Need help selecting digital camera

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dave Boland, Nov 26, 2008.

  1. Dave Boland

    Dave Boland Guest

    Newsgroup,

    I need to get a digital camera to replace the Polorid 600, and would
    appreciate any help. Some information about the camera use to help
    guide the comments:

    * The camera will be used mostly for documentation of things like
    scope traces, printed circuit traces, control panel pictures, and some
    field test items that may be in bright sun. Light levels run from
    normal room lighting to bright sun. Speed from stationary, to
    oscilloscope display, to moderately fast moving (1/30s to 1/250s
    typically).

    * Users of the camera vary between no photography experience, to a
    fair amount of experience. That said, the camera should be as simple
    to use as possible because I don't want people spending time tweaking
    settings.

    * Picture size is typically 5 in. by 7 in. some are larger.

    * Budget is limited and I would like to stay at $100 (U.S.) or less.

    * Features that seem important are:
    - Easy to use is number 1, which includes controls and menus.
    - Very good quality pictures (focus, exposure, color) important.
    - Very reliable.
    - Easy to use in the sun. I like viewfinders for this, but...
    - Optical zoom of 3 to 1 or better.
    - Batteries that can be obtained at 'mart's is a must.
    - Easy to down-load to P.C. or printer, and quickly.
    - Macro would be nice for close-ups of circuit card failures.
    - Manual controls would be nice, at least for some of us.

    Some cameras that I'm considering are the ones that will be on sale
    for black Friday. They are:
    http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=10727357&sourceid=17160933832852010904
    http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=10710381&sourceid=38947188162793659556
    Nikon Coolpix L18 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz
    Olympus Stylus 760 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz
    Kodak EasyShare C913 9MP 2.5" LCD With Free Canon Photo Printer,
    $79.99 at Staples
    Casio EX-Z9 8.1MP Digital Camera - $99.99 at K-Mart (Thur. only)
    Kodak EasyShare MX1063 10MP Digital Camera w/ 3x Zoom - $89.00 Target

    Thanks for any serious suggestions.
    Dave
    Dave Boland, Nov 26, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dave Boland

    Rich Guest

    On Nov 25, 8:31 pm, Dave Boland <> wrote:
    > Newsgroup,
    >
    > I need to get a digital camera to replace the Polorid 600, and would
    > appreciate any help.  Some information about the camera use to help
    > guide the comments:
    >
    > * The camera will be used mostly for documentation of things like
    > scope traces, printed circuit traces, control panel pictures, and some
    > field test items that may be in bright sun.  Light levels run from
    > normal room lighting to bright sun.  Speed from stationary, to
    > oscilloscope display, to moderately fast moving (1/30s to 1/250s
    > typically).
    >
    > * Users of the camera vary between no photography experience, to a
    > fair amount of experience.  That said, the camera should be as simple
    > to use as possible because I don't want people spending time tweaking
    > settings.
    >
    > * Picture size is typically 5 in. by 7 in. some are larger.
    >
    > * Budget is limited and I would like to stay at $100 (U.S.) or less.
    >
    > * Features that seem important are:
    >    - Easy to use is number 1, which includes controls and menus.
    >    - Very good quality pictures (focus, exposure, color) important.
    >    - Very reliable.
    >    - Easy to use in the sun.  I like viewfinders for this, but...
    >    - Optical zoom of 3 to 1 or better.
    >    - Batteries that can be obtained at 'mart's is a must.
    >    - Easy to down-load to P.C. or printer, and quickly.
    >    - Macro would be nice for close-ups of circuit card failures.
    >    - Manual controls would be nice, at least for some of us.
    >
    > Some cameras that I'm considering are the ones that will be on sale
    > for black Friday.  They are:http://www.walmart.com/catalog/prod...atalog/product.do?product_id=10710381&sourcei...
    > Nikon Coolpix L18 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz
    > Olympus Stylus 760 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz
    > Kodak EasyShare C913 9MP 2.5" LCD With Free Canon Photo Printer,
    > $79.99 at Staples
    > Casio EX-Z9 8.1MP Digital Camera - $99.99 at K-Mart (Thur. only)
    > Kodak EasyShare MX1063 10MP Digital Camera w/ 3x Zoom - $89.00 Target
    >
    > Thanks for any serious suggestions.
    > Dave


