Mountain Biking - 'lil help with digicams

I put this here because I need a digital camera mainly for taking great mountain biking shots. I'm thinking about getting one for my husband for xmas (please, don't tell him).

Anyway, my budget is $400 max. I like the weatherproofness of the Olympus Stylus 400 but the Canon A80 is a better camera.

What do you use/recommend for action shots?

I put this here because I need a digital camera mainly for taking great mountain biking shots. I'm thinking about getting one for my husband for xmas (please, don't tell him).

Anyway, my budget is $400 max. I like the weatherproofness of the Olympus Stylus 400 but the Canon A80 is a better camera.

What do you use/recommend for action shots?

I havent had any problems with my canon A70, its a pretty sweet camera. When I was in the process of buying it I heard that they were coming out with new stuff, and out comes the A80. I am still satisfied with my camera, I have used it alot since I got it. The video quality is quite good but it could use a MIC that picked up less wind noise. I havent really used it for alot of action shots which I really want to do, and I havent really learned how to adjust the aperture, shutter, and exposure to take perfect pictures yet. I just looked at the specs on the A80 and it looks totally sweet. It only has up to 320X240 res video capabilities though. It could have used a little more optical zoom also. Overall it has TONS of features and I think the A80 is definately the camera to get.

The Minolta DImage Xt is nice because it's zoom mechanism is enclosed but still gives you 3x optical zoom. This is great in less than ideal conditions. It turns on and is ready to shoot in 1.1 seconds which makes capturing "the moment" possible without having to wait for a telescoping zoom to pop out. Check it out.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=283782&is=REG

i think you might be able to get an older canon gX series at that price. i am extremely satisifed with my older canon g2. the only bad thing is the size since it is a lot larger than most cameras.

Can't speak for Olympus, but I've heard really good things about Canon from guys who are serious about photography.

One friend recommended Canon (S400 which is the one I'll probably buy) because of the following features:

-Small size for carrying. As one friend advised, "big cameras get left at home. Small cameras get used."

-Easy to use manual override.

- shiftable program mode so you can set the Exposure Value while in auto.

He also recommended the Pentax Optio.

try checking www.edealsinfo.com every now and then. they don't always have digital cams on there, but they update the page twice a day during weekdays, so there's always a good chance you might find one.

I bought the Canon S400 a couple of months ago and I'm very happy with it. I carry it with me everywhere.

The A70 and A80 are really nice cameras but I thought too bulky. The S400 felt comfortable in my hands and its so small I carry in my pocket when I hike and put in my bike bag when I ride.

It's basically a point and shoot camera but has enough features to keep me happy.

The only action pictures I've taken were kids dancing at school but I was able to get pictures of them without being blurred.

I ordered my camera online from NewEgg.com.

Check out the Canon forum at www.dpreview.com

Remember, you will also need an extra battery, an extra memory card, a carrying case, and possibly a card reader. However, you can get those items as you see a need for them.

If you order online be careful. Low ball prices could mean reconditioned or grey market, which affects warranty.

Good luck with your purchase.
Kathi

The camera that's right for you totally depends on what you want to do with it, where it will be used and how serious about photography you are. Try these sites to get really confused!:D

www.dpreview.com

www.dcresource.com

www.steves-digicams.com

Thanks guys.

I have been to dpreview a lot actually and have been reading all sorts of reviews about cameras - which only makes it more confusing, you are right aerobat :)

keep the opinions coming, I'm open to suggestions :)

I love my Sony Cyber-shot. Mine is a little over a year old and cost uder 400. Now Sony has the newer version more mega pixels and bigger memory stick for about the same price. 3x optical and 3x digital zoom.

I had the same problem when I bought my digicam. Too much information. I finally went to the stores and held my choices, I even took my backpack to see which one fit the best in the pockets. The S400 won out.

I'm not an experienced photographer so the limited manual controls works well for me.

Kathi

I had the same problem when I bought my digicam. Too much information. I finally went to the stores and held my choices, I even took my backpack to see which one fit the best in the pockets. The S400 won out.

I'm not an experienced photographer so the limited manual controls works well for me.

Kathi


I looked at the s400 because I've been getting a lot of positive feedback on that one. I think now I'm leaning towards the s45 - it has a few more manual features and several auto exposure modes.

and thanks bentrim - I think you are right about size!

S45 is a great camera. We've got the S40 at work and a lot of the pictures from it are as good as those from my Canon Digital Rebel (at 3x the cost?).

