So I have always loved to take pictures. Now its been a long time since I have done that and would love to get back into it. All I have is my is my 2.0 megapixel camera on my cell. I would like to stay in a budget of less than $200-$250 for a digital camera. I know there is a lot of choices out there. I just need some ideas of the better ones for the price. Any ideas would be appreciated. I want to take some pics of downtown and stuff.
- 264
how about the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ8 or Fuji FinePix S700 or something similar
i would go to a store that carried both, and pick which is easier to use. these cameras are the bridge between the standard digicam & the expensive DSLRS = digicam ease of use, but with the ability explore photography with manual controls, image stabilization, wide angle & telephoto reach, the option to attach wide or zoom lenses, etc, etc.
and see if you can find a store that doesn't charge a restocking fee if you don't like what you buy. i know best buy charges one once you open it.
i would go to a store that carried both, and pick which is easier to use. these cameras are the bridge between the standard digicam & the expensive DSLRS = digicam ease of use, but with the ability explore photography with manual controls, image stabilization, wide angle & telephoto reach, the option to attach wide or zoom lenses, etc, etc.
and see if you can find a store that doesn't charge a restocking fee if you don't like what you buy. i know best buy charges one once you open it.
The Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ8 is one of the best ultra zoom cameras on the market. It certainly doesn't skimp on features: you get a 12X Leica lens with optical image stabilization, full manual controls, widescreen movie recording, snappy performance, and conversion lens support. Not bad for under $300, eh?
http://www.dcresource.com/buyersguide/
The Fuji FinePix S700 offers a budget-conscious alternative to existing megazoom consumer digitals like the Canon PowerShot S3 IS and the Sony CyberShot H5. It's a fairly bulky camera that packs a 10x optical zoom lens and a nice 7.1 megapixel sensor. With full manual control over all shooting settings, you can take advantage of the S700's hefty ISO and shutter speed ranges to ensure you get clear, clean images. The camera also offers a trio of features to automate the process of getting a great shot. A selectable software-based image stabilization system will automatically choose the correct ISO/shutter speed combination to eliminate blur. A new flash system called iFlash promises to auto-adjust flash strength based on ambient lighting, avoiding washed out foregrounds and dark backgrounds. And the optional Dual Shot Mode will take two shots in quick succession, one with flash and one without, saving both for your later review. With a MSRP of $250, the S700 is a great value for enthusiasts who want to dip a toe in the megazoom pool without tossing in their wallets.
http://www.digitalcamera-hq.com/digital ... tails.html
- 11K
Go with the Canon SI 2S. Heck, you may be able to get the 3S for $250 by now. I bought the 2S this past summer and it's a great camera. It also does quality video with stereo sound. We recorded up to 8 minutes which filled the memory card we had. I think you can go longer with a larger card. Also, I ended up buying a wide-angle lense for about $40 - you can add a number of lenses to the 2S/3S. It also uses 4 AA batteries which is fantastic since you can buy them anywhere in a pinch. With the rechargeables we have we can get ~400 pics. Otherwise, we just got a Canon SD1000. It's been great because it's so small we actually take it with us just about everywhere. The other Canon won't easily fit in a pocket. The 2S is 5MP and the SD1000 is 7MP, but I wouldn't worry about anything above 5MP - the lense and processor quality will determine the quality of your pics.
Like a laptop, small parts are expensive. If your focus, as far as looking for a camera goes, is on having a small camera you can carry around with you, that's cool, but your sacrificing a bit of quality. Small parts cost more than larger electronic parts. If it's small, and cheap, then the quality probably isn't all that great.
Those somewhat bigger cameras, which almost look like SLR, are typically good buys, in my opinion. They tend to be a little more expensive, but are typically much better in quality than those small silver cameras.
Also, look for optical zoom, and ignore digitial zoom.
Sony, Canon, and Panasonic are the best brands, imo. Nikon is good if you're looking for an SLR.
Those somewhat bigger cameras, which almost look like SLR, are typically good buys, in my opinion. They tend to be a little more expensive, but are typically much better in quality than those small silver cameras.
Also, look for optical zoom, and ignore digitial zoom.
Sony, Canon, and Panasonic are the best brands, imo. Nikon is good if you're looking for an SLR.
Well how important is portability? The Canon SD870 is a bit above your price range at $300, but the quality is great and you can take it anywhere.
http://www.digitalcamera-hq.com/digital ... views.html
"The Canon Powershot SD870 IS is a solid, respectable camera that won't get shaken up. The integrated Image Stabilization ensures that your photos will come out crisp and clear, no matter how jittery your hands might be. The SD870 IS is currently the highest rated, highest reviewed camera in each of the categories it is measured in (Canon, Ultracompact, and 8 Megapixel). That's hard to argue with.
