Digital cameras....

[Lucky13]

Looking to replace my current camera with one slightly better, more pixel (better than 7.1) etc... Being as far from a "Pro" as humanly possible, more of "shot from the hip" kinda shooter, it doesn't have to advanced or anything. All and any suggestions are most welcome!

Would this be a halfdecent contender?

Display: 2.4" LTPS Screen
Dimensions: 95x 57 x 20mm
Weight: 111g (With Battery)
93g (Without Battery)
Color: Black
Lens: f=6.1 to 18.3mm F2.8 to 4.8
Image sensor: 1/2.5" CMOS
Max. Pixel: 12.0 Megapixel
Camera: Format: .JPEG (EXIF)
Resolution: 4000x3000 / 3648x2736 / 3264x2448 / 3072x2304 / 2560x1920 / 2048x1536 / 1600x1200 / 640x480 / 2048x1536 / 1600x1200 / 640x480
Image Quality: Super Fine / Fine / Normal
Auto Focus
8x Digital Zoom
Anti-Shake Function
Auto Face Detection
Macro Mode
Video Recorder: Format: MPEG4 (AVI)
Resolution: 640x480, 320x240
5x Digital Zoom
Photo Album: Crop
Rotate
Protect
Video Player: Format: AVI
Digital Output: USB 2.0 / PictBridge
TV Out Format: NTSC / PAL
Function: Protect

PC Interface: USB 2.0
Data transfer: USB Cable
Setting / Function: Flash Light: Auto / On /Off / Red eye reduction
Scenery: Auto / Night Portrait / Night Scenery / Portrait / Scenery / Sport / Party / Beach / High
White Balance: Auto / Daylight / Tungsten / Fluorescent / Cloudy
ISO: Auto / 100 / 200 / 400
Exposure: -3.0EV to +3.0EV
Sharpness: Normal / Sharp / Soft
Self-Timer: 10 / 5 / 2 seconds
Auto Power Off: None / 1 / 2 / 3 Minutes
Frequency: 50Hz / 60Hz
Internal Microphone
Default Setting
Format Memory
Storage capacity: Internal: 32MB
External: Support of SD/MMC card up to 8GB
Power: Lithium Battery 700 mAh
Standard Voltage 3.7v
Support USB charging only

 

[comiso90]

Lots to consider but here are some thoughts:

megapixel
More Megapixels dont always translate into better quality photos. There's a lot to be said about using bigger image chips which give better performance in low light conditions. I'd much rather have a 7 megapixel camera with larger chips/better low light that a 10 mega pixel with smaller chips.

storage
check the price of additional media... some storage chips are very expensive

power
Some cameras can use off-the-shelf batteries which can be nice if you are in a pinch. consider a camera that can use rechargeable AA's . Extra proprietary batterys are expensive

Also consider water resistant/shock proof... i have a great little Olympus water resistant/shockproof camera.

.

.

 

[Wurger]

Also I would be looking for a camera with many optical zooms ( not those digital)

 

[comiso90]

Yes Wurger... good point.

.

 

[Lucky13]

Around the 8-9 megapixel then?

 

[evangilder]

It also depends on the lens it uses. The better the glass, the better the quality of photo, regardless of the megapixel.

 

[Colin1]

It also depends on the lens it uses. The better the glass, the better the quality of photo, regardless of the megapixel.

One of my colleagues is into cameras too
He said of the digital stuff, 'get one from a company who made the old-style SLRs, they'll have the background expertise on the lenses - the electronics is two-a-penny'

That sound about right?

 

[comiso90]

It also depends on the lens it uses. The better the glass, the better the quality of photo, regardless of the megapixel.

"Being as far from a "Pro" as humanly possible",

He's talking about a point and shoot though.... it seems all consumer level under $500 cameras have comparable glass..... true?


.

 

[Wurger]

That's true. I think that a camera with a matrix of 8-9 Megapixels and six or more optical zooms will be enough.But the possibility of changing lens would be nice as well.

 

[evangilder]

He's talking about a point and shoot though.... it seems all consumer level under 500 cameras have comparable glass..... true?


.

Yes and no. If you buy, for example, a Canon or a Nikon point and shoot, they will have a better lens that an off-brand name because they have the expertise and the knowledge to get the best photo for the cost.

You can also check the reviews of cameras you are looking at at places like:
Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ
Digital Camera Reviews and News

That's a good place to see what others who have them think about them.

 

[Glider]

My guess would be that that is about right. My wife uses a very small point and shoot camera made by National Panasonic which don't have a background in camera's, but the lens is a Leica lens and they don't come much better than that.