    Chances are the ink for that "free Canon" will cost 1/2 what the
    printer would on it's own. Pick the camera that most matches the
    shroud you used for the polaroid to shoot the oscilloscope with, you
    might have to adapt it.
    Rich, Nov 26, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dave Boland

    whisky-dave Guest

    "Dave Boland" <> wrote in message
    news:ggi8ro$3d4$...
    > Newsgroup,
    >
    > I need to get a digital camera to replace the Polorid 600, and would
    > appreciate any help. Some information about the camera use to help guide
    > the comments:
    >
    > * The camera will be used mostly for documentation of things like scope
    > traces, printed circuit traces, control panel pictures, and some field
    > test items that may be in bright sun. Light levels run from normal room
    > lighting to bright sun. Speed from stationary, to oscilloscope display,
    > to moderately fast moving (1/30s to 1/250s typically).


    I can't offer any real recommendations but from taking pictures of scopes
    traces
    you'll need a camera with a good and easy focus at short distances of around
    50cm or so.
    So check how easy/good the macro function is.
    We have brought LCD scopes that have built in USB ports for direct printing
    and saving
    the trace as an image file.
    I brought a canon G10 last week, haven't used it much yet, but did get a
    reasonable picture
    of a blown op-amp. easier to manually focus than my old S70 but I'd still
    prefer
    a good olde fashion focusing ring around the lens and a sturdy tripod.
    whisky-dave, Nov 26, 2008
    #3
  4. Dave Boland

    ransley Guest

    On Nov 25, 7:31 pm, Dave Boland <> wrote:
    > Newsgroup,
    >
    > I need to get a digital camera to replace the Polorid 600, and would
    > appreciate any help.  Some information about the camera use to help
    > guide the comments:
    >
    > * The camera will be used mostly for documentation of things like
    > scope traces, printed circuit traces, control panel pictures, and some
    > field test items that may be in bright sun.  Light levels run from
    > normal room lighting to bright sun.  Speed from stationary, to
    > oscilloscope display, to moderately fast moving (1/30s to 1/250s
    > typically).
    >
    > * Users of the camera vary between no photography experience, to a
    > fair amount of experience.  That said, the camera should be as simple
    > to use as possible because I don't want people spending time tweaking
    > settings.
    >
    > * Picture size is typically 5 in. by 7 in. some are larger.
    >
    > * Budget is limited and I would like to stay at $100 (U.S.) or less.
    >
    > * Features that seem important are:
    >    - Easy to use is number 1, which includes controls and menus.
    >    - Very good quality pictures (focus, exposure, color) important.
    >    - Very reliable.
    >    - Easy to use in the sun.  I like viewfinders for this, but...
    >    - Optical zoom of 3 to 1 or better.
    >    - Batteries that can be obtained at 'mart's is a must.
    >    - Easy to down-load to P.C. or printer, and quickly.
    >    - Macro would be nice for close-ups of circuit card failures.
    >    - Manual controls would be nice, at least for some of us.
    >
    > Some cameras that I'm considering are the ones that will be on sale
    > for black Friday.  They are:http://www.walmart.com/catalog/prod...atalog/product.do?product_id=10710381&sourcei...
    > Nikon Coolpix L18 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz
    > Olympus Stylus 760 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz
    > Kodak EasyShare C913 9MP 2.5" LCD With Free Canon Photo Printer,
    > $79.99 at Staples
    > Casio EX-Z9 8.1MP Digital Camera - $99.99 at K-Mart (Thur. only)
    > Kodak EasyShare MX1063 10MP Digital Camera w/ 3x Zoom - $89.00 Target
    >
    > Thanks for any serious suggestions.
    > Dave


    100$ wow, research, you have so many to pick from in that price range,
    I will do it for you for 150$
    ransley, Nov 26, 2008
    #4
  5. Dave Boland

    tony cooper Guest

    On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:08:02 -0500, Alan Browne
    <> wrote:

