Hey ive had the Kodak 4230 2.0 MP camera for a few years now and i feel its time for an upgrade.. I have a LIMIT on the budget at around 350 $ and i was wondering which you reccomended. I have some "hook ups" at kodak ( Im located in Rochester the start of kodak) Now ive seen the Kodak DX7630 and it seems pretty nice. 6.1 megapixel a big 2.2 screen and the works.. anyone \have any photos with this camera?

Now i know that the camera does not make the photographer, but i was wondering if it was worth it to get a 6.1 mp camera or a 4 mp wiht more features?

someone please help!

 

I am your savior.

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1069719

Megapixels do nothing for image quality. They only benefit someone who is looking to develop very large prints. The prints I've developed from the G2 I'm selling look better than some $1,000+ cameras.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ebelp &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I am your savior.

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1069719

Megapixels do nothing for image quality. They only benefit someone who is looking to develop very large prints. The prints I've developed from the G2 I'm selling look better than some $1,000+ cameras.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I so badly want you're camera

 

I've used many Canon cams and don't have a bad thing to say about them.

Megapixels &lt; Image quality.
I don't print my pics, just save them on my PC.
So 2MP is enough for me, that's even larger then my desktop resolution, so I have to zoom out to view complete pictures.
And since most forums resize pics wider than 500/700px even 2MP pics need resizing if you upload them and post them on the net.

 

llook for somethin with a lot of manual features if you want to somewhat get into photography. canon a series cameras are a fine choice as well as the g2 listed before.

one personal issue i have is auto focus times, my canon a80 (and pretty much all basic digital cameras) is disturbingly slow to focus, but my friend's a85 is significantly faster, they're revising a lot of the hardware and software on new models however so thats a benefit of buying new.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr.RHTuner &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I so badly want you're camera </TD></TR></TABLE>

Then buy it, I don't mind!

 

if the 4mp camera has more features i'd say go for that one instead. if you're budget is $350 i'd go with like a canon a95 or s60. or for about $50 you can pick up a G5

 

Just do a lot of research on the Canon models. The A, S, and G-series Canons are very different, and very similar in different ways. They're all good choices though, just depends on what you want out of them.

 

lense &gt; megapixel. 90% of people don't need higher than a 3mp. Kodak has mediocre lenses, although the sneider (spelling?) on their higher up cameras are nice.

 

Kodak film &gt; Kodak digicams

 

I's say an S60, it's pretty much the same as a G5.

http://www.buydig.com/shop/pro...PSS60

It'll be a little over your budget with a CF card, but well worth it

 

Resolution means nothing ... <FONT SIZE="3"><FONT COLOR="red">NOTHING!!!</FONT></FONT>

All images viewed through a computer are displayed at a resolution of 72 ppi...

Resolution only matters if you are doing print jobs, which I'm sure you most likely won't be working on.

My best advice would be for you to invest in a wide variety of lenses.

 

everyone on h-t is a photographer now...

 

I'm a pornographer

 

canon g3 sounds nice

is that wat rodrez used?

 

It doesn't matter if thats what Rodrez uses.

I can use a Nikon D70 and my images will be far from RoaringTurtles photography.... I mean p0rnography.

 

Taking pictures is fun.

 

alright so basicaly any cam around 4mp will be good enough for relay quality pics?

I guess ill go with a kodak

and there is no specific modes that u guys use that a kodak woudn't have


it hink ill buy some lenses too if possible

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Ya &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">everyone on h-t is a photographer now...</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yeah. But only about 4 of em are any good.

 

if your serious about photography
focus on taking pics
when the time comes to actually warrant upgrading your camera
you'll have a far better idea of what you actually want from a cam, than anyone else will

 

ok narrowed down to

cannon g3 or g5


g3 i could get numerous lenses (in my price range)

g5 would jsut be the standard


which would be a more User friendly "point and shoot" camera that wont be outdated for a few years

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DarkspeedVtec95 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">ok narrowed down to

cannon g3 or g5


g3 i could get numerous lenses (in my price range)

g5 would jsut be the standard


which would be a more User friendly "point and shoot" camera that wont be outdated for a few years</TD></TR></TABLE>whats wrong with the A95? you could get lenses for it too.

 

wow the a95 looks nice as well

what are some advantages of the a95 over the G5 or vise versa!

it seems smaller as well

 

my sony f505v..
2.8 mega pixel..
pos @ focusing...
slr is indeed the **** to shoot with..
step up or step down.

2.8 mp , a real four leaf clover.

 

i think the a 95 might be the best choice for me