|
Post by Petey on Jul 6, 2004 16:08:48 GMT -5
Most anglers, at least a lot of them I meet on the river carry some sort of camera. With the technology being what it is today many of those cameras are digitals. About two years ago, maybe a little longer I bought a Sony Cyber-shot 2.1 megapixel. At the time it offered the most pixels in a small camera for under 250 dollars. I still use this camera today and with the mini kodak photo labs at Wal-mart and Walgreens I have been able to make better pictures then my old 35 mm use to. The camera is a little bigger than most compact but not so combersome it can't be carried on the river. It has tons of features, but the biggest thing I have been pleased with is the photo quality. That is what it is all about anyway, right? I use a 32 mb memory stick that can usually hold 36-40 pictures when I use it on its highest pixel setting. 1600x1200. It also has 3 levels of flash, and will even shoot silent MPGS. Thought those take tons of memory. It also has a macro feature that allows for taking up close pics of small objects, like flies on the river or on the vise! This is definitely a sweetly tied Elk Hair Caddis! Petey
|
|
|
Post by HughH on Jul 6, 2004 17:44:24 GMT -5
Petey, I'm going to have to give a big thumbs up on this report. This area of digital photograpy has been a totally new experience for me.I had used disposable cameras for several years and I became the best on the creek for dropping them in the water or falling in with them in my pocket. I did get a Sony Cybershot --5 megapixel last year and an Aqua Pack that is waterproof to carry it in. It is opening up a whole new aspect to flyfishing. I also bought a Nikon CoolPix 3.2 megapixel camera for photographing the flies that I sell. It has been a learning experience for me that has opened many new doors. Learning to handle these new cameras is really a by product that can offer job opportunities out in the future. When combined with photographic software they can produce some of the best work that a person can ask for and a lifetime of memories. I highly recommend some of these new cameras coming onto the market right now to all fishermen. Hugh Hartsell---East Tenn.
|
|
Sanman
South Holston Wild Brown
If you post it, they will come!
Posts: 82
|
Post by Sanman on Jul 6, 2004 18:27:06 GMT -5
Good report Petey and Hugh; I purchased the Pentax Optio 43 WR 4 megapixel about a month ago and really love it mainly in case I drop it in the water. It is so small it easily fits in shirt pocket. I hadn’t caught a fish over 17.5” since, guess I need to send it back. I sure wish I had it when I was fishing the Clinch and the Caney earlier in the year but have taken some nice scenic pictures and pictures of ugly fisherman like Grumpy ;D with his jet sled. Sanman
|
|
|
Post by northgeorgiasportsman on Jul 7, 2004 6:38:17 GMT -5
I'll second what Hugh said. I've got the same 5.0mp Sony that he's talking about and it takes such good photographs, it makes me look like a photographer! I think it's in the lenses, but Sony makes one of the best cameras out there.
|
|
Sanman
South Holston Wild Brown
If you post it, they will come!
Posts: 82
|
Post by Sanman on Jul 7, 2004 19:51:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gverholek on Jul 10, 2004 14:38:23 GMT -5
A couple of years ago, I bought a Nikon CoolPix 775 (2 megapixel), and the pocket-sized camera was my constant companion. I was fishing above Tremont and thought I'd take one last cast on the stream. I stepped onto a rocker and down I went. The shirt and camera got wet, but the camera dried and still worked. Ever since then, I put it in a zip-lock bag. Then about 2 months later I dropped it on a wooden floor. It didn't survive that incident. It finally got stolen on the return trip from Isalmorada. I now own a Casio QV-R40. It's smaller, faster and has 4 megapixel resolution. I sometimes think the Nikon lens was better for Macro shots, but for normal shots, it produces fantastic photos. The other day, I did a photo-shoot of our TU chapter giving GSMNP a $7,620 check from TroutFEST. I used my Nikon N6006 35-mm and the Casio for identical shots. I couldn't tell the difference in quality on 4x6's. I may try some blow-ups to see if there really is some differnence. The printer may be the key. For the convenience and cost, I'm sold on digital. Now, if i could only affort the new Nikon digital SLR...
|
|