Cameras

I am starting a web page for my business (horseshoeing). I wish to photograph my work and place it on this new web page.

What makes and models should I be considering? I very much would like to consider some older models and by used/refurbished. What features should I be considering? Ease of downloading is important but quality of image probably more so. Spec numbers are helpful as vague terms as better are just that, vague.

I know some like using their phones, but I find many phones, when images are transferred to the internet to be rather lacking.

Thoughts and ideas are appreciated.

I have several cameras (too many),but the one which I carry all the time in my truck is a Casio Ex-H10. It might be hard to find as they came out around 2009, but the battery is good for around 1000 shots before a re-charge is needed. Camera is built like a battleship,slips into your pocket as well. I have cameras I have paid up to $1000 for,but this little Casio ($160) is my go-fer,everyday camera "takes a beating and keeps on clicking".

(quoted from post at 15:11:52 05/21/16) I have several cameras (too many),but the one which I carry all the time in my truck is a Casio Ex-H10. It might be hard to find as they came out around 2009, but the battery is good for around 1000 shots before a re-charge is needed. Camera is built like a battleship,slips into your pocket as well. I have cameras I have paid up to $1000 for,but this little Casio ($160) is my go-fer,everyday camera "takes a beating and keeps on clicking".

Click to expand...

I had a Casio, I remember it being a very good camera, but it didn't stand up to a snowmobile crash.

I have a Canon EOS Rebel. It is in SLR format and capable of directly downloading to your computer or via its memory card. You can use it for a variety of things, vacation, family etc. I've even taken wedding photos with it. It is a good quality camera. You can buy used online for around $100.00. It is an EOS Digital Rebel XTS (a.k.a. 350D) 8.0 Megapixel, SLR, Digital Camera Body
Camera

Have an EOS Rebel as well. Cannot go wrong with Canon. After you get the camera, it's all about the lenses. Nikons are great too.

I have a Nikon D 3100 and it will take shots that pocket camera can't and has more settings. Like said Cannon and Nikon are both good cameras.

All digital cameras these days are more than good enough for web photos. You don't need an SLR, buy a new (not used) point and shoot camera and study the manual.

You will take much better pictures when you understand what different focal lengths, f-stops, shutter speeds, and lighting angles do in still and video. Technique is more important than hardware.

A couple more tips:

1) For your purposes, get a good tripod and use it; your pictures will be much better

2) Pay a few bucks for a good photo editing program (probably Corel or Adobe) and watch some tutorials on editing. It isn't difficult but it makes a big difference.

We bought a nikon coolpix L340. Very good quality pictures and video, and goes up to 28x zoom. Only had it a few months, but impressed so far.

Hasselblad camera is the only choice none better! have the prints transfered to disk then post them where you need them

bass

i have two Canons! My DSLR is the rebel t5-probably more then you need! I also have a point and shoot(does not have interchangeable lenses for it) that is an SX50HS! It has 50 times optical and 200 times digital zoom! It has most of the features of my 'better' camera, but it's simpler in many was too!

I know absolutely nothing about digital cameras. I've only owned one. I bought a Canon about 4 years ago, and I've posted 18,173 Photos to FindAGrave from that camera. It's like the Timex watch - it just keeps on tickin'. If that little camera dies, I'm gonna get another Canon.
Proof

Nikon coolpics will do everything you want for less than $150. Small enough to fit in your pocket, very durable (I carry one in my tool belt) They use AA batteries and will take hundreds of photos on one set. Avoid rechargeable batteries, if they die you are stuck until they recharge, not to mention having to always bring along the charger. Super easy to use and download photos to your computer. I recommend using Picasa which is a free program you can download from Google.
I have used it for several years.

Very good looking early model McCormick rake-tedder there. First of series. From the teens.

Heyseed I will second your post. Nikon Cool Pix 9600 is a very nice pocket camera. Has 16mp with a nice zoom and stabilization. Go on fleabay and look them up and you can find factory referb units for the $150.oo or a little less. I have one of those or my Canon 7D with me. Also the camera in my Samsung smart phone. That Coolpix is a Good deal.

I use my smart phone. Take pic sent it via email, text, post on YT. Some post to facebook, I'm not a facebook person. Don't want Google to have my mug shot.

I put my daughter through college, art and graphic design. She needed Apple computer, expensive state of the art digital Nikon, $1500 plus lenses.

Can't tell you want smartphone she has. She never uses the Nikon, just the phone . She can do everything on her phone. Her husband job is MS and Apple administrator, he set's up web pages and wakes up computers. They don't have a PC at home. All done on phone.

Check out phones.

My wife uses a Cannon X150 for her website. Check out her website.
Untitled URL Link

Think she paid $150 for it.

Cell phones don't have an optical zoom (lense doesn't move to magnify light). If you are only taking pictures of close objects, or scenery, they work "ok". Cheap cell phones generally don't have great cameras, some don't have a flash, some do poorly in dim light, like indoors. If you plan on getting a phone anyway, you "could" get by with one, probably, for what you describe.

But, a regular camera is far more useful for general use, most any of the major brands are ~good. If you see something in your price range, you can google the name, and get reviews, or, google the name with the word flickr, and see pictures people have taken with it, so you can see exactly what it can do. Canon SX150 was mentioned, here it is. https://www.flickr.com/groups/canon_powershot_sx150_is/

Regular cameras with big zooms take decent pictures, but when you zoom in on screen, some lose quality pretty quickly. That's where the more pro cameras come in. They have larger "sensors", the part that sees the picture. They require bigger lenses to work with the larger sensors, and will have lower zooms. These would be overkill for general use. I do have one of the smaller versions of those, a Sony a5100, and I like it. You also need different lenses for different purposes, and it gets very expensive. I currently only have two "kit" lenses it came with. I got it refurbished for about the same price as a better regular point and shoot. Also, although they have lower zooms, you can usually "crop" part of the picture, and view it bigger without losing as much quality.

