looking for a new camera probably under $200
#12
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: titusville, PA
Posts: 267
JMAN thanks for the info, about the other m65, very helpful, a question for you about your came, you say that it does take IR pictures during the day in the woods? Just curious cause that is why I am looking for a new cam cause the is all my I40 was doing pretty much ;-( the D55 is looking better and better, the cuddyback capture, what is the warrenty on them? how is customer service?
#13
I know there alot of guys who like the Cuudebacks but after my experience with them, I would never buy another. First of all there is a 30sec delay between triggers that can't be overcome because it has no multi-shot option. It can't take video if that's important to you. Another feature it lacks is a battery life indicator. It would really help to know when you are in the field to be able to know how much battery life is left before you leave it out there. The sensing area is so narrow that it won't take a pic. unless the animal is directly in front of the camera. Cudde knows this has been a problem for years and they are now calling this; image centering technology. What a load of bull. They are fast triggering but I don't care how fast a camera is, it can't take a picture of what it can't see. The pics were crisp and clear but many times they had a purple or yellow tint to everything. I never had any experience with their customer service but I have read on other forums that it is terrible. If you want to stick with white-flash, as I do, the choices are limited, especially in the higher end cameras. Hope this helps.
Blessings.....Pastorjim
Blessings.....Pastorjim
Last edited by PastorJim08; 07-12-2010 at 08:51 AM.
#14
I want to try one of the new Bushnells that are handsized, they look really cool and spec nice also. As of now, I have only ran Moultrie in digitals...and they have been good, just slow...gotta angle the camera the right way towards the trail. Also, before that, it was Stealth cam 35mm which seemed bullet proof. But for the money, moultrie is good...i would still like to try a bushnell over a cuddie.
#16
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,926
Different Needs
I am not looking for a picture to put in National Geographic as much as I am looking for a decent picture and information JMAN
I'm looking for a first camera for a scouting hunter, and not a Vogue Magazine photographer. If I paid three or four hundred, I'd expect more. But I'm not one to let one of those babies get put all alone in the woods.
So far I'm looking for as little light as possible at night for deer and possible hunters. Enough camera speed to catch sight of a moving deer. Cheap enough; good enough to get a night ID. Thanks for the post.
I'm looking for a first camera for a scouting hunter, and not a Vogue Magazine photographer. If I paid three or four hundred, I'd expect more. But I'm not one to let one of those babies get put all alone in the woods.
So far I'm looking for as little light as possible at night for deer and possible hunters. Enough camera speed to catch sight of a moving deer. Cheap enough; good enough to get a night ID. Thanks for the post.
#17
I plan on checking out the new predator traileye IR. Cabelas has them for 199 and according to predators website the camera has some pretty impressive specs for the money. As PastorJim08 stated cuddebacks arent worth the money. It amazes me what their advertising team is capable of, taking a down fall of their camera and make it sound like its proprietary technology. Another thing about the Cuddebacks, I had alot of problems in the morning with dew forming on the lens so everything it takes a picture of is foggy.
#18
I'm looking for a first camera for a scouting hunter, and not a Vogue Magazine photographer. If I paid three or four hundred, I'd expect more. But I'm not one to let one of those babies get put all alone in the woods.
So far I'm looking for as little light as possible at night for deer and possible hunters. Enough camera speed to catch sight of a moving deer. Cheap enough; good enough to get a night ID. Thanks for the post.
So far I'm looking for as little light as possible at night for deer and possible hunters. Enough camera speed to catch sight of a moving deer. Cheap enough; good enough to get a night ID. Thanks for the post.
Just a thought really.
#20
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,592
hunterojc: Checking your times when the pictures were taken and the location of setup, it appears you were fortunate to get a camera that does not have to be out in direct sunlight to obtain a color picture. I have read a few posts that there camera didn't work that way. I hope your camera keeps performing well. The pictures look good. Thanks for sharing.