Cheap Camera
Sep 6, 2019 08:09:36 #
I had to sell all my camera equipment a couple of weeks ago and ended up getting a cheap Kodak point and shoot. This is the 2nd pic I took with it. A little soft but better than nothing.
Sep 6, 2019 08:19:47 #
Sep 6, 2019 08:32:02 #
I think you've proved it's the photographer, not the camera. Great shot!
Rick
Rick
Sep 6, 2019 08:40:03 #
sct198 wrote:
I had to sell all my camera equipment a couple of weeks ago and ended up getting a cheap Kodak point and shoot. This is the 2nd pic I took with it. A little soft but better than nothing.
I had a Kodak DX6490 4mp camera for many years, and got some really great shots with it. It was a great camera.
Sep 6, 2019 08:47:13 #
sct198 wrote:
I had to sell all my camera equipment a couple of weeks ago and ended up getting a cheap Kodak point and shoot. This is the 2nd pic I took with it. A little soft but better than nothing.
Your Kodak appears to work well enough to handle, as a small sized image, your vision of a point where the genres (possibly sub-genres?) of still life, waterfall and landscape converge. Your shot seems to me to be well composed and subtly lit. Pixel peeping - not so much.
Sep 6, 2019 11:14:11 #
good picture, just goes to prove anything is possible if you put your mind to it and have some type of understanding about what your doing. you don't need a $5000 camera to take a good picture, all you need is the passion to make due with what you have and capture the moment, and I think you did an excellent job with that
Sep 6, 2019 11:44:14 #
Sep 6, 2019 13:52:21 #
Sep 6, 2019 16:01:19 #
CO wrote:
That's an excellent composition but yikes ! The over saturated colors are too much.
I saw the EXIF, and there is a lot of sharpening and saturation. Not bad for a newer Pixpro Kodak though. I have an AZ901 and it actually doesn't die from diffraction at full zoom.
Sep 6, 2019 18:32:13 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
This is a joke, Right?
No, it's not a joke. It's a Kodak Pixpro FZ53. You can get it online for $50-$60.
Sep 6, 2019 18:53:26 #
sct198 wrote:
No, it's not a joke. It's a Kodak Pixpro FZ53. You can get it online for $50-$60.
I understand the camera is real—not a joke.
I thought it might be a joke to post the image.
Sorry to offend anyone.
Sep 6, 2019 21:22:45 #
I don't know if anyone paid attention. Why did sct98 had to sell his camera equipment? What is going on here?
As for the photograph and the camera used, this is proof positive that the photographer makes the photograph.
As for the photograph and the camera used, this is proof positive that the photographer makes the photograph.
Sep 7, 2019 02:59:19 #
lsaguy wrote:
I think you've proved it's the photographer, not the camera. Great shot!
Rick
Rick
Thanks Rick, I also think that these cheap cameras have come along way, just like cell phones.
Sep 7, 2019 03:05:14 #
Orson Burleigh wrote:
Your Kodak appears to work well enough to handle, as a small sized image, your vision of a point where the genres (possibly sub-genres?) of still life, waterfall and landscape converge. Your shot seems to me to be well composed and subtly lit. Pixel peeping - not so much.
I should have warned everyone about pixel peeping, it really show how soft and distorted the pics are.
Sep 7, 2019 03:11:34 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
I understand the camera is real—not a joke.
I thought it might be a joke to post the image.
Sorry to offend anyone.
I thought it might be a joke to post the image.
Sorry to offend anyone.
I am not offended, the story is not a joke either, just been having some hard times. Thanks for responding though. I guess it's more of a statement of passion over money and adversity.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.