THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM AMERICAN BIG GAME HUNTING FORUMS


Moderators: Canuck
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Re: Anybody use game cameras?
 Login/Join
 
one of us
posted
Pay the extra $$ for a digital trail camera. A few rolls of film and developing will make up the difference pretty quick.
 
Posts: 816 | Location: Missouri | Registered: 24 May 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Tell ya what...you pay the difference, and I'll get the digi. Otherwise, can anyone make any recommendations for under $200?
 
Posts: 898 | Location: Southlake, Tx | Registered: 30 June 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I'm looking at buying a game camera. I'd like to stay under $200. Any suggestions?

Has anybody used one with success? Without success?

To be clear, I'm looking for an all-weather camera set-up to put near a likely area for game movement, not a traditional camera to take pictures of game animals...
 
Posts: 898 | Location: Southlake, Tx | Registered: 30 June 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
No need to get all stirred up. My point is that they are worth saving a bit more for and getting one for 100.00 or so more.



We have used most of the advertised trail cams over the years and never had any problems to speak of out of them, Cabela's catalog is full of them and from my experience they will all do what you need them too.



Doug
 
Posts: 696 | Location: Texas, Wash, DC | Registered: 24 April 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I would go with what Mike said and go digital. My friend uses one where we hunt hogs. We grab the camera and hook it to the laptop and instant photos! I am not sure of the model but I will find out.

Doug
 
Posts: 696 | Location: Texas, Wash, DC | Registered: 24 April 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Has anyone used such a camera for security purposes and if so what do you suggest?
 
Posts: 5543 | Registered: 09 December 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of BHW
posted Hide Post
If you only want to spend under $200.00 film is what you will get. Over the long haul the total cost of ownership with a digital will be less than one that uses film.

A couple of our members at our hunt club in SC use game cameras. They do a GREAT job of taking pictures of deer at 2:00 AM in the morning. Like I really need to know where the deer are moving at that hour.

I wonder how hunters were so successful prior to the evolution of game cameras. An old timer said is was nothing more than doing your scouting on a regular basis and knowing how to read deer sign. I equate this to kids today with electronic calculators compared to us old timers who were relegated to slide rules early on in our careers.

Progress, is it a wonderful thing? I say maybe yes, maybe no; it depends on what we are talking about.

DON'T under any circumstances buy the cheapest digital game camera you can find. It won't take long for you to become dissatisfied. Either make the needed investment in a digital or understand that you will get what you pay for, nothing more and buy a quality film camera. You are going to need to use at least 400 speed film especially if in a wooded area to keep the shutter speed up when not using the flash.

Do a search with your internet browser and compare features of 5 or 6 cameras in the same price range.

Post some of your pictures I would be interested in seeing what results you get.

Good Luck.
 
Posts: 261 | Location: Duncan, SC | Registered: 06 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Quote:

DON'T under any circumstances buy the cheapest digital game camera you can find. It won't take long for you to become dissatisfied. Either make the needed investment in a digital or understand that you will get what you pay for, nothing more and buy a quality film camera.




So true. A bunch of the "digital game cameras" have something like a tiny, 1.2 megapixel camera in them. Quality is less than stellar, so to speak.

Unless you want grainy/pixelated, hard-to-see, impossible-to-get-a-good-print images, you're gonna need to spend some money. If you're satisfied with blurry images just to get an idea of what's in the area, they "might" be acceptable.

In the $200 and under price range, stick with film. You'll get much better results.
 
Posts: 2629 | Registered: 21 May 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Russell E. Taylor
posted Hide Post
If you hunt out of state a lot, I'd recommend a good digital. I say this because... when I go hunting outside of Illinois, whether for bear or deer, it's usually on an outfitted hunt. I'm usually miles from a Wally World or any other place where I could get a one-hour turnaround on film. If I'm checking the game that's coming through my area, I want IMMEDIATE knowledge. I not only want digital, I want to be able to review the images right there, on the spot, in the field.



I guess if a guy was hunting around his own neck of the woods, taking film to Wal-Mart each day is somewhat viable.



Russ
 
Posts: 2982 | Location: Silvis, IL | Registered: 12 May 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Wendell Reich
posted Hide Post
A camera for security purposes would have to be digital and infrared (No visable flash).

I love my digital camera. I get over 100 photos per week from one camera. I will second what everyone else says ... go digital!

TT, look for "Jessies hunting pages" (He is Spectr 17 I think?). He might have plans there on how to build your own digital camera, and it might be under $200. I have not visited his page in a while, so I do not know, but it is a good place to start.
 
Posts: 6265 | Location: Dallas, TX | Registered: 13 July 2001Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I guess I'll just say that I am looking at 35mm units only.

Believe me, I know exactly the benefits of Digi over 35mm...no need to beat that horse any more.

Now, bearing in mind that we're talking about 35mm units under $200...can anybody comment on the difference between Infrared and PIR (Passive Infrared)? Some units I've looked at have flashes that they claim are good for 24 and 30 feet, respectively. Any experience on whether I can expect more, less, etc?

Thanks.
 
Posts: 898 | Location: Southlake, Tx | Registered: 30 June 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Spring
posted Hide Post
I've been using Camtrakkers for years and have found them excellent. The ones I have are their original models and I haven't tried one of their recently marketed cheaper ones. When it comes to having true expertise in this area, I don't think I would be wrong to say that they were one of, if not the pioneer in the game cam industry. If I had to guess, I would say that the difference between their original unit and the one that is half the price would be in the quality of the camera itself. I would suspect that the electronics are the same. It would't hurt for you to call and ask them about that.

If I was going to buy a cheap game camera, I would at least get it from someone that has clearly demonstrated they know what they are doing with these things.
 
Posts: 1445 | Location: Bronwood, GA | Registered: 10 June 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
We have members building their own digitals for just over $200.00. They are using 1 to 3 megapixel cameras. Pics are awesome. You can check out the spring gam cam contest pics to see the quality. The forum is at



http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/index.php?showforum=50



Leaf River, TrailMAC, Cuddeback, Penn's Woods all make good digitals. As usual, you get what you pay for. Stealthcam has too many complaints and returns for me to be comfortable recommending it. That and it sucks batteries like Michael Moore at a church picnic.



We have several 35mm and digital models in our online store. The Leaf Rivers are on backorder for a week or two more. Also if you have the coin, Penn's makes a great video game cam. You supply the Camcorder and buy just the housing and timer/sensor electronics all ready to go.



https://www.jesseshunting.com/osCommerce/index.php/cPath/37_48



There are two types of sensors for game cams.



Active IR is a laser beam shot between two units, the animal has to break the beam to make it take a pic. Great for no false pics and you set it to the height of target animal. Drawbacks are more expensive, more gear for squrriels and coons to chew up, heavier to lug around and a little tricky to align for setup.



Passive IR is what most game cams use. They detect heat changes along with movement to trigger camera. Cheaper, lighter, less gear and easier to set up. Drawbacks are the false pics if you get a warm limb on a cedar moving in the wind. You have to move them sometimes if sun or background triggers false pics.



Most people are converting over to digitals since the price dropped to $300 for a good one. Immediate pics and less time bugging a 1 hour photo tech plus pic developing costs are overwhelimg reasons for the switch.
 
Posts: 424 | Location: Kali-fornya via Missouri | Registered: 23 June 2001Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia