Photographers Only…i Need Help On Purchasing A Camera.?
September 19th, 2009 | 
Author: Okay so I really want to start my own small time business. Nothing big, but I want to atleast give it a try. I do ALOT of photoshopping and things like that also. So I was wondering what would be the best camera for me to purchase. I took 2 different Photography classes during my senior year of high school so I know a very limited amount about cameras. We worked more on film cameras and film developing process insted of spending much time on Digital. So I was wondering if any one would help. I know a bit about shutter speeds, aperture, ISO equivalent, and Image resolution etc..etc. I was wondering what is a good ISO and shutter speed for nearly studio quality? How much megapixels do I really need? I narrowed my choices down to just two cameras.
My budget is at a $350 max. Here are the two cameras.http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?…http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?…
Thanks
Posted in 
Tags:
Sticking to your question…
Given the choice of these two cameras, it is no contest. Get the Sony W200. Besides having more pixels to work with (not always necessarily the reason to choose), the W200 has a much larger sensor than the Casio and it also has real image stabilization. Both of these factors will be a great advantage over the Casio as far as general image quality. Someone will correctly point out that the Sony memory cards cost more money, but that’s no big deal. They are not THAT much more and you only buy one anyhow. It’s not like they are disposable items.
You’ll figure this out soon enough, but the lower the ISO you choose, generally speaking, the better the image quality will be. As long as you have enough light, you can use a low ISO. Looking at the specs, I see the Sony goes as low as ISO 80 and the Casio as low as ISO 64. This is an insignificant difference and certainly not a reason to think about the Casio instead of the Sony.
My suggestion would be that you get a film camera, manual operation, a light meter, and some inexpensive studio lights.
Your iso setting is dependent upon the amount of light as are your shutter speeds and aperture settings. So look at it this way, you are looking for the tightest grain of film which will be the lowest ISO. I would use a 50 Ilford film for BW, and the lowest ISO I could find in color. That means you have a lot of light.
I would suggest an OM model from Olympus or a Canon A1 or AE1, of if you can find what you need at the price you want to pay, a manual Nikon. You will need either a 105 or (I like) a 135 with the fastest lens you can find. You will need a tripod, and the good ones are not cheap.
Digital is good if you don’t want all the mess but I’d probably go and buy an SLR digital camera, you then have the ability to play about with shutter speeds and all that sort of thing. The secret of a good photograph is the light and also whether or not your object is static and you have a steady hand/tripod etc!!!
You need to really ask yourself what you want to do with the camera, that will help you with your choice.
The cameras you have chosen are more than good enough for taking snaps and working on photoshop so either will do.
Good luck with the business, but you really will have to do more than high school stuff to make a real go of it!
Higher ISO settings are useful for getting pictures in low light without blurring. All of the cameras you’re looking at will do poorly indoors with no flash, at twilight, or trying to freeze action by using high ISO settings in all but the best light…. They use smaller lenses and sensors than the pro models. They gather less light and suffer from noise at higher ISO settings. The more mega pixels they pack onto these small sensors… the better the resolution is in good light… the worse the performance is in low light or at high ISO settings. Most point-and-shoot cameras offer high ISO settings. They all produce noisy results though.
Casio is really hit and miss with picture quality. Packing 12 mega pixels onto the small sensor will almost certainly hurt the low light / high ISO performance of the Sony.
I’d look at this… http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-Di… or this if you need something smaller… http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-Di…http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-Di… smaller still
I think you could expect fairly professional results… but not in low light without a flash and not when using ISO settings over 200 without very good light. You’d need to step up to an SLR model to do better in that area… http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0007QK…
EDIT: The C-Net reviewer confirmed my suspicions about the mega pixel overkill on the Sony…http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-cameras/…
The Casio you’re looking at seems to get decent reviews though…
EDIT AGAIN: Yeah… What the other poster said really is true. I didn’t realize you were mostly interested in studio work. For studio work, the “right” way would be to shoot at lower ISO with external flash lighting. It’s much easier to get professional-looking results from a point-and-shoot outdoors. Shooting without a flash or with a built-in flash really won’t cut it for studio work. Might be able to get away with not using flash photography, but it would still require good lighting and at least an SLR camera.
i love my digital kodak share 7.0 meg camera it does everything my proffessional film camera did plus more and you can evend do a couple minutes of video clip, it would do all you need to do in a small busiess. If you are a member of sams club, go look for kodak share cameras it was just over the $200 mark in price.
IMO you are not ready to do this. Your question about settings (… what is a good ISO and shutter speed for nearly studio quality?) tells me you are very inexperienced.
The cameras you referenced are not suitable for studio work. In a studio setting you have multiple light sources which are controlled by the camera. A DSLR is the only real choice and your budget is insufficient.
IMO you should work for a professional photographer for at least one year, preferably two. This is the best way to gain experience without being responsible for the finished product. You’ll get real-world experience in running a photography business and in how a professional photographer works. During this apprenticeship you can continue to save so if and when you do go out on your own you’ll be better able to afford the right equipment.
I’m not trying to be a “gloomy gus” here, just a realist.
EDIT: I stand by my answer. Probably not what you wanted to hear so I understand your comments.