dpb

This things battery has gone ( it never was good ) and costs a tenner to replace.
I think the whole thing was 300 mortal quid and iv used it about 10 times , its really solidly put together as well ,
do i really just sling it in the bin ?
Its 3.2 mp and new 7 mp one is £25

Jamie

What make is it ?

dpb

Kyocera -

Jaybird-UK

Bin it in my opinion, the photos will be poor compared to even a cheap digital camera of today.

For anything I'd deem worthy of taking a photo and keeping as a memory of, I'd prefer a decent picture.

Can you post a photo taken from said camera? depends on quality of the image really.

Jamie

Never heard of that make before

I have a cheap Olympus for sale if you want it ?

Kieran_Burns

iTrader: (1)

Really?

I guess I better throw the camera that took this:


and this:



away.

Jaybird-UK

Keiran, did you take those on a 7 year old Kyocera?

Kieran_Burns

iTrader: (1)

10 year old Olympus e-10

Jaybird-UK

Not really comparable then is it? I had a low mp Kyocera and it was very poor

dpb

Wow thats some nice 'shots' lol

I tried firing it up and it wont even turn on ( without being plugged into the wall anyway )

its 'koycera finecam S3l' , id send it to my african step nephews - but even so id be embarrased at how dire the rechargable battery would be ( even new) , and they dont have computer either afaik

Kieran_Burns

iTrader: (1)

I know, but it was a tongue in cheek repsonse to how 10 year old cameras can't be as good as modern ones. The lens on the Olympus is good enough that the 'limited' 4 megapixel CCD still captures good pictures.

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

In fairness Kieran, those jagged rocks are a little on the jpeggy side; Is that the compression setting or processing?

Nice pic though

IMO; I wouldn't replace an old expensive camera with a cheapy. Whilst the CCD maybe better, the lens optics and processing play an important part in getting good pictures.

Like my phone is 8 megapixels with AF. Whilst it "can" do some pretty impressive picture. Most of the time it messes them up; The AF often gets its knickers in a twist and of recent, the shutter sound/response does not correspond to the actual shutter operation resulting in blurred photos (even when it appears to have taken the pic ok, I go back to review and find its screwed up ...that's Samsung for you ). My first compact camera (Canon A70 - 3.2MP) would blow it away in terms of quality.

If the new cheapy camera has crappy autofocus and processing; then many pics will be spoilt. But if the old camera also had crappy optics and processing, then your not gaining anything apart from even bigger crappy pictures.

The Panasonic DMC-FS33 I bought for my mum to replace her old Canon A70 is a very impressive for a little point and shoot....but it costs a hell of alot more than £25....pays your money IMO.

Kieran_Burns

iTrader: (1)

Post processing Al - the original is in RAW format. That's a low quality jpeg of the original with some quick HDR slapped on it

I'm thinking about entering that image in a competition, so I'll need to spend some time getting as high a quality image as I can get with the HDR sorted.

The original is here: http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z...osspasstop.jpg (again lower quality jpeg but without the HDR fun)

scunnered

iTrader: (1)

If its only a tenner, just get a battery. I'm sure a good online search could bring the price down further. If Kyocara make cameras are as good as their ceramic knives, then surely it would be worth it.
I have an old Olympus 3.2Mp digital camera from way back in 1997 (about £500). I'd say the pictures are every bit as good as my latest camera. Sometimes better. It has a proper lens, that's why. I don't use it much now, but only because its too big and bulky to fit in my pocket. I'll never get rid of it though.