I like the S40's feature set and the auto modes seem incapable of taking a bad picture. I think there's also a RAW mode for the technical users in the crowd (RAW is image data straight from the sensor without in-camera processing).

After reading a review of the S45, it seems it's the same as a S40 with a ton of improved features.

-Small size for carrying. As one friend advised, "big cameras get left at home. Small cameras get used."


That's a personal thing I guess.

If you want better pictures you'll hump a bigger camera with you.

If your only concern is snapshots, rather than photos, size matters.

That's a personal thing I guess.

If you want better pictures you'll hump a bigger camera with you.

If your only concern is snapshots, rather than photos, size matters.


Interesting counterpoint statement although it's a bit vague. Could you elaborate on that?

I know the S400 isn't the best you can buy but I believe it's higher end than the A80, and smaller to boot. So bigger doesn't necessarily mean better either.

My friend who made that quote is an indy filmmaker (director and DoP) who studies cinematography and an expert in professional lighting setup. He knows his Canon s400 to a Pentium 35mm SLR's for stills, from Sony PDX-10 prosumer DV cams to Betacams...so I kinda trust what he says.

But I'm always open to another POV since I'm considering buying a digital camera too...

The Minolta DImage Xt is nice because it's zoom mechanism is enclosed but still gives you 3x optical zoom. This is great in less than ideal conditions. It turns on and is ready to shoot in 1.1 seconds which makes capturing "the moment" possible without having to wait for a telescoping zoom to pop out. Check it out.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=283782&is=REG

I will second the endorsement for the DiMage Xt. I have the original X and the Xt is even better... lighter, faster, better resolution, smaller. The X is light and compact enough that I can operate the thing one-handed and while on the move. I've even been able to perfect a single-handed Ninja-style draw/turn-on/shoot/turn-off/stow while moving. It literally takes more effort to pull out a water bottle or fumble for the CamelBak hose than it does to use this camera. All the controls are well laid out. And yes, not having a protruding lens to snag on things makes it perfect for adventure sports.

I'm no expert photographer, so a lot of features just confuse me. IOW, I'm a perfect candidate for a point and shoot type camera. However, my previous digital (POS) was horrible for action shots. So, my only requirement was that I could get a digi with adjustable shutter speed. All I really needed was a camera for capturing family photos (for web posting) and one with an "action" setting. I did a lot of searching and ended up with a Canon A70. It's more than I need, yet does everything I need it to without being "over my head". Plus, the price was right and I was able to buy it locally, so warranty wouldn't be an issue.

My only gripe is that the display is exposed and scratches easily.

L8R

I'm looking into getting this for my wife. It seems like a pretty good deal. Anyone have one of these? Casio QVR40

My only gripe is that the display is exposed and scratches easily.


Try a PDA screen protector cut down to size. A pack of 2 or 3 will make several protectors for the camera screen.

I've never had a need for it (I baby my cameras) but I hear of others using them.

Interesting counterpoint statement although it's a bit vague. Could you elaborate on that?

My friend who made that quote is an indy filmmaker (director and DoP) who studies cinematography and an expert in professional lighting setup. He knows his Canon s400 to a Pentium 35mm SLR's for stills, from Sony PDX-10 prosumer DV cams to Betacams...so I kinda trust what he says.


"big cameras get left at home. Small cameras get used."

If someone wants the best possible results, they won't leave the big camera at home. They will hump it on the trails.

So I do disagree with his comment since I regularly leave the small camera at home and use the big camera.

It all depends upon what your goals are.

"big cameras get left at home. Small cameras get used."

If someone wants the best possible results, they won't leave the big camera at home. They will hump it on the trails.

So I do disagree with his comment since I regularly leave the small camera at home and use the big camera.

It all depends upon what your goals are.

we have a digital video camera but I usually don't take it with us cuz of it's size (and it's not that big).

Thanks guys - I decided on the s45!

Justsomeguy has implied something about big cameras that should be considered too; which I never considered about a camera specifically while you mountain bike...durability in case you endo with the camera in your back pack.

Justsomeguy has implied something about big cameras that should be considered too; which I never considered about a camera specifically while you mountain bike...durability in case you endo with the camera in your back pack.


well then, I'll just kill him :)

well then, I'll just kill him :)



MtbBikerChk- threats are not allowed on this forum!



Now cut it out or else I'll have to hunt you down and hog tie you!


:D

Koffee

MtbBikerChk- threats are not allowed on this forum!



Now cut it out or else I'll have to hunt you down and hog tie you!


:D

Koffee

sorry. :love:

sorry. :love:

Oh... alright!

Who can resist the love emoticon? I know I can't!

