jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,275
|
Post by jamesp on Oct 11, 2018 12:50:10 GMT -5
Grim reminders of age creeping up.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,275
|
Post by jamesp on Oct 11, 2018 12:54:12 GMT -5
I still have a 1997 Sony Mavica Very cool. Does yours still work? I lost the charging cord to mine. Floppy disc version right? I remember those as well. 1.4 meg of high quality photography. My first kid was born the year I got my 1 megapixel camera so I have thousands of pictures saved from back then. I can remember how thrilled we were to be able to take pictures and not have to get them developed. edit: I see the floppy disc sticker on it now. Chuck You got it all right. I figured this one landed in your hands. They had me traveling to check up on large machinery the company I worked for had ordered. Recording progress of the building stages. I was the photographer and this was the camera. Solid machine. SO thankful not to have to develop photos.
|
|
|
Post by Drummond Island Rocks on Oct 11, 2018 13:01:17 GMT -5
I had one of these too. Prior to the tilting LCD screens they just swiveled the entire lens portion of the camera. I actually did like this one though. I always thought the swivel portion would be weak or break but it was really sturdy. Chuck
|
|
gemfeller
Cave Dweller
Member since June 2011
Posts: 3,854
|
Post by gemfeller on Oct 11, 2018 13:11:16 GMT -5
I have an old floppy disk Mavica as well. I'm sure it still woks but I haven't fired it up in a long time. I recall being delighted with such "advanced" camera technology, and the freedom from film. Technology advances since then have been amazing. But I still use my trusty old Nikon Coolpix 4500 for most of my rock and gem shots. The lens is amazing and it focuses down to 2-3 inches. The split body makes it perfect for table-top work. They're now available on Ebay and Amazon for under $100. I actually bought 3 of them just for "insurance." ETA: You were posting while I was writing Chuck. I think your Coolpix model was the one just before the 4500. I've had mine for years now with no swivel or other problems. Fantastic cameras!
|
|
|
Post by Drummond Island Rocks on Oct 11, 2018 13:24:48 GMT -5
I have an old floppy disk Mavica as well. I'm sure it still woks but I haven't fired it up in a long time. I recall being delighted with such "advanced" camera technology, and the freedom from film. Technology advances since then have been amazing. But I still use my trusty old Nikon Coolpix 4500 for most of my rock and gem shots. The lens is amazing and it focuses down to 2-3 inches. The split body makes it perfect for table-top work. They're now available on Ebay and Amazon for under $100. I actually bought 3 of them just for "insurance." ETA: You were posting while I was writing Chuck. I think your Coolpix model was the one just before the 4500. I've had mine for years now with no swivel or other problems. Fantastic cameras! Funny how that works. I loved my Sony DCS-HX200-V so much that I bought the newer higher megapixel DCS-HX400-V to upgrade. I keep it about a week and returned it because I was never able to get the same performance from it. All of the specs say it should be better and all of the controls were in the same spots but picture for picture I liked the old model better. I think some of the issues revolve on around the zoom they are trying to achieve. All of these new cameras that have 50X and up optical zooms have got to suffer when it comes to taking a closeup photo of a rock. Chuck
|
|
braat
spending too much on rocks
Member since December 2016
Posts: 350
|
Post by braat on Oct 13, 2018 12:11:22 GMT -5
All this older camera discussion and Chuck's experience using an older camera for his great photos caused me to wonder how my dinosaur (early 2000's) Fujifilm Finepix 3800 might do compared to my Canon EOS Rebel T6s with all it's lenses and flashes that require a university degree to make sense of the seeming infinite # of settings. Yesterday I dusted off the Fuji and relearned how to operate it and transfer photos to the computer. Back in the day I remember the Fuji took decent photos so I was kinda nervous it might take a better photo than the Canon and if it did what would that say about all the money I've sunk into the Canon? Anyways I took a Fuji and Canon photo of the same rocks using a copy stand similar to what Chuck talked about up thread...I tried to keep everything the same (distance, lighting, auto mode, etc.) and damned if the Fuji didn't come out better (to my eye). I was ticked off initially but after thinking about it concluded maybe there's a silver lining in all this. I can use the Fuji as a point and shoot permanently mounted in the copy stand for batch photos and whatever else...the Canon I'll use with the macro lens for closeups of fancy rocks if I ever get good enough at tumbling to dare zoom in close. Since I started tumbling 2 years ago I've always been frustrated at being unable to take a photo showing the shine with a camera that has all the bells and whistles supposedly. The old Fuji may be the answer...I'm going to do more comparison test shots so we'll see what happens...
|
|