    >Dave Boland wrote:
    >> Newsgroup,
    >>
    >> I need to get a digital camera to replace the Polorid 600, and would
    >> appreciate any help. Some information about the camera use to help
    >> guide the comments:

    >
    >> * Picture size is typically 5 in. by 7 in. some are larger.
    >>
    >> * Budget is limited and I would like to stay at $100 (U.S.) or less.
    >>
    >> * Features that seem important are: - Easy to use is number 1, which
    >> includes controls and menus. - Very good quality pictures (focus,
    >> exposure, color) important. - Very reliable. - Easy to use in the
    >> sun. I like viewfinders for this, but... - Optical zoom of 3 to 1 or
    >> better. - Batteries that can be obtained at 'mart's is a must. - Easy
    >> to down-load to P.C. or printer, and quickly. - Macro would be nice
    >> for close-ups of circuit card failures. - Manual controls would be
    >> nice, at least for some of us.

    >
    >> Nikon Coolpix L18 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz Olympus Stylus 760
    >> Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz Kodak EasyShare C913 9MP 2.5" LCD
    >> With Free Canon Photo Printer, $79.99 at Staples Casio EX-Z9 8.1MP
    >> Digital Camera - $99.99 at K-Mart (Thur. only) Kodak EasyShare MX1063
    >> 10MP Digital Camera w/ 3x Zoom - $89.00 Target
    >>
    >> Thanks for any serious suggestions.

    >
    >www.dpreview.com is a very good place for you to winnow your choices.
    >
    >For good prints at 5x7 and reasonable at 8x10 consider a camera with
    >about 300 dpi potential output:
    >
    > 5 x 300 = 1500
    > 7 x 300 = 2100 X
    >
    > = ~ 3 Mpixels.
    >
    >So any 4 or 5 Mpix camera that otherwise meets your needs should suffice.


    Looking at his conditions, I would rule out the Casio because it
    doesn't use AA batteries. The Olympus is not rated well at all. Of
    that group, the Nikon is the most likely to produce good "macro"
    photos. I'd go with the Coolpix L18.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Nov 26, 2008
    #5
  6. Dave Boland

    McPhotos Guest

    Alan Browne wrote:
    > Dave Boland wrote:
    >> Newsgroup,
    >>
    >> I need to get a digital camera to replace the Polorid 600, and would
    >> appreciate any help. Some information about the camera use to help
    >> guide the comments:

    >
    >> * Picture size is typically 5 in. by 7 in. some are larger.
    >>
    >> * Budget is limited and I would like to stay at $100 (U.S.) or less.
    >>
    >> * Features that seem important are: - Easy to use is number 1, which
    >> includes controls and menus. - Very good quality pictures (focus,
    >> exposure, color) important. - Very reliable. - Easy to use in the
    >> sun. I like viewfinders for this, but... - Optical zoom of 3 to 1 or
    >> better. - Batteries that can be obtained at 'mart's is a must. - Easy
    >> to down-load to P.C. or printer, and quickly. - Macro would be nice
    >> for close-ups of circuit card failures. - Manual controls would be
    >> nice, at least for some of us.

    >
    >> Nikon Coolpix L18 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz Olympus Stylus 760
    >> Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz Kodak EasyShare C913 9MP 2.5" LCD
    >> With Free Canon Photo Printer, $79.99 at Staples Casio EX-Z9 8.1MP
    >> Digital Camera - $99.99 at K-Mart (Thur. only) Kodak EasyShare MX1063
    >> 10MP Digital Camera w/ 3x Zoom - $89.00 Target
    >>
    >> Thanks for any serious suggestions.

    >
    > www.dpreview.com is a very good place for you to winnow your choices.
    >
    > For good prints at 5x7 and reasonable at 8x10 consider a camera with
    > about 300 dpi potential output:


    Cameras do not have dpi output. Digital images are composed of pixels,
    hence, ppi, not dpi. I know you are capable of making this distinction,
    so just do it instead of arguing how unimportant it is to you. It may be
    important to some who are trying to learn digital processing.


