Camera Oasis

I ran across a Nikon N2020 in a thrift store last week. It would make a great doorstop, or maybe a prop in a war movie. By dw_ross from Springfield, VA, USA (20121213_1371) [CC BY 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)],  via Wikimedia Commons The bottom plate was partially unscrewed. A thin patina of dust covered its surface. You couldn't read half of the control labels on the body. Nikon made many rugged 35mm single-lens reflex cameras. The N2020 wasn't one of them, despite being the company's first autofocus SLR model. I'm a long-time Nikon SLR owner. But I let it go. Some owners baby their cameras. Others toss them in a backpack and neglect them. And there's no hard-and-fast rule about which holds up better. SLR cameras of the 1970s and 80s were built with metal frames, but plastic soon took over. If you find a $10 Nikon in a thrift store, it's likely to need more than a dusting off and a fresh battery. Compact point-and-shoots are a

Your iPhone or Android might take pretty good photos. For $500+, it ought to take photos Annie Leibovitz would buy. But it doesn't. It's more like the world's most overpriced point-and-shoot camera.  Compact 35mm film cameras from the 1970s-1990s are my Kryptonite. I find most of them in thrift stores, next to audio devices with old 30-pin iPod docks. Those film cameras have better lenses than a smart phone. Flashes that actually light up a scene. They make me think about composing a picture that tells a story. And if I drop a camera I bought at a Godwill or Salvation Army, I'm out a whole $5 -- not $500 plus a pricey screen replacement. I can live with that.  Here's a brief guide to real 35mm cameras worth looking for when you're garage-sailing or cruising thrift stores. You can go retro for just a few dollars, and see if you remember how to compose a photo with a real viewfinder pressed against your brow. 10. Olympus Infinity Twin - a some

You shot some pretty decent digital photos in the Bahamas in 2004. In fact, they might be useful in a book on travel photography. Can you use them? Maybe, maybe not. If you used a Nikon D70 -- one of the leading digital SLR cameras sold at that time -- you have some pretty sharp files. Six megapixels isn't bad. However, if you went back to Marsh Harbor in 2011 to shoot additional photos, you'd be using a 12- or 14-megapixel camera, likely with a better image processing algorithm. Your 2011 photos will have more detail. And your 2004 photos will pale, in some ways, when compared with your new photos. Documentary photographers who spend years capturing images for a project frequently encounter this issue. Digital advances turn their earlier digital photographs into, well, yesterday's photos. But photos captured on film in 2004 have exactly the same resolution as those captured on film today. Negatives and transparencies from years ago can be scanned into high-resolution digit

I'm a sucker for stretching the limits of 35mm negatives. And, with a little creativity, I get some nice rewards. This week, I'm shooting with a rarity: the Canon Multi-Tele, a 35mm automatic film camera that captures either full-frame or half-frame images. Depending on how you set the selector, you can grab either 24 x 36 or 18 x 24 mm pictures. So a 36-exposure roll of Kodak Portra VC 400 becomes a 72 exposure roll. Why do this? 18 x 24mm is roughly the same size as the sensor in digital SLR cameras, and I'm curious to see if the half-frame images come out with any more clarity or detail than the same-size JPEGs from a Nikon D60. Besides, I get the added satisfaction of driving the photo lab a little bit crazy, as the half-frame adapter required to print "normal-size" prints from the smaller negatives is rarely found. (You can easily create acceptable prints by editing a scan or digital negative). Downsides: the Canon Multi-Tele uses a loud, spring-loaded lens t

I'm going to tell you how to choose a digital camera -- what to look for, and what to ignore. Please pay attention. Many people ask me which camera they should buy. It's easy to suggest one sold by my employer, but different people have different photographic needs. And an $80, 3x zoom camera with a plastic lens might not make you happy if you want to shoot wildlife that's 100 feet away. This isn't to say my employer makes inadequate cameras; it's merely that one size doesn't fit all. I'm currently using a K odak Z950 , which delivers fine performance, feels great in my hands, and costs around $150. First, the items you can ignore: IGNORE "megapixels". Really. If it has more than 8 megapixels, it'll give you the photos you want. If you need a 14-megapixel camera, you'd better be shooting images to display on billboards, because you'll seldom need a 14-MP file. IGNORE "fits in a pocket." Ninety percent of today's cameras fi

Here's a short but handy checklist to help you sell cameras on Craigslist: Don't simply say "Nikon digital camera." Give a model number: Coolpix 5400, L20, whatever it says on the camera body. Get the brand right. Shoppers often search by brand name. There's no "Cybersnap" or "Olympis" brand in digital cameras, but there are a Cybershot and an Olympus. Again, it's probably spelled correctly on the camera. Write a better headline than "Digital Camera 12 Megapixels." The difference between a camera made by Kodak or Polaroid is striking. Again, brand matters. Don't fill your ad with meaningless specs borrowed from a web page. Instead, be sure to tell us whether all the camera's functions work, if the LCD screen is cracked, and whether the essential accessories (battery, charger, connector cord, manual, etc.) are included. Show a photo of the camera. Don't blow this off! If you're selling your only camera, set the cam

