recitals, band concerts, visiting relatives, you name it, my mom took a photo. It's really cool to have photos from prior generations, and in my fantasies I 1) have descendants and 2) they think it's neat to have photos from my generation. In my family, photos are mostly for the album.

I *want* to also take artsy shots. My uncle's travelling all over the world as a photographer (gets press invites to things, too) in his retirement and does amazing work. And now my brother's been out taking photos of canyons and arches and other such things. So now I want nifty shots for my walls, too.

My family were huge social picture takers but apparently I didn't get that gene. I don't have a single photo of anybody in my family and hardly any of friends. Just no interest in them.

My first wife and I had a photographer at our wedding but we never actually got around to buying any of the photos.

So the surprising thing is that I probably burned through a couple thousand dollars worth of small digital cameras before finally realizing I was wasting my money.

I really want a DSLR. I rarely take group/people photos. I much prefer nature/object/art photos. I just couldn't swing the DSLR + lenses this time around. I will own one but in the mean time my lil digi takes some really amazing photos.

I bought the SD700 IS over the weekend. It's so tiny, so powerful, so easy to use!