Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Newbie Help

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 9, 2003, 3:11 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 2
Default Need a camera that can print 8x10 at photo quality.

Hello,

I need suggestions for a digicam that can produce 8x10 prints at photo quality. I intend to use the camera a lot, doing stuff from photos for cd covers and booklets, magazines, and eventually selling some of my prints.
Will this be possible without using a DSLR? I really don't want to carry around a big camera, i want something compact.

I'm interested in experimental photography, so I'll be shooting under all types of lighting conditions. That means still and in motion subjects, night and day and indoors/outdoors.

Oh, and I dont need the options of sound or video, since I already own a mini DV.

Which models would best suit my needs?


Thanks in advance. :-)
Dave Evad is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 9, 2003, 7:16 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

Hm, probably you should look for a 6 meg Pixel camera or more;
300 dpi x 8 = 2400 pixels & 300 dpi x 10 = 3000 pixels
2400 x 3000 = 7 mP
Calculation is just a guideline, most of times there are ways to get a sharp image with less data

In leightweight d-slr there is the Canon 300D or Pentax D *ist.

In the range of cameras with lens fixed to body;
Fuij S7000 will soon be released with 6mP interpolated 12mP. Ofcourse you can also wait how Sony 8 mP camera turns out. Personally I doubt that Sony can deliver professional color fidelity (unless your specialiced in green plants). I do expect many other manufacturers to launch soon 6 mP or more digital cameras with lens fixed to body.

However note, the ccd for d-slrs is and will be larger and thus less noise compared to those prosumer camera's. Looking at dpreview.com least dlsr's noise seems to be Fuji S2 or Canon 10D. Yes it weights, but the love for your tool will make it lighter (believe me I would never had expected to drag more than 1 kilo equipment along everywere I go, but the 10D is such fun that I forget about the weight. )
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 9, 2003, 7:40 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 544
Default

I regularly print 8 X 10's from my Canon Pro90. I have done some very nice 13 X 19's taken by the same camera. Part of the equation is the printer and paper you use.

More megapixels are better than fewer, but that's really not all there is to it. You used the term "photo quality prints". This is a somewhat subjective thing. My "photo quality" might not reach the standards you expect.

I would suggest you spend your money on a good lens, regardless of the camera you buy. DSLRs give you a lot of flexibility in selecting lenses, but there are some very good ones out there in all-in-one digital cameras.
Wildman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 10, 2003, 12:31 AM   #4
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default I agree...

I have many images mountd on my wall that were shot with a 2.1mp, Olympus C2100UZI (pretty much the same as the Canon IS-90).

More pixels equals more cropping available to you before you print. If you really want to learn good photography technique, use a 2mp camera & train yourself to crop on the spot.
  Reply With Quote
Old Oct 10, 2003, 7:52 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

Hmm my advice of 6 mP is based not on cropping but on the guarantuee, that whatever the subject of Dave scene is, it can be printed on A4, even according to art and glossy magazine standards.

And yes it is possible to print a 2mP photo on A4 or even A3, but would that be possible with any 2 mP photo regardless of subject/scene? Although both prosumeer and d-slr sensors are smaller than 35mm film format; It is like saying 50mm big film format is just a waste and advice to shoot on 35mm regardless of whatever what.
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 10, 2003, 9:46 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

I would recommend a camera with at least 4mp capability. The cost of 4mp camera is reasonable. If you plan to print 8X10 prints or larger then use the raw of tiff settings on the camera. This will eliminate the compression and provide you with an excellent output. The use of Tiff or raw format will also require a larger memory card and time for the camera to write to the card. A camera that can use the faster CF cards would be recommended.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 10, 2003, 10:18 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 2
Default

thanks for all the feedback guys.

I still havnt decided which camera to buy, but its nice to have more then one brain thinking of possibitlities.
Dave Evad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 10, 2003, 10:34 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

Camera with unprocessed & compressed (tiff/raw) file option are indeed nice. The usual jpeg files created by digital cameras are a tiny bit less quality compared to those lossless file formats. Tiff ranks lower than raw files, because the hughe files write very slow to memory card. I like Canon d-slr raw which delivers image data as captured by ccd. The user decides at photo review on acceptable saturation/sharpness and so on. (such cameras can also pre process image data like other cameras)

With live subjects timing may be crucial; most con- pro-sumer cameras have more shutterlag than a d-slr. This is also an argument to just bite your teeth and go for the full kilo. (just don't throw away your pocketcamera, keep it for those long hikes)
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:00 AM.