Some cameras have wifi, so you connect wirelessly and transfer pictures. Mine does that. Also, I have an app on my Tracfone smartphone. I can set my camera somewhere, walk away, and see the live picture on the smartphone, use the zoom, take pictures, and save them instantly from the camera to the phone. I plan on getting a tripod and using it to take pictures of birds feeding.

If you'd state a budget, it would help. If you want something in between regular point and shoot, and the pro grade, Sony has the RX100 (a new version is released once in a while). Very expensive, but high reviews. I'd say overkill, but a nice camera (costs more than mine did...). https://www.flickr.com/groups/rx100/

And mine.
https://www.flickr.com/groups/a5100/

Let's start out with what you DON'T need. You don't need a high resolution camera, because for web images you need to shrink them down so they'll load fast in a browser. (This is an important detail that a lot of web designers neglect, assuming everyone has a fast internet connection.) If you're going to compress your pictures down to, say 100K pixels, it doesn't matter whether you started with a 4 megapixel or 24 megapixel image. High resolution is important for printed enlarged photos, but not for web images.

You do need some degree of zoom, so you can take wide angle shots as well as close-ups. Back with 35mm film cameras, this typically meant a zoom between focal lengths of 28mm for wide angle to 135mm for close-up portrait shots. Digital cameras don't have consistent sensor sizes, so manufacturers typically list the "35mm equivalent" focal length for digital cameras.

A important feature is "exposure compensation", which is the ability to override the camera's light meter when it is giving a false reading. (Which is the case more often than not.) For example, if you're trying to take a picture in a dark barn with a window in the background, the picture is going to be underexposed because the window will trip up the light meter. Exposure comp allows you to force the camera to open the lens aperture or lengthen the exposure time by a couple of f-stops, resulting in a correct exposure. All but the cheapest cameras have exposure compensation. The problem is that most make it difficult to access. Get a camera with an easy-to-use exposure compensation control, that way you'll actually use the feature.

I'm not a fan of digital single lens reflex (DSLR) cameras. What's the point of making a camera bigger and heavier so a mirror can fit in it, when that mirror is just an artifact of obsolete technology? I believe in a few years, serious photographers will switch from DSLR cameras to so-called "mirrorless" cameras. Mirrorless cameras are mid-to-high range cameras with professional features like interchangeable lenses, but lack a through-the-lens viewfinder.

It's important to me to have a camera that will fit in a coat pocket. You're not likely to carry your camera with you if it's big and bulky (which is the reason so many pictures are taken with cell phones). My gripe with the current crop of compact cameras is their lack of viewfinders. A viewfinder is essential for taking pictures outdoors, particularly of fast-moving objects. A few years ago, most camera makers decided to drop viewfinders from their cheaper compacts for reasons I don't understand, so if you want a new compact camera with a viewfinder, expect to spend some money.

My current camera is a Fujifilm X10. It is a beautiful, all-metal, made in Japan compact camera that looks very similar to an old Leica. It has a big exposure compensation knob right on top where you can easily get to it. It has a viewfinder. The current model of this camera is the X30. A new X30 will set you back about five bills. You can probably pick up a used X10 or X20 for a couple of hundred bucks; because they are nearly indestructible, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a used Fujifilm X-series camera.
Fujifilm X series cameras

MarkB_MI wins with the best advice. If you have a coal forge or running gas forge in your picture you have to adjust the exposure to get a decent picture. The Canon Rebel will also do you a great job. You can do very well with an advance phone except for managing the light. Once you have the file in your computer you can use whatever editing program is on your computer to improve your pictures, including adjusting size, cropping, exposure, and color.

I see a couple "deals" so I thought I'd post, not small cameras though (size and use, personal preference, some don't mind bigger, especially for "ok" cameras). They seem to be clearancing these out in some stores, I see some finding deals in Walmart, Best Buy, etc. that may be cheaper, but good luck finding them in stock cheap. If you have a store around, I'd check there for these (or any other camera). Also, Best Buy sometimes has open box, I guess satisfaction guaranteed and factory warranty. Not near a store, haven't looked how that works in store.

http://slickdeals.net/f/8776627-nik...tshop-pro-x8-319-free-shipping?src=SiteSearch

http://slickdeals.net/f/8785527-can...-lens-kit-249-98-free-shipping?src=SiteSearch

And if you don't want to mess with changeable lenses, or spend that much, for what you describe, $100-$200 range should get you a good Canon or Nikon that would work well enough.

I highly recommend my a5100, the a6000 is the higher model with more features, takes the same quality pictures and has a viewfinder, but is more expensive (about $200 more for a similar kit when I got mine). It is a mirrorless like MarkB mentioned, and VERY highly rated. Fits in the palm of a hand with the base kit lense. I don't use a viewfinder much, don't miss it, most pictures, when I had one with a viewfinder, I didn't have the camera near my face anyway. I can see mine well enough in bright sunlight. I paid a little over $400 for mine with two lenses, case, refurbished and looked exactly like new, had a low shutter count, not used much. Higher priced now....

Specs on paper don't matter much. Basically why I didn't put out spec numbers. High megapixels don't matter much, less on the low end cameras, doesn't work too well to shove a high number into a small sensor. Camera with a big sensor like mine, then it's ~ok. I'd just pick a price, look at real world pictures from matching cameras, and start from that.