In fact Leica sell exactly the same camera badged Leica for another £100.

 

[comiso90]

I think it's like Ford Trucks and Ford cars.... two completely different manufacturers with in the same company. I bet 90% of the point and shoots share many of the same manufacturers. Its only a Nikon cause of the name stamped on it. It has nothing to do the professional line...

 

[Colin1]

I bet 90% of the point and shoots share many of the same manufacturers. Its only a Nikon cause of the name stamped on it. It has nothing to do the professional line...

Well, OK
it's a point of view but I don't think betting is the same as knowing
If I understood my colleague correctly, the electronics driving the cameras are all pretty similar across the board in terms of quality. It's the lenses that make the difference between, say, a good camera and a very good camera. Companies like Nikon will bring their lens-making expertise to the table in competing with other branded and non-branded outfits; to the discerning camera buff this is a real competitive advantage that means that as far as he's concerned, the non-brands won't get so much as a look-in.

 

[comiso90]

Well, OK
it's a point of view but I don't think betting is the same as knowing
o the discerning camera buff this is a real competitive advantage that means that as far as he's concerned, the non-brands won't get so much as a look-in.

Yes I chose the word "Bet" cause I dont claim to know for certain - but I know a ton about marketing and I know how items are brought to the consumer and the importance of branding. I dont always trust labels.

"competitive advantage" "Discerning camera buffs" huh?

... the thread was started with a discussion about amateur cameras


"competitive advantage" "Discerning camera buffs" arnt in the equation... of course the lens makes a difference for them. In my definition of "competitive advantage" and "Discerning camera buffs", they wouldnt be buying a low end camera anyway...

The 12 cameras on the shelf at Costco all priced pretty close are all pretty much the same....
Many review sites out there are sponsored...


Just my thoughts...
.

 

[RabidAlien]

Most of them have the same manufacturers, yes...but still, with cameras, stick with a known brand. Canon/Nikon are the two top contenders (boils down to body-style, really...they're both excellent with similar features). Kodak makes a good upper-end point-n-shoot (their cheap ones are...well...cheap. The upper end use Leica or Zeiss lenses, its been a few months since I sold my last camera so I forget which). Sony is just overpriced with a proprietary memory card, and Olympus/Fuji are worse, with really crappy lenses in their affordable models. Casio/Panasonic, comparable to the Kodaks. HP, much as I love their printers and computers, should never have gotten into cameras.

Basically....find a good Canon or Nikon with 10-12 Mpix, a good zoom (the higher the optical, the better the actual zoom. Digital zoom is nothing more than cropping and enlarging, which REALLY screws up your resolution), image stabilization if they have a good sale on one, and pick up a few extra memory cards to go with. Batteries are another consideration. Those sleek and sexy slim-line cameras use rechargeable LiOn batteries. Yes. They're rechargeable. But...if you forget to charge it the night before and it runs out halfway through Bubbles' pole-dance, you're screwed. The larger-sized cameras (hey, they're just big-boned!) usually use AA batteries. You can use rechargeable AA's, but you are not going to shoot much before you have to recharge. Standard AA's last longer, and the lithium AA's last a frikkin LONG time. The advantage...you can find AA batteries sold pretty much anywhere.

 

[Lucky13]

WHAT would you buy, in the lines up to 100 quid ($200)??

 

[pbfoot]

Just a suggestion I prefer having a camera with an eyepiece rather then using one with the LCD screen for 2 reasons , If I take pics outside you often have trouble seeing what your dhooting with the LCD sdreen because of the relection of the sun and the LCD sucks up more battery power

 

[RabidAlien]

PB brings up another good point.

I'm a Canon guy, so here's my picks:
PowerShot A2000 IS Digital Camera

Canon PowerShot A1100 IS digital camera

PowerShot A1000 IS Digital Camera

I like the 2000, for the zoom. The other two are great, and $50 cheaper. (IS=Image Stabilization)

 

[rochie]

Well old boy you wont go far wrong with the fuji finepix S1000fd, Terry and i both have one.
FinePix S1000fd Zoom Digital Camera from Fujifilm UK

 

[evangilder]

I had a Canon PowerShot S50 for a few years. It still works, just the battery won't hold a charge anymore. It takes really good photos. I know Nikon has a CoolPix line. While I am a Nikon guy, I haven't used their point and shoots, so I can't speak about them. The PowerShot line is good from what I have seen. I would venture to guess the CoolPix line is good as well.

LCD preview is a pain when shooting outside, so it is always handy to have a viewfinder as well. It sure can save some aggravation.