[SEL] engine pictures

[Jerry Evans]

At 06:00 PM 07/10/2008, you wrote:
>Message: 3
>Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 17:57:54 -0700
>From: "Jim O'Hagan" <jdohagan at comcast.net>
>Subject: [SEL] engine pictures
>.
>
>Hi this is kinda on topic. I need to take some high resolution pictures of
>an ignitor and name tags for reproduction. My early cheep digetal  camera
>can't produce the necessary quality. Anyone have any suggestions for an
>upgrade. I need something user friendly. Thanks for any suggestions pro or
>con. Jimmy O'Hagan,415 892 0236
>Jim O'Hagan

Hi Jim,
         That's a hard question to give a definitive answer to. There are 
so many good cameras out there now and the price keeps getting better.

         I disagree with the suggestion that you should buy a cheap film 
camera and have digital prints made. Film is slowly disappearing off the 
market as digital gets better - cheap film camera's are just that -cheap. 
Film is also expensive. The advantages of digital to the average (I assume, 
you and I) guy who just wants some good quality pictures are just so much 
greater than film. Also so much cheaper - take a bad shot !! Just hit the 
delete button. Film costs you money to discover that the shot was bad. 35mm 
film has 36 shots per roll of film ($$) digitals allow you to take 100's of 
pics and sit at your computer later and delete the bad ones - practically 
no cost involved. (You can also use software to improve them - with film 
you need darkroom facilities and equipment to do this.)

         Choosing a new camera is a very personal thing and depends so much 
on what YOU are looking for. Some of the questions you have to ask yourself 
are:

         1) Are you a serious photographer and do you want total control 
over your pics - as in setting aperture / shutter speed, focus etc. 
yourself or do you just want to take good average pics for your own enjoyment.
         If you answer to the latter - look for one that has good results 
from the "Automatic" setting (most of them do today). Point 'n  shoot is 
for the likes of us . More serious photographers (may I mention some of Ken 
Christisen's macro work) prefer more manual control and are prepared to pay 
much more for their equipment but the "learning curve" to use it to it's 
maximum capability is quite steep.

         2) Something very important with digital camera's is "battery 
life". Some of them really "chew" batteries. Do not go for anything that 
uses "proprietary" battery packs - they're expensive. Rechargeable 
penlights (AA) work well for me. They're not expensive and you can also buy 
normal AA batteries almost anywhere if your rechargeable batteries run 
flat. I once bought an HP digital but returned it within the 7 day "cooling 
off" period - darn thing only took about 15 shots per set of batteries. 
Remember also that the more you use the zoom feature and the flash the more 
battery power it will use up.

         3) Do you want to use flash - check that the flash is strong 
enough -it used to be called the flash "Guide Number" but I do not see the 
term used often these days. Most camera's these days do have "flash" but 
some of them are only strong enough to be of any use if the subject is 
really close to the camera. The HP I tried was not effective on anything 
further than about 2 yards away - you will not get a well exposed picture 
of a group of people sitting at a longish table. The easiest way to check 
this is to take a flash pic of something like a shed full of engines with 
the lights off - focus on the "middle distance" and then look at the pic on 
your computer. You will be able to see how far the flash reached effectively.

         4) Zoom- digital zoom is usually terrible - go for the best 
"optical" zoom you can afford. Most of the better digital camera's these 
days have lenses made by well known "Optical - manufacturers". eg. my 
"older" Sony Digital Video camera has a Carl Zeiss lens. (It was one of the 
early digital video cameras and is already well past it's "sell by date").

         5) "Macro Photography". It's a great feature if you are a "serious 
photographer" but most of us will have very little use for this. If you are 
like Ken (again) and enjoy photographing things like "bugs" and extreme 
close-ups of tiny flowers and the like then you'll love "macro" but will 
have to spend a lot more money than the average digital offers these days 
to get results like Ken's.
         You mentioned a need to photograph engine plates (I know why) and 
governor parts - you do not need "macro" for this. Remember that your 
"depth of field" (that is the distance between parts of the subject that 
are in focus) is very short with "macro" lenses and your focus needs to be 
"spot -on". (Of course this also depends on the available light & movement 
which also governs your aperture / speed setting but lets not go there 
right now). As an example, if you tried to photograph a governor gear "end 
on" using  the macro setting only one part of the gear would be in focus - 
the rest would be blurred. You would get a better result using a normal 
lens setting and holding the camera a bit further back (as near as it can 
focus).

         I use a Fuji Finepix 5500 (as someone else mentioned) and cannot 
praise this camera enough. It is also well past it's "sell by date" - I've 
had it since 2004 but I considered it "ahead of it's time" then. The 
current replacement costs about 25% of the price (include inflation and 
it's more like 10%). The reasons I chose it were:
         i) It was developed in conjunction with NIKON.
         ii) It has a 10 times optical zoom feature.
         iii) It does not "chew" batteries. I use the zoom feature for 
practically every picture I take and also make a lot of use of the flash 
(it even has a "force flash" feature - for those daylight pics that you 
want to use flash as a "fill in"). I have taken over 200 pictures on a 
standard set of (Duracell) batteries with it at it's highest resolution.
         iv) It is a "Single Lens Reflex" (SLR) camera - this means that 
you look through the actual lens that is going to take the photo - great 
for composing your shot - "what you see is what you get" - this is a great 
help for close-ups. It also has a digital screen at the back if you prefer 
this but then you look just like all those guys at shows who hold the 
camera above their head and "squint' to see the screen :-)

         v) It looks like a camera - not a cellular phone :-)

         I cannot afford the latest one yet but, when I can, I will 
certainly look at the latest FUJI Finepix available here at present for the 
rough equivalent of US$ 200.00.

         Another reason why not to go the "film" route. I have a Nikon (my 
4th Nikon) with lenses and accessories, bought late 1998 for the (then) 
equivalent of US$ 7500.00. I discovered digital at about the same time - 
result is that the Nikon has only had 3 rolls of film through it!  It's 
destined to become just another "collectors piece". (No, it's not for sale.)

         O.K. That's my bit.

Keep the revs up (or down)
Jerry Evans
Near Johannesburg in Sunny South Africa.
Etched Brass Engine Plates made to order:
<www.oldengine.org/members/evans/plates/index.htm>