    --
    lsmft

    Coach: "Are you just ignorant, or merely apathetic?"
    Player: "Coach, I don't know, and I don't care."
    McPhotos, Nov 26, 2008
    #6
  7. Alan Browne wrote:
    > McPhotos wrote:
    >> Alan Browne wrote:

    >
    >>> www.dpreview.com is a very good place for you to winnow your
    >>> choices.
    >>>
    >>> For good prints at 5x7 and reasonable at 8x10 consider a camera
    >>> with about 300 dpi potential output:
    > >>
    > >> 5 x 300 = 1500
    > >> 7 x 300 = 2100 X
    > >>
    > >> = ~ 3 Mpixels.
    > >>
    > >> So any 4 or 5 Mpix camera that otherwise meets your needs should
    > >> suffice.

    >>
    >> Cameras do not have dpi output. Digital images are composed of
    >> pixels,

    >
    > Please read more carefully next time.


    You simply don't get it, or you're too arrogant to admit you're wrong.
    Neither is becoming.
    >
    > The tie in is his desire for 7x5 prints and the arithmetic provided (and
    > restored above) makes the link clear enough.


    The conclusion is all right, but you're confused on dots and pixels;
    always have been.

    > Take your annon-nym and blow.


    My bad on the latter; am trying new newsfeeds, and normally sign in
    full, as you know. In the case of intransigents, I sometimes use the
    dismissive "lsmft".

    --
    John McWilliams
    John McWilliams, Nov 27, 2008
    #7
  8. Dave Boland

    dj_nme Guest

    McPhotos wrote:
    > Alan Browne wrote:

    <snip for brevity>
    > > For good prints at 5x7 and reasonable at 8x10 consider a camera with
    > > about 300 dpi potential output:
    > >

    <text erased by "McPhotos">
    > >
    > > 5 x 300 = 1500
    > > 7 x 300 = 2100 X
    > >
    > > = ~ 3 Mpixels.
    > >
    > >So any 4 or 5 Mpix camera that otherwise meets your needs should suffice.

    </text erased by "McPhotos">
    >
    > Cameras do not have dpi output. Digital images are composed of pixels,
    > hence, ppi, not dpi. I know you are capable of making this distinction,
    > so just do it instead of arguing how unimportant it is to you. It may be
    > important to some who are trying to learn digital processing.


    It's pretty darn obvious what Alan Browne intended, the fact that DPI
    was confused for PPI is really neither here nor there.
    I would only suggest that slightly more resolution is ideal, especially
    if you want to crop off extra image detail that isn't relevant to your
    intended final image and that 6MP or 8MP would be a better idea.
    I'm also not sure that there are many new cameras which are made with
    less than 10MP anyway.

    I feel that the most important bit these days is to see how easy the
    controls are to manipulate and how easy it is to navigate to alter the
    settings to your liking.
    This can only be done by actually going to a real shop and testing for
    yourself.
    dj_nme, Nov 27, 2008
    #8
  9. Alan Browne wrote:
    > John McWilliams wrote:
    >> Alan Browne wrote:
    >>> McPhotos wrote:
    >>>> Alan Browne wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>> www.dpreview.com is a very good place for you to winnow your
    >>>>> choices.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> For good prints at 5x7 and reasonable at 8x10 consider a camera
    >>>>> with about 300 dpi potential output:
    >>> >>
    >>> >> 5 x 300 = 1500
    >>> >> 7 x 300 = 2100 X
    >>> >>
    >>> >> = ~ 3 Mpixels.
    >>> >>
    >>> >> So any 4 or 5 Mpix camera that otherwise meets your needs should
    >>> >> suffice.
    >>>>
    >>>> Cameras do not have dpi output. Digital images are composed of
    >>>> pixels,
    >>>
    >>> Please read more carefully next time.

    >>
    >> You simply don't get it, or you're too arrogant to admit you're wrong.
    >> Neither is becoming.

    >
    > Please read below very carefully.
    >
    >>> The tie in is his desire for 7x5 prints and the arithmetic provided
    >>> (and restored above) makes the link clear enough.