:D

Nuthin' but love, chickie. Nuthin' but love...

Koffee

S45 is a great camera. We've got the S40 at work and a lot of the pictures from it are as good as those from my Canon Digital Rebel (at 3x the cost?).

I like the S40's feature set and the auto modes seem incapable of taking a bad picture. I think there's also a RAW mode for the technical users in the crowd (RAW is image data straight from the sensor without in-camera processing).

After reading a review of the S45, it seems it's the same as a S40 with a ton of improved features.

i can honestly say i dont like like the Sxx. The S40 and S45 are just smaller versions of the g2 and g3, the higher end digi cams by canon. the battery life on the s40 is horribly poor compared to the g2. i have both of them so i can tell you that the s40 battery will only last me for a couple hours of continous usage and less if you use the LCD and flash. As for the g2, ive used it for months at a time with flash and LCD without recharging. The quality on the g2/g3 is MUCh better than the s40/45, but the size of the g2/g3 is at least twice of s40/45. but im sure there are better ones out that there that offer great quality in a small package.

Justsomeguy has implied something about big cameras that should be considered too; which I never considered about a camera specifically while you mountain bike...durability in case you endo with the camera in your back pack.

This is one of the reasons I like the DiMage X series. All its components are enclosed within the metal housing... even while it's in operation. Most good compact digital cameras nowadays are in all-metal cases... typically aluminum.

Many electronics stores will offer full-replacement insurance. The price is kind of steep and totally unnecessary if you're good to your equipment but if you plan to put it "in harm's way" then you might want to consider it. I wouldn't recommend anything beyond two year's worth though as the cost just gets rediculously prohibitive and by that point, most likely you'll want to replace the unit anyways just because the technology has improved. And if you don't its actual replacement value has dropped to well under what it would be worth for the amortised insurance cost. Actually, if you go for it, a year's insurance is probably the best for anything in the $500 range. The other thing you might want to investigate is an armoured case. Some camera models can be equipped with a durable and waterproof (albiet relatively big and bulky) armoured case.

Anybody know anything about those Canon EOS cameras? It seems like there's some excitement out there for these cameras, and I've seen them on sale from time to time, but I'm a little fixated on the Nikon 5700 Coolpix at the time too.

Koffee

Anybody know anything about those Canon EOS cameras? It seems like there's some excitement out there for these cameras, and I've seen them on sale from time to time, but I'm a little fixated on the Nikon 5700 Coolpix at the time too.

Koffee

If you like the Nikon and its feature set then go for it.

I used to own a Nikon 990. Great camera except for high blue channel noise and poor performance speed-wise. I got rid of it purely due to it's low light performance, slowish AF and slow image writing time. I take a lot of pictures at bike races and marathons... frequently in overcast conditions.

I now own a Canon EOS Digital Rebel. It's a great camera but there's a steep learning curve to learn how it works. The EOS 10D is a better choice for those who like using pro gear.

The DR uses the same imaging sensor and electronics but the feature set has been dumbed down and the case (but not the frame) is plastic. The DR doesn't allow user selection of metering areas except by changing mode or focus point. It works but it's a lot more awkward than selecting centre-weighting, AF point-weighting, etc.

That said, the 10D was too expensive for me so I got the DR. After using the camera for 6 weeks I love it. The shortcomings really don't seem to affect my day to day photography and the results speak for themselves.


http://foosoftware.com/gallery/albums/1555lens/110_1024_640.jpg


http://foosoftware.com/gallery/albums/1555lens/110_1070_640.jpg

http://foosoftware.com/gallery/albums/75300lens/111_1176_640.jpg

http://foosoftware.com/gallery/albums/Barkley/105_0583_sm.sized.jpg

I've also recently picked up a used Canon EOS 630 film body... so I'm locked into Canon gear now :D

Wow!

What about super close images and images from far away- how do they work with your Canon?

Koff

Wow!

What about super close images and images from far away- how do they work with your Canon?

Koff

The DR's supplied lens is best thought of as a wide-angle/short zoom lens. It's 18-55mm (29-88 after applying the 1.6x factor for sensor size). Minimum focusing distance is 0.28m. So it's not a macro champ. You'll want a macro lens or perhaps a close-up filter. I'm going to grab a set of +1/+2/+4 adapters next week to see how that works on the kit lens. I added a cheap Canon 75-300 USM III telephoto lens to my bag (120-480mm equiv) for the far-away stuff.

