camera connecting & software installations

  • Thread starter Thread starter RustyM
  • Start date Start date
R

RustyM

Hi- I have a few basic questions. I am trying out 2 new cameras. The Kodak
easyshare C300 & the Polaroid PDC 4055.( I like to use the scanner & camera
wizard to download pics)
These 2 cameras require the camera to be ON before I connect by USB in order
to start any kind of transfering to the pc. WHY?
See, I am curious. I have a cheapy Vivitar 3345 dig.cam that I plug in on
or off, and It starts the transferrring process right away and so on.
Next question, as stated, I am trying out those 2 cameras above. I did NOT
install their software because I dont need the driver part nor editing
software. my pc recognized the both cameras instantly when I plugged in the
USB to it. Is there any reason why I would need to install the software? The
instructions say to install it before ever plugging in the camera. I've done
great with my Vivtar 3345 without ever having installed the cd to install
software.
Last question. My cheapy (1 yr old)Vivitar 3345 takes clearer, sharper
images on the first try than any of these two (or any so far that I have
tried)- does the lens thing have something to do with it (has an F2.8
lens)?? which i heard was supposed to be really good.
I dont really plan on printing alot of pics. I use the pics for inventory
purposes at my family store. but, I have compared my vivtar with many others
and am not impressed.
 
Plugging in a camera or other USB device with the device turned on may be
needed if the USB interface in the device requires power from the device to
operate or initialize properly. Plug& Play is the usual reason.

Sharpness, clarity, etc. from one camera to another. It may be that the
lower resolution camera has more accurate focusing under your conditions.
Or, some sort of image optimization is taking place in the camera. If
windows camera support meets your needs, by all means use it. Generally,
software that comes with most cameras is designed to store and index
pictures, as well as make other tasks simpler for an occasional user of
cameras and computers.

I only install such software to see if anything included is actually useful,
such as "stitching" pictures together..
 
I don't know anything about these cameras but I will try.
Vivitar is a 1.3 MP camera. This is fine if what you want is simply to
display the image on a computer screen. You may get a "decent" print at
something like 3 x 5. Yes, F 2.8 is good. The lowest the F number is for a
lens the better. But this is only one factor in a lens. The lower the F
number is, the more light can pass through and hit the sensor. This
obviously is good, you don't need as much light when you take a picture of
an object, but it does not indicate how sharp the lens is.
The Kodak is 3.2 MP and Polaroid is 4.2MP. The more MP you have the larger
the print you can make. You should be able to make a very good 6 x 4 or 7 x
5 prints with these and an average 10 x 8. Also, these pictures should be
sharper on your screen. But then, maybe you have a relatively poor screen
and the increase MP of these cameras is not delivering better quality.
Difficult to say but there is quite a jump between 1.2 and 3.2 or 4.5 MP and
it is hard to believe that you can't see a difference. Have you tried taking
a picture of the same scene, outside on a sunny day? It is very hard for me
to believe, that in this price range, the optical quality of the lenses are
very different. But the MP sure are different and you should see a
difference.
As for software installation, different manufacturers take different
approaches. Sure you don't need their software to download pictures because
XP has the driver. However, if you want to use the manufacturer's software
to download pictures (and many have such) then follow the directions.
Usually they tell you to install the software first.
 
THanks Chuck and Yves for your input-it really helps me understand things.
just one comment on what Yves asked.
You wanted to know if I have tried taking a picture of the same scene using
the different cameras. Yes. I did several times. & different times of the
day too. I too am amazed as how the Vivitar 'beats' those two cameras
mentioned. plus, i have tried others in the past & still like the sharpness
of the vivitar. Just like there are pros, there are cons.The vivitar has
hardly any features & no LCD screen. ANyways, I would have liked to have
shown you examples of the pics I took so that you can see what I am talking
about.
As far as my pc screen, gee, I dont know if I have a "relatively poor
screen" as you mentioned. My monitor is not flat screen but the CRT kind ( i
think that is how its called)- what is the best resolution for the pc (just
curious)
Thanks again for the knowledgeable posts. Cheers!


Yves Alarie said:
I don't know anything about these cameras but I will try.
Vivitar is a 1.3 MP camera. This is fine if what you want is simply to
display the image on a computer screen. You may get a "decent" print at
something like 3 x 5. Yes, F 2.8 is good. The lowest the F number is for a
lens the better. But this is only one factor in a lens. The lower the F
number is, the more light can pass through and hit the sensor. This
obviously is good, you don't need as much light when you take a picture of
an object, but it does not indicate how sharp the lens is.
The Kodak is 3.2 MP and Polaroid is 4.2MP. The more MP you have the larger
the print you can make. You should be able to make a very good 6 x 4 or 7
x
5 prints with these and an average 10 x 8. Also, these pictures should be
sharper on your screen. But then, maybe you have a relatively poor screen
and the increase MP of these cameras is not delivering better quality.
Difficult to say but there is quite a jump between 1.2 and 3.2 or 4.5 MP
and
it is hard to believe that you can't see a difference. Have you tried
taking
a picture of the same scene, outside on a sunny day? It is very hard for
me
to believe, that in this price range, the optical quality of the lenses
are
very different. But the MP sure are different and you should see a
difference.
As for software installation, different manufacturers take different
approaches. Sure you don't need their software to download pictures
because
XP has the driver. However, if you want to use the manufacturer's software
to download pictures (and many have such) then follow the directions.
Usually they tell you to install the software first.
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top