    >>
    >> The conclusion is all right, but you're confused on dots and pixels;
    >> always have been.

    >
    > Not at all. I am not confused. Merely redacting what is of little use
    > to the OP.
    >
    > Rather than being anally precise about terms, I focused on what seems to
    > be important to the OP ... somebody who probably is not all that
    > interested in what happens between the shutter click and the printer.
    > And that's what I refer to: how well will the sensor translate to the
    > printer. Explaining all the interim crap in the middle is of no value
    > to anyone, least of all this OP.


    So you maintain. I disagree, and will continue tilting at the occasional
    windmill; others can learn and use correct terms, even if you have to
    defend your errors ad nauseum.

    >
    > So, John, at due risk of falling in your killfile,
    >
    > F U C K O F F
    >
    > O N T H I S I S S U E.
    >
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Alan.


    Never! I correct folks on this minor minor nomenclature error as it will
    help those who are trying to learn, that pixels and dots are different.

    And you're far too important to be in my k-f, dontcha think?

    Chairs!
    --
    john mcwilliams
    John McWilliams, Nov 27, 2008
    #9
  10. Dave Boland

    Guest

    On Nov 25, 8:31 pm, Dave Boland <> wrote:
    > Newsgroup,
    >
    > I need to get a digital camera to replace the Polorid 600, and would
    > appreciate any help.  Some information about the camera use to help
    > guide the comments:
    >
    > * The camera will be used mostly for documentation of things like
    > scope traces, printed circuit traces, control panel pictures, and some
    > field test items that may be in bright sun.  


    That can be difficult for many of the possible cameras. I would
    not be so hot to take advantage of Black Friday and risk getting a
    camera that will not be suitable for your needs.

    I am particularly concerned about the scope traces. Any of the
    point and shoot cameras could have problems. Scopes vary with the
    scan rate and decay rates. If the shutter is too fast, and you can
    expect limited or no control over the shutter speed with a point and
    shoot digital, you may have unacceptable results.

    I would suggest making sure you can return the camera if it fails
    to meet your needs, or ask to borrow the demo to test it out.

    Good Luck

    >
    > Thanks for any serious suggestions.
    > Dave
    , Nov 27, 2008
    #10
  11. Dave Boland

    Dave Boland Guest

    Dave Boland wrote:
    > Newsgroup,
    >
    > I need to get a digital camera to replace the Polorid 600, and would
    > appreciate any help. Some information about the camera use to help
    > guide the comments:
    >
    > * The camera will be used mostly for documentation of things like scope
    > traces, printed circuit traces, control panel pictures, and some field
    > test items that may be in bright sun. Light levels run from normal room
    > lighting to bright sun. Speed from stationary, to oscilloscope display,
    > to moderately fast moving (1/30s to 1/250s typically).
    >
    > * Users of the camera vary between no photography experience, to a fair
    > amount of experience. That said, the camera should be as simple to use
    > as possible because I don't want people spending time tweaking settings.
    >
    > * Picture size is typically 5 in. by 7 in. some are larger.
    >
    > * Budget is limited and I would like to stay at $100 (U.S.) or less.
    >
    > * Features that seem important are:
    > - Easy to use is number 1, which includes controls and menus.
    > - Very good quality pictures (focus, exposure, color) important.
    > - Very reliable.
    > - Easy to use in the sun. I like viewfinders for this, but...
    > - Optical zoom of 3 to 1 or better.
    > - Batteries that can be obtained at 'mart's is a must.
    > - Easy to down-load to P.C. or printer, and quickly.
    > - Macro would be nice for close-ups of circuit card failures.
    > - Manual controls would be nice, at least for some of us.
    >
    > Some cameras that I'm considering are the ones that will be on sale for
    > black Friday. They are:
    > http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=10727357&sourceid=17160933832852010904
    >
    > http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=10710381&sourceid=38947188162793659556
    >
    > Nikon Coolpix L18 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz
    > Olympus Stylus 760 Digital Camera - $99.99 at Ritz
    > Kodak EasyShare C913 9MP 2.5" LCD With Free Canon Photo Printer, $79.99
    > at Staples
    > Casio EX-Z9 8.1MP Digital Camera - $99.99 at K-Mart (Thur. only)
    > Kodak EasyShare MX1063 10MP Digital Camera w/ 3x Zoom - $89.00 Target
    >
    > Thanks for any serious suggestions.
    > Dave
    >
    >