Seriously: how long did you think camera companies could churn out higher- and higher-megapixel cameras before consumers became fatigued with it all? They're figuring out that a new 12- or 14-megapixel camera isn't a necessity when jobs, hours and salaries are getting cut. That 6- or 8-MP camera most of us bought a year or two ago will do fine, at least until the recession moderates. As a result: Ritz Camera filed for Ch. 11 bankruptcy protection this week. Hundreds of stores, stocked with Fuji, Nikon, and Olympus cameras that no one's buying. Most Ritz stores were mall-based, within easy clobbering range of the Target or Best Buy across the parking lot. If you bought a camera from Ritz, I hope you didn't pay extra for a Ritz warranty. Ritz's court filings say they owe Nikon USA more than $20 million. That kind of liability isn't going to make things easy at Nikon. Take good care of that D90 or D300; customer service may get whacked. Olympus downsized a portion

In my film camera days, a roll of 35mm film gave you a negative of 36 x 24mm. That area was the "recording surface" for the images I shot. Digital cameras today are promoted for having 8, 10, or 12 megapixels. That's not the size of the recording surface; it's geek-speak for the number of tiny recording cells on the sensor. You can squeeze millions of these cells on a sensor. But if the sensor itself is only 7.2 x 5.3 mm -- typically the size found in a pocket digital camera -- you have less overall area in which to capture an image. Add megapixels, and you're just squeezing more tiny cells on a small sensor, which leads to image degradation in the form of "noise." So, when you're looking at different cameras, megapixels are irrelevant. It's the size of the sensor that really determines image quality. There's a semi-technical explanation of this at this web site, and a simpler (and somewhat exuberant) discussion on Ken Rockwell's webs

I don't know. I love this execution. But something about a camera that adds calories...? Isn't that the 180-degree turn away from what digital's supposed to do? You decide. Have a look at this URL. From Wired.com's Gadget Lab blog. Next: point-and-shoot brownies???

Read this Craigslist ad, and you'll discover how to review a camera. But you won't do much to sell it. Eventually, you figure out that the seller/reviewer has a Nikon D90 digital SLR . A lovely camera. He or she might have the 18-105 VR kit lens to sell, too. Or another lens purchased afterward. It's hard to tell. But there's no asking price. And I wouldn't begin to guess what's included with the camera. I would guess that he's suffering a pretty severe case of buyer's remorse. We've all been there, pal. I don't miss pricey newspaper classified ads. But they had one saving grace: brevity. If you want to sell something, be accurate, and be brief. If you want to be David Pogue -- who writes funny, detailed reviews for the New York Times -- that's fine. But Craigslist isn't the right venue.

Forget Black Friday; this is a very good time to buy a new or used digital camera. After the holidays, people look to unload their older cameras that have been replaced by newer models. Also, with the Consumer Electronics Show starting in a few days, announcements of new models from major manufacturers will make what's on store shelves now seem obsolete, and thus ready for close-out. If you're buying new: 6-, 7- or 8-megapixel cameras will meet 90% of most picture-taking needs. Really. If you need a 21-MP camera, check your driver's license: you may be the lost grandson of Ansel Adams , suffering from amnesia. In the stores, consider display models, and ask if they'll either extend the warranty or take a few dollars off for buying a floor model. The worst they can say is, "I'll ask the manager." The Kodak Z1012 IS camera shown here is a 10-MP camera that's been out a little over a year. Kodak recently brought out a newer, larger camera with a differen

Today's observation: never buy a digital camera with the "1" or "One" in the name. My first Panasonic digital camera was the fabled Lumix FZ-1. It was a 12x optical zoom, and the aperture stayed at a constant f2.8 at all focal lengths. It took incredible photos. But it was only 2 megapixels and fairly slow to operate, even in 2003. The next iteration of FZ models fixed a lot of these issues, but I had already invested in the FZ-1. Now Panasonic's come out with this new DMC G1, roughly the same size as my old FZ-1, but with interchangeable lenses like a digital SLR. And a bigger DSLR-like sensor. And an $800 price tag. Right, $800 for a baby DSLR. I can buy a Nikon D60 with lens for much less than $800. What are you thinking, Panasonic? Other "ones" worthy of this list: the Kodak EasyShare One (a wireless digital camera that's about as slow as my old FZ-1). Sigma DP-1 (also slow, and $999 buys you a camera with performance characteristics wort

Here are two reviews of two current digital cameras that are both going for around $170: TrustedReviews.com gave a lukewarm review of the Kodak Z8612 IS camera. This is a 12X "superzoom" camera that won't fit in your pocket, but will get you pretty decent photos from over 100 feet away. CNET.com had kinder remarks about the Kodak M1033 camera , a personal favorite of mine. This is a very compact pocket model with a typical 35-105mm lens, and a bigger-than-usual 3-inch LCD screen. CNET liked its image quality; in addition, I like how it's insanely light and compact. So how do you choose? If you shoot lots of photos from the bleachers at a football game, the Z8612 is a pretty decent value. But I've always believed that you'll get the best photos from the camera you keep with you. A pocket camera fits better in my sport jacket than a bulky superzoom. Thus, I pack the M1033 for casual shooting, and use a DSLR when photography is the main reason I'm headed out