Recommendations for Digital Camera for rocket photography use

Oh no...

That's not like the infinite sampling abilities of digital audio, is it?

Tod "Run away! Run away!" Hilty

Hey Marc,

You going to be shooting at Three Oaks?? Inquiring Rocketeers want to know :-)

Mark A Palmer

Marc Kl> Hi Bob,

aah, I knew we'd have a "pro" chime in eventually :-) thanks Marc.

Also, there's one more camera I'd like to add. the Olympus E-100RS. it's in the "prosumer" category and will do

the downsides are: it's only 1.5mp and it's not being made anymore. Olympus spent a bunch developing it and it's market is slim so it didn't sell well. From what i hear, there are no plans to update it with a higher mp sensor. :-(

they pop up on ebay once in a while, but don't go real cheap.

-Dan

Dan Chandler Southern New England Association of Rocketry

Tod Hilty, rmr regular. If you see him runing, try to keep up :)

Doug

Hi Mark,

Unfortunately, I think I'm going to miss Three Oaks in November. We had a little girl in September who is now almost 7 weeks old. She is taking up a lot of our free time :) and travel logistics might be tricky.

There is still a chance I'll come out on my own, but it'd be without all the on-site equipment.

I do plan on making it to the April launch and hopefully LDRS in New York next year.

I also have plans to re-work my web site, but free time is tight these days.

I need to make more money at photography so I can quit my day job :)

Thanks!

- Marc

Klinger Photography

Hi Dan,

Yeah, I've read about the E-100RS but I've never seen one in person. Looks like it was an interesting camera, almost a video camera/still camera hybrid.

What's really going to be interesting is the coming of the HD camcorders.

JVC already has one, the GR-HD1 which can do 1280x720p at 30fps and runs about $2500.

I'm starting to get into digital video and recently got the Canon-GL2 which is a pretty nice SD cam. I'm waiting for another generation or so of HD cams before I take that plunge. I'd like to see true 1920x1080i at 30fps, or 1280x720p at 60fps for under $4000. Should only be a couple more years.

- Marc

Klinger Photography

well their is no 5-10mp camera prices.

you have 5mp and then you have the 11mp canon and the 14mp kodak (GARBAGE) and the 16mp Camera Back.

a FEW 6mp's just came our recently but nothing inbetween 6 and 11

you can grab 5mp for UNDER $500 (I think argus has a $400 5mp)

are you telling me you can get a DECENT userfriendly 120 or 4x5 camera for that price.

then tell me costs on film and developing. unless your printing larger than

please show me where I can get a 4x5 for under $400 I would actually be quite interested in playing with a MEDIUM format camera (you said large format and 4x5 is not large format neither is 6x6 or 6x7 I believe) I think they are all medium format still (this area I am gray in not my area of knowledge)

Chris Taylor

I am sorry but you are just plain wrong. When the resolution of your "capture" EXCEEDS the resolution of your "output" (print etc..) you can NOT be taking a res hit.

When I print 4x6's I am almost NEVER taking a res hit (except rocketry) the two will be INDISTINGUISHABLE to the human eye.

When I print 8x10 I am 60-70% of the time NOT taking a res hit. AGAIN the res difference is NOT distinguishable to the human eye.

If I were to use a 2picoliter printer (that means the dots are no longer distinguishable to the human eye)

and then print my 5mp image and then print your film image scanned at ANY resolution you desire and then printed to the same size 4x6 or 8x10 etc.. you WILL NOT be able to tell the difference.

When you "CAN" tell the difference you NOW have a res hit.

also your claim is also false. 11mp canon eos 1ds has SUPERIOR resolution and clarity to 35mm film at ANY print size.

SO if you have a eos 1ds and print large enough you will take a res hit if you use FILM.

PLEASE have some understanding of what you are talking about first jerry.

Chris Taylor

Irrelevant. that is theoretical resolution.

People have compared the 11mp image to that of a 35mm negative scanned at the BEST reasonable quality (Expensive DRUM scanning) and the 11mp image had MORE detail to a smaller dimension AND was "cleaner" with far less NOISE.

That means I can crop and blow up the 11mp image on my computer and print it on my inkjet and get better result than if I did the same with a 35mm negative including outsourcing the drum scanning (NO mere normal mortal can afford to own one of those babies)

Incorrect again. it is not continious tone. the Pigments or dyes etc.. that make up the image have limits just like pixels.

when you goto 2 picoliters or smaller (dot size) you are now beyond the ability of the human eye to see.

it IS continious tone for any relevant concern.

Just like although film is NOT c> >

NO digital is comparable to that. and that is YOUR problem as that is not what we are comparing it do (ALSO the 14mp (not 13mp) kodak is garbage. HORRIBLE images. Kodak should have kept that locked up till they got it right)

also that 14mp camera is no more comparable to that 2 1/4 than a 35mm camera is (which is what we are comparing to by the way since it looks as if you did not read the thread)

SO your point is irrelevant and moot.

Chris Taylor

well it is definately NOT meant for the consumer market. that is for CERTAIN. I also made that quite clear.

but it is something I want. so when it gets affordable enough I will own it.

Chris Taylor

Correct I still use my 100 year old cartridge camera (according fold and all) I love it.

People say I am nuts its valuable. I say boo hoo. I got it to take pictures. (Aperature to 64 !!!!) so that is what I do with it.

but that is not large format as jerry claimed was easy and affordable.

I would love to afford a "NICE" 120 or 220 camear but most half way decent models are so far out of my price range (price verse applied use and all)

Chris Taylor

Absolutely. I suffer from that all the time even with my coolpix 5000

I am hoping the Canon Rebel Digital will "fill" a middle ground a little it is the next camera I am hoping to own.

especially since I can then use any canon af lens on it !!! YEAH 400mm here I come !

Chris Taylor

WOW if you could get 5fps in the 3-5mp range even for just 15 frames you would almost never miss the "sweet spot" launch photo again.

even my best film slr comes no where NEAR that !! cool !

Puty the 1.5mp

but then again with 280mm you might still end up with a better photo than from a 5mp camera with far slower shutter and shorter lens.

How many frames could it do this 15fps for ?

How long between "runs" ? IE to flush the caches and be ready for another run of 15fps.

Got any good links for this camear (will google is in a moment as well)

Chris Taylor

Holly Living crap. I hope my drool does not kill my keyboard.

although not ideal it will do 10 FULL quality images at 15fps (27 if you do normal compression but I think I would rather live with the 10frames and get the higher quality !!!)

HOLLY crap this is a wicked cool camera !!! I WANT ONE but ouch. only one on ebay and its already nearly at $400 and in stores (yup stil available) its $700 !!

BUT wow what a camera.!

I have now read about 5 messages from you this morning where you conclusively declare someone else wrong.

You're wrong.

They were relaying OPINIONS and OBSERVATIONS not CONCLUSIONS, thus literally cannot be wrong.

But YOU were.

Jerry

You know, I have no clue what the hell you are trying to prove here. Exactly what is wrong with the Kodak DCS Pro 14n? We have outputted images from this camera to our Fuji Pictrography printer, and they are beautiful. Nice shadow detail, and sharp, crisp photos, up to 9x12"

What, exactly, is garbage about this camera?

Also, I have a feeling my points aren't the only ones moot and irrelavent.

-Rich

Chris Taylor Jr wrote:

Good point, Marc. Most people have a hard time believing this, and are hung up on 'megapixels' to judge digital camera quality.

-Rich

Marc Kl>