    Thanks for all the responses. Some have been very helpful. I regret
    the anger that it caused some, but that is life. To clear up one
    thing, I do understand analog scopes very well. My concern was that
    the readers of this forum would not. I agree, capturing a trace is
    challenging. Currently I do it with my Nikon film camera, but it is a
    pain to have to get the film developed because it takes time. A
    digital would be good, but I also agree that it is wise to take my
    time and investigate the cameras before I buy.

    Hope everyone had a good Thanksgiving (U.S.).

    Dave,
    Dave Boland, Nov 28, 2008
    #11
  12. Dave Boland

    SMS Guest

    Dave Boland wrote:

    > * Features that seem important are:
    > - Easy to use is number 1, which includes controls and menus.
    > - Very good quality pictures (focus, exposure, color) important.
    > - Very reliable.
    > - Easy to use in the sun. I like viewfinders for this, but...
    > - Optical zoom of 3 to 1 or better.
    > - Batteries that can be obtained at 'mart's is a must.
    > - Easy to down-load to P.C. or printer, and quickly.
    > - Macro would be nice for close-ups of circuit card failures.
    > - Manual controls would be nice, at least for some of us.


    Get the Canon A590IS. It's $102.

    "http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830120256&CMP=AFC-C8Junction"

    Use "CAMERA118" coupon for $8 off.

    It has everything you need. If you need more manual control you can use
    CHDK firmware on it.
    SMS, Nov 28, 2008
    #12
  13. On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 10:41:57 -0800, SMS <> wrote:

    >Dave Boland wrote:
    >
    >> * Features that seem important are:
    >> - Easy to use is number 1, which includes controls and menus.
    >> - Very good quality pictures (focus, exposure, color) important.
    >> - Very reliable.
    >> - Easy to use in the sun. I like viewfinders for this, but...
    >> - Optical zoom of 3 to 1 or better.
    >> - Batteries that can be obtained at 'mart's is a must.
    >> - Easy to down-load to P.C. or printer, and quickly.
    >> - Macro would be nice for close-ups of circuit card failures.
    >> - Manual controls would be nice, at least for some of us.

    >
    >Get the Canon A590IS. It's $102.
    >
    >"http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830120256&CMP=AFC-C8Junction"
    >
    >Use "CAMERA118" coupon for $8 off.
    >
    >It has everything you need. If you need more manual control you can use
    >CHDK firmware on it.


    Oh goody, our resident google-photographer is back. He'll do all our googling
    and look up things in manuals for us. It's as close as he ever personally gets
    to anything photography related. Let's let him live out his phantasy while being
    our internet coolie, gofer, and grunt.

    Yes, even virtual-photographer trolls can have their uses.

    FETCH, BOY!

    Good boy, atta boy. Now go lay down in your cage until we need you again.
    Dave Bernstein, Nov 28, 2008
    #13
  14. Dave Boland

    Dave Boland Guest

    Dave Bernstein wrote:
    > On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 10:41:57 -0800, SMS <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Dave Boland wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>* Features that seem important are:
    >>> - Easy to use is number 1, which includes controls and menus.
    >>> - Very good quality pictures (focus, exposure, color) important.
    >>> - Very reliable.
    >>> - Easy to use in the sun. I like viewfinders for this, but...
    >>> - Optical zoom of 3 to 1 or better.
    >>> - Batteries that can be obtained at 'mart's is a must.
    >>> - Easy to down-load to P.C. or printer, and quickly.
    >>> - Macro would be nice for close-ups of circuit card failures.
    >>> - Manual controls would be nice, at least for some of us.

