Camera Help Please???

[Yorick]

I had my heart set on the Canon jobby and 300mm zoom lens.
But then saw this...

https://www.argos.co.uk/product/9177989 ... =plp:15:33

Has the same zoom without all the farting about with carrying and swapping lenses.

This any good?

[Rockburner]

I only initially started doing RAW photos 'cause my camera took 'em faster! I dunno if that's always the case, but mine could do quicker/longer bursts that way.

Really? Not calling you a liar or anything ( ) but I've never heard of that. Usually the burst rate for JPEGs is many times that of RAWs as they're so much smaller.

Maybe I just don't read enough reviews

Depends on what the camera is doing - It may be that Dazzle's camera is saving in RAW, then processing to JPEG (using whatever extra settings have been configured), instead of "just" exporting direct to JPEG (which I'm not sure is possible tbh, the sensors tend to export as RAW, then it's up the camera's OS what it does with it).

[Mr. Dazzle]

I'm gonna go find the bloody thing and try it now.

Its still in the LowePro bag you "lost" (sold to me )

[Rockburner]

I had my heart set on the Canon jobby and 300mm zoom lens.
But then saw this...

https://www.argos.co.uk/product/9177989 ... =plp:15:33

Has the same zoom without all the farting about with carrying and swapping lenses.

This any good?

5.62 focal length multiplier.
Lens focal length 3 - 247mm
20.3 megapixels.
Sensor size 6.17 x 4.55mm.

Not sure exactly what that equates to given the sensor size and whatever the "focal length multiplier" is, but for track shots that "should" give you "ok" photos - I doubt it would be enough to get the bike filling the frame - but, with 20M+ pixels, you can crop in to get the bike full-frame quite easily and the resulting image would be perfectly good enough for putting on the web or even printing.

As has been said by all the others - the quality of the photo is more down to light and composition than the kit, so it genuinely is a case of learning and practising, even with "cheap" kit you can get very good photos once you're confident and aware of all the options.

I've had photos from my 6Mp Nikon D50 printed onto canvas and they look great, you don't "need" a huge number of pixels to get a decent image.

[Yambo]

This any good?

There are quite a few reviews on YouTube . . .

[ChrisW]

This any good?

That's the size of sensor you get in a decent phone camera so maybe think of it as a sort of a phone camera with decent optical zoom?

[Horse]

I've had photos from my 6Mp Nikon D50 printed onto canvas and they look great, you don't "need" a huge number of pixels to get a decent image.

Although a crisper image should give a better print at larger size, typically people will look at them from further away.

I had a picture printed at (IIRC 15" x 12") from a slightly cropped 3.5Mp original jpeg. It's fine. But, it's an arty photo where crispness isn't important. I expect there's a finite number of arty pictures that Yorick wants (especially now he's cleared the dungeon).

[Mr. Dazzle]

I think I probably mentioned it alraedy, but one HD TV is about 2MP....so you need 4 stacked together in a rectangle to display a single 8MP picture at full resolution. Even a 4K TV is only about 8MP. Or put it another way, if I said "you can blow this pic up to the size of 4 big TVs and not lose resolution" you'd be fairly happy right? And that's only 8MP not 20MP. Obviously there's loads more to it, but you get the point.

20MP chips are not all created equal. An 8MP SLR is gonna take way better pics (assuming you can "drive" it) than a 20MP phone. The physical size of the chip makes a big difference too.

But, mostly, don't worry about. 6, 8...50...they're all gonna take pic just fine.

[Horse]

I've had photos from my 6Mp Nikon D50 printed onto canvas and they look great, you don't "need" a huge number of pixels to get a decent image.

Although a crisper image should give a better print at larger size, typically people will look at them from further away.

I had a picture printed at (IIRC 15" x 12") from a slightly cropped 3.5Mp original jpeg. It's fine. But, it's an arty photo where crispness isn't important. I expect there's a finite number of arty pictures that Yorick wants (especially now he's cleared the dungeon).

First pic, whole image. Moody arty, kid playing on a beach at sunset. It's blurred - but that helps depict movement.

20230725_181719.jpg (616.05 KiB) Viewed 261 times

Close-up, you can see some detail (like the highlight on the edge of the boot) but the detail is lost in the face.

20230725_181814.jpg (295.51 KiB) Viewed 261 times

As said, a 3.5Mp image cropped, then blown up 'too big'. It was taken at sunset in December, so low light levels, on a compact camera, so small lens to get light in.

[Horse]

@Yorick

Did you and Penny ever get a camera, and learn how to use it?

[Yorick]

@Yorick

Did you and Penny ever get a camera, and learn how to use it?

No. My anxiety kicked in and I couldn't choose.

[Horse]

@Yorick

Did you and Penny ever get a camera, and learn how to use it?

No. My anxiety kicked in and I couldn't choose.

If the TDO arranges a trackside photographer, buy images from them.