If I add any more photos to this thread the dial-up people will be angry. Look around here http://foosoftware.com/gallery

The top most gallery shows you some pictures I just took at the extremes of focal lengths. They're of a stop sign that's about 75 m from my back door.

There are two pages of albums there (some good, some bad) all taken with the DR (except the 2003 Oregon album). Most of those images were low light as the weather has been horrible since I bought the DR. I expect much better results on a sunny day. The moon picture (on page two) was at 300mm as were most of the ones of birds. I haven't done much macro work except for the cat picture above.

Looking at the 5700 though... if I wanted a all-in-one carry camera I'd be leaning towards that. You get 35-280mm (35mm equiv) and I haven't heard a single complaint about the 5700.

<edit> This is about the macro limit with the Canon's kit lens. These flowers are about 1" across.

http://foosoftware.com/photo/scripted/violet_macro.jpg

I have a Nikon Coolpix 5700 but I'm reluctant to ride with it because (a) it's bulky, something to take into account on any camera, (b) if I took a fall with it in my pack it could be damaged big-time.

I'd probably opt for a 'flat' camera but that usually means maybe at the expense of super quality pictures. There are good 'flatties' and there are crap one as well. Best thing is to get to the photo shop and actually see some pics or find a good website that has the reviews and some actual photos you can look at.

I was looking at the Nikon Coolpix 5700 and some dude came up and told me to think about getting a dSLR camera- recommended a Canon dSLR. Is there really a difference between a high end Nikon and a Canon dSLR camera if I'm looking to seriously take professional cameras, or is it just that when you get to the high end cameras, it doesn't make much of a difference which kind of digital camera you have?

Koffee

Hey F1_Fan,

What type of camera did you take those pics with..there amazing...i just bought a cannon A80 for x-mas...i htink it will be great!...but what kind of camara did you use (what are some of the tech. specs)...very awesome...thanks!

Never mind. Just got the info on the SLR.

Koffee

I was looking at the Nikon Coolpix 5700 and some dude came up and told me to think about getting a dSLR camera- recommended a Canon dSLR. Is there really a difference between a high end Nikon and a Canon dSLR camera if I'm looking to seriously take professional cameras, or is it just that when you get to the high end cameras, it doesn't make much of a difference which kind of digital camera you have?

Koffee

Unless you're a professional photog, most digital cameras from reputable companies are going to give you acceptable images. This is especially true since any marginal photos can be digitally enhanced to look pretty good.
Unless you're a pro photog with a huge investment in SLR lenses, it's really a matter of religion, or who has the better marketing department.

For mountain biking, the durability of the mechanisms, the speed at which the camera operates, weight, and other convenience features will make a world of difference.

I'm thinking of going professional, from the comments I've been getting from friends and strangers. And since I'm seriously considering some major travel and would like to get paid to do some photography of some rare places I'll be heading, I'd like a great camera that will yield the results that are worthy of any national magazine I may get to pay me for my idea. So I've got the money, might as well go for the best one I can afford.

Koffee

I'm thinking of going professional, ...
So I've got the money, might as well go for the best one I can afford.
Koffee

:D Sounds costly, in sanity and money. :D

I'm thinking of going professional, from the comments I've been getting from friends and strangers.

ummm...ok, best of luck.


And since I'm seriously considering some major travel and would like to get paid to do some photography of some rare places I'll be heading, I'd like a great camera that will yield the results that are worthy of any national magazine I may get to pay me for my idea. So I've got the money, might as well go for the best one I can afford.[Koffee

If you have "the gift" or "the vision" you can get fantastic results even with relatively cheap digicams.

A DSLR will allow you to capture your "vision" in variable light conditions/shooting conditions and allow you much more control over your photos because they allow more flexibilty as well as manual control, and vastly greater control in post production (digital darkroom) if you shoot RAW.

If you like the Nikon and its feature set then go for it.

I used to own a Nikon 990. Great camera except for high blue channel noise and poor performance speed-wise. I got rid of it purely due to it's low light performance, slowish AF and slow image writing time.

It's all about understanding the tool that you're using.

Low light performance, even with the weak integrated flash, was fine for me even under the canopy where it was pretty dim (see below).

Most post and shoot digicams have what people like to refer to as "slow autofocus" or "shutter lag." It's a matter of understanding the limitations and PREFOCUSING to reduce the af time and to snag your shot.

I never had a problem with file writing times though.

http://home.pacbell.net/psf0/001.jpg

http://home.pacbell.net/psf0/002.jpg

http://home.pacbell.net/psf0/003.jpg

It's all about understanding the tool that you're using.