    >>
    >>Get the Canon A590IS. It's $102.
    >>
    >>"http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830120256&CMP=AFC-C8Junction"
    >>
    >>Use "CAMERA118" coupon for $8 off.
    >>
    >>It has everything you need. If you need more manual control you can use
    >>CHDK firmware on it.

    >
    >
    > Oh goody, our resident google-photographer is back. He'll do all our googling
    > and look up things in manuals for us. It's as close as he ever personally gets
    > to anything photography related. Let's let him live out his phantasy while being
    > our internet coolie, gofer, and grunt.
    >
    > Yes, even virtual-photographer trolls can have their uses.
    >
    > FETCH, BOY!
    >
    > Good boy, atta boy. Now go lay down in your cage until we need you again.
    >


    I don't see how this is helpful. If you have a better idea, then
    let's hear it. Otherwise, it may be time to refocus you energy.

    Dave (OP)
    Dave Boland, Nov 29, 2008
    #14
  15. Dave Boland

    SMS Guest

    Dave Boland wrote:

    > Thanks for all the responses. Some have been very helpful. I regret
    > the anger that it caused some, but that is life. To clear up one thing,
    > I do understand analog scopes very well. My concern was that the
    > readers of this forum would not. I agree, capturing a trace is
    > challenging. Currently I do it with my Nikon film camera, but it is a
    > pain to have to get the film developed because it takes time. A digital
    > would be good, but I also agree that it is wise to take my time and
    > investigate the cameras before I buy.


    I remember in high school electronics class we had a Polaroid Scope
    Camera. It was a really good deal at the time compared to the ones the
    scope companies sold.

    I think you'll just need to fashion some sort of a hood for the camera
    and play with the manual settings, and perhaps use CHDK.
    SMS, Nov 29, 2008
    #15
  16. Dave Boland

    SMS Guest

    Dave Boland wrote:

    > I don't see how this is helpful. If you have a better idea, then let's
    > hear it. Otherwise, it may be time to refocus you energy.
    >
    > Dave (OP)


    LOL, since when has our favorite troll ever been helpful? Especially
    since unlike him, I actually have used digital cameras for scope traces
    (though thankfully now I use digital storage scopes!).

    Anyway, there's some other reasons why something like the A590 would be
    suitable. There is a way to attach extension lenses and tubes, and such
    a device would be very helpful in fashioning a hood that fits over the
    scope tube and onto the camera. And as I stated before, if you need more
    manual control, at least on the Canon models there's a way to get it.
    Yeah, a lot of the CHDK stuff is geeky, but some of it is quite useful,
    especially when you're doing out of the ordinary stuff like this.

    Look at
    "http://www.truetex.com/tektronix_xg_polaroid_oscilloscope_hood_adapter.pdf"
    for some ideas, and remember it's much easier if the digital camera is
    designed for lens tubes and conversion lenses.
    SMS, Nov 29, 2008
    #16
  17. Dave Boland

    Dave Boland Guest

    SMS wrote:

    > Dave Boland wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks for all the responses. Some have been very helpful. I regret
    >> the anger that it caused some, but that is life. To clear up one
    >> thing, I do understand analog scopes very well. My concern was that
    >> the readers of this forum would not. I agree, capturing a trace is
    >> challenging. Currently I do it with my Nikon film camera, but it is a
    >> pain to have to get the film developed because it takes time. A
    >> digital would be good, but I also agree that it is wise to take my
    >> time and investigate the cameras before I buy.

    >
    >
    > I remember in high school electronics class we had a Polaroid Scope
    > Camera. It was a really good deal at the time compared to the ones the
    > scope companies sold.
    >
    > I think you'll just need to fashion some sort of a hood for the camera
    > and play with the manual settings, and perhaps use CHDK.


    I've used those devices on the older Tek. scopes. They work well.
    The hood provided the correct focal length and kept out extraneous
    light. The hood had to fit the bezel of the scope display. I'm not
    worried about ambient light or focal length because I can controll
    both of them.

