February 09, 2009

camera -- macro zoom

I can't believe I missed that this was present: my camera does have a macro mode, and it's pretty darned good, for a cheap camera. Combined with manual exposure control, it's possible to get really quite decent closeups of things even using the flash. I've got four pictures below the fold, as examples.

I believe I'm going to have to read the manual to find out what other things this can do that I wasn't aware of. (I know it can take 640*480 video.)

UPDATE: Two more added.

UPDATE: This camera cost me $130, about. Kodak or Polaroid film cameras from 10-15 years ago, were there any in this price range which had remotely this kind of feature set and image fidelity? Not even close! It's no wonder digital cameras have long since killed off film for consumer use -- and for most other photography, too. Film is a niche now, and it's a niche that's continuing to shrink.

UPDATE: They did considerably improve the lenses in the newer version. In my L-18 the macro mode is limited to a range of 6 inches. In the L-19 it's 2 inches.

/images/02348.jpg

Here's Andy Jackson.

/images/02349.jpg

And here's a closeup of his eyes. Those are both from the same shot. For the first one, I reduced the whole thing to 800*600; for the second I extracted an 800*600 section out of the middle.

/images/02350.jpg

Here's Hakufu.

/images/02351.jpg

And here's her eye. Again, these are both from the same shot.

UPDATE: Here's a couple more, of Andy's friends George and Franky.

/images/02353.jpg

/images/02352.jpg

Those are considerably reduced. The quarter was actually about 1700 pixels across.

Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Daily Life at 07:47 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

1 A few years back I got what I thought would be just a little pocket point and shoot Canon SD200 with a semi-decent lens. I just wanted it for some security work at the time. I orderd a larger after market memory for it also. After I got the thing I realized I had massive overkill. With the larger memory chip it could be used as video camera not just still shots. It also had the macro, landscape, etc. modes. If they just made a comparable photo printer. The reasonably priced ones are all rape you on the price of ink jet cartridge types. I also read complaints that if you don't use the printer often enough you get nozzle clogs.

Posted by: toadold at February 10, 2009 05:44 AM (zcbXo)

2 CCDs and flash memory have revolutionized more than a few areas in the last few years.  How long before even Hollywood stops fiddling with film?

toadold, I don't do much printing anymore myself, but I'm told that it's sometimes cheaper to get it done at a place like Walmart than it is to buy the ink and paper yourself.  They apparently have kiosks where you slot your card, pick the pic, pay up, and take the freshly-printed copy out of the hopper.

Posted by: BigD at February 10, 2009 10:18 AM (LjWr8)

3 Ayup, I figured it was cheaper to go to Walgreen's photo kiosk with a flash drive or a burned DVD than pay about $0.30 a photo to use an ink jet. Of course the last time I tried that the flershinger machine at Walgreen's was out of order.

Posted by: toadold at February 10, 2009 01:49 PM (zcbXo)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Enclose all spoilers in spoiler tags:
      [spoiler]your spoiler here[/spoiler]
Spoilers which are not properly tagged will be ruthlessly deleted on sight.
Also, I hate unsolicited suggestions and advice. (Even when you think you're being funny.)

At Chizumatic, we take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately.

How to put links in your comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
8kb generated in CPU 0.0109, elapsed 0.0151 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.01 seconds, 20 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.