Low light performance, even with the weak integrated flash, was fine for me even under the canopy where it was pretty dim (see below).

Most post and shoot digicams have what people like to refer to as "slow autofocus" or "shutter lag." It's a matter of understanding the limitations and PREFOCUSING to reduce the af time and to snag your shot.

I never had a problem with file writing times though.


Hey justsomeguy,

ho9w many megapixels did that camera have...?...and what kinda camera was it...thanks :)

It's all about understanding the tool that you're using.

Low light performance, even with the weak integrated flash, was fine for me even under the canopy where it was pretty dim (see below).

Most post and shoot digicams have what people like to refer to as "slow autofocus" or "shutter lag." It's a matter of understanding the limitations and PREFOCUSING to reduce the af time and to snag your shot.

I never had a problem with file writing times though.
hey man, nice shots! a couple of those pictures look kind of familiar, were those shot in bc?

I used to be big into photography... and have always preferred medium format. What about those with big and bulky medium format cameras such as a Mamiya M645 sitting collecting dust? Have any of you used some of the digital backs such as the Kodak ProBack to convert them? How well did it work out? It's definately not something I'd take with me on a ride (especially on a mountain bike excursion) but it might be something I'd use at a cycling event.

Ok, I feel you guys.

Part of my frustrations come from taking action pictures-they oftentimes came out looking blurry. Then I had problems with night pictures. I like to sometimes shoot at night when no one's around so I can get the kind of haunted look, but then the pictures didn't turn out. I know now I need a camera that will shoot in pitch black and darkness. Sometimes, I like to shoot the panoramic shots, and it was soooooo frustrating to get a 3/4ths picture and not the full shot. I ended up doctoring two pictures together to get what I wanted. Aaaaaugh! Sometimes I went into churches and monuments and shot pictures where they didn't allow flash- I couldn't adjust my current camera to account for this, so pictures end up looking dark and had little definition. Also, I would like to have a camera that took sharper pictures. I usually end up adjusting as much as possible, but I still never felt like I had that crispness I desired. Then when I wanted to zoom in on objects farther away, by the time I'd zoomed in, it ended up distorting the picture too much to use it. My close ups were fine, but the zoom is horrible.

I'll be heading over to Wolf Camera at the beginning of next year with my specifications and see what they come up with for me. It's just good I can read through all this stuff here so I have a better idea of what to ask for when I go in there. I already got disappointed by CompUSA trying to push a camera on me that I now think wouldn't perform everything I wanted to do- I'm now just going to go to a camera store that deals only with cameras to get what I want.

Koffee

I'm now just going to go to a camera store that deals only with cameras to get what I want.

I don't know how they are now but ten years ago, my favourite and most respected camera store in the Chicago area was Helix at least for chemical film photography. I pretty much just went to the one in Yorktown Mall in Lombard though.

I don't know how they are now but ten years ago, my favourite and most respected camera store in the Chicago area was Helix at least for chemical film photography. I pretty much just went to the one in Oakbrook though.


Thanks for the tip. I'll go to the Helix in the Illinois Center, but there's no way I'm going to schlep out to Oakbrook for any camera store. Without a car, it takes the better part of 2.5 hours to get there and back, since there's no direct train service there. I had the unfortunate circumstance where I had to go to Oakbrook, and it was a hellish nightmare getting out there- suburbia hell... :-/

Illinois Center... now I'll head on down there next week and check out the folks there and see what's up with them. I haven't stepped in there in years! :eek:

Koffee

I had the unfortunate circumstance where I had to go to Oakbrook, and it was a hellish nightmare getting out there- suburbia hell... :-/

Yeah, had I been living in the city during my days as an avid photographer, I wouldn't have gone all the way out there either. But at the time, I was still growing up in Naperville so it wasn't all that far. Actually, as you can see from my editted post, memory has faded and I had to remember that it was even a little more the ways out in Lombard. :)

Ok, I feel you guys.

Part of my frustrations come from taking action pictures-they oftentimes came out looking blurry.

Someone who wants to/thinks they can go "pro" who doesn't understand a basic photographic skill such as panning?

Again, good luck.

If the light levels are low and the shutter speeds are low as well you can pan with the subject to capture a crisp rider. The background blur lends a feeling of motion to the shot.

Many folks also stop down the camera in well-lit situations to get the same effect. It's an art thing.

http://home.pacbell.net/psf0/004.jpg

Hey justsomeguy,

ho9w many megapixels did that camera have...?...and what kinda camera was it...thanks :)

It's the same camera that the poster was referring to, a Nikon 990 which is 3.34 mp.