    Dave,
    Dave Boland, Nov 29, 2008
    #17
  18. Dave Boland

    Joey Pilsner Guest

    On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 18:50:30 -0600, Arnie_R_Ungers <>
    wrote:

    >
    >If the slit of the focal-plane shutter is moving parallel to the scan lines on
    >the TV (or CRT computer monitor) display then you may not first see the
    >bent-block distortion caused by the typical horizontally moving focal-plane
    >shutters of the past. But it also won't reveal the true shutter speed either by
    >trying to count the scan lines. This is because if the shutter's slit is moving
    >parallel with the forming scan-lines then they will be either compressed or
    >expanded vertically. (Just as a diver diving into a pool of water will be
    >compressed or stretched a bit, distorted, by being photographed with a
    >focal-plane shutter camera.) In many modern cameras the focal-plane shutter was
    >changed from a horizontal motion to a vertical motion to increase apparent
    >speed. The narrower distance of the image-frame being a shorter distance to
    >traverse, doing so "faster" at the same speeds as all of last-century's shutter
    >curtains.


    I suppose you could test the true speed of a focal-plane shutter with this
    method. Just determine your shutter's direction of travel. If top to bottom then
    orient that to the TV/CRT display, top to bottom. Your motive is to align the
    shutter's slit to be parallel with the scan-lines of the display. Take a
    picture. Now flip the camera upside down to show the other extreme of this
    compression and expansion distortion created by all focal-plane shutters. Take
    the average number of scan-lines between both images and that could be used to
    test the accuracy of your shutter. If the shutter's direction of travel is
    horizontal then hold the camera in portrait mode. One shot one way, the next
    shot with the camera turned 180-degrees.

    If you use a slanted-slit focal-plane shutter as in that who-on-earth-would-be-
    stupid-enough-to-buy-that-thing Hasselblad, then you'll have to determine the
    angle of that moving slit and make it parallel with the scan-lines on your
    TV/CRT display. Again, taking one of each, the second shot with camera turned
    180-degrees from the first one.
    Joey Pilsner, Nov 29, 2008
    #18
  19. Dave Boland

    samueld Guest

    On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 22:41:53 -0600, Joey Pilsner
    <> wrote:

    >who-on-earth-would-be-
    >stupid-enough-to-buy-that-thing Hasselblad


    Don't you know? One of those intelligent PRO photographers.

    LOL

    The same kind of "Pros" that all their blind followers in this newsgroup strive
    emulate.
    samueld, Nov 29, 2008
    #19
  20. Dave Boland

    SMS Guest

    Dave Boland wrote:

    > Thanks for all the responses. Some have been very helpful. I regret
    > the anger that it caused some,


    Huh, who got angry about this?!

    > but that is life. To clear up one thing,
    > I do understand analog scopes very well.


    Wow, analog scopes. I remember those!

    Lately the times I've found I've needed a picture of a scope trace it's
    to prove something that isn't retriggerable at a regular frequency, but
    is a one time event based on an abnormal trigger. I remember the old
    analog storage scopes with the special screens that would store one
    trace were useful for this. The problem you're going to run into is
    controlling the camera shutter to get the actual trace you want.

    For lower frequencies, i.e. less than 50 MHz, the inexpensive PC based
    digital storage scopes I've seen at shows like Embedded Systems
    Conference would be a great alternative to trying to use a digital
    camera. There are combination storage scopes/logic analyzers for less
    than $600 ("http://www.usbee.com/ax.html"). There's one really low
    frequency scope from Parallax for around $150.
    SMS, Nov 29, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mansoor Siddiqui

    Need help selecting first digital camera...

    Mansoor Siddiqui, Aug 31, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    337
    Mansoor Siddiqui
    Sep 1, 2003
  2. Fatbob

    New help selecting my first digital camera

    Fatbob, Dec 19, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    290
  3. ct

    Need help selecting budget digital camera...

    ct, Feb 9, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    276
    Stewy
    Feb 10, 2005
  4. Jack

    Need help selecting a camera

    Jack, Aug 14, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    298
    Neil Harrington
    Aug 14, 2007
  5. Jack

    Need help in selecting new camera, please

    Jack, Sep 26, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    270
    John Turco
    Sep 30, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page