Quick Specs: 8 Megapixel, Image Stabilization, 3.0-inch LCD display, Lithium-ion Battery"
http://www.digitalcamera-hq.com/digital ... views.html
"The Canon Powershot SD870 IS is a solid, respectable camera that won't get shaken up. The integrated Image Stabilization ensures that your photos will come out crisp and clear, no matter how jittery your hands might be. The SD870 IS is currently the highest rated, highest reviewed camera in each of the categories it is measured in (Canon, Ultracompact, and 8 Megapixel). That's hard to argue with.
Quick Specs: 8 Megapixel, Image Stabilization, 3.0-inch LCD display, Lithium-ion Battery"
- 667
www.dpreview.com has some good insight on digital cameras.
I currently use both a Sony Cybershot W50 and a Panasonic Lumix FX01, both are good. They both are small enough for the pocket and quick to turn on and shoot a picture. I also have a non-digital Canon Rebel SLR.
I've owned many digital cameras in the past and I find that Sonys reliable and are very durable for the amount of abuse it can take. I take a lot of pictures and I've dropped my W50 many times and it now has scratches and is cracking, but it still works wonders. My previous Sonys (Cybershot P72 and Cybershot N1) also were durable until they got too old.
Like Xing said, Canon, Sony, and Panasonic digitals are good recommendations.
I currently use both a Sony Cybershot W50 and a Panasonic Lumix FX01, both are good. They both are small enough for the pocket and quick to turn on and shoot a picture. I also have a non-digital Canon Rebel SLR.
I've owned many digital cameras in the past and I find that Sonys reliable and are very durable for the amount of abuse it can take. I take a lot of pictures and I've dropped my W50 many times and it now has scratches and is cracking, but it still works wonders. My previous Sonys (Cybershot P72 and Cybershot N1) also were durable until they got too old.
Like Xing said, Canon, Sony, and Panasonic digitals are good recommendations.
I'll second the Canon S2 IS. I've got it and it's great. More of the features of a DSLR without the price of the body and lenses (manual exposure, auto bracketing, etc). You can get some lenses and filters for it as well. I have a telephoto, wide angle and macro lenses, and I've found filters on ebay but haven't bought any. My only complaint would be that it doesn't shoot .RAW
- 11K
Damn - I got my letters and numbers mixed up. It's is indeed the S2 IS. I believe the S3 IS is out and relatively cheap now - though it doesn't have much in addition to the S2.
- 145
I wanted to thank you for the tips on cameras but I no longer how the funds to purchase one. Now its going wait until next year and be less than $150. With the ideas that you have given and the brands you have suggested I will see if I can get something good in that range. Thanks again.
Alright well I mentioned to my mother that I wanted a camera and she bought me one. It is a GE A730. I just got it today. So we will see how good it is.
Congrats! That camera will be serviceable for you. It's amazing the pictures you can take just by studying composition and exposure, regardless of the camera.
- 362
I found the advice helpful though. Thanks for all the great thoughts. I am starting to do more web work with pictures and video, etc., and I want something that I can take with me and keep in my truck, but that still does a good, professional job so that I can post pics to the web for my various projects. So, thanks for the recommendations. Perhaps I will pass them along to my wife as Christmas ideas.
Why? I didn't think a 5MP camera would be considered good quality...at least not for taking anything other than portraits, party pics, pics of the kids, etc. For taking distance shots, i.e. buildings, I wouldn't think you would want anything under 7MP, but I know very little about cameras, so educate me please, why isn't more MP better?Grover wrote:The 2S is 5MP and the SD1000 is 7MP, but I wouldn't worry about anything above 5MP - the lense and processor quality will determine the quality of your pics.
jlblues wrote:Why? I didn't think a 5MP camera would be considered good quality...at least not for taking anything other than portraits, party pics, pics of the kids, etc. For taking distance shots, i.e. buildings, I wouldn't think you would want anything under 7MP, but I know very little about cameras, so educate me please, why isn't more MP better?Grover wrote:The 2S is 5MP and the SD1000 is 7MP, but I wouldn't worry about anything above 5MP - the lense and processor quality will determine the quality of your pics.
I think it's based more on more MP more $$$. 5 mp is good for 8x10" prints and such (from personal experience). If you really feel the need to make an 11x17 print, then you'd want to get about 10mp in size.
Mostly I'd be looking for other features on the camera rather than it's mp rating first.
jlblues wrote:Why? I didn't think a 5MP camera would be considered good quality...at least not for taking anything other than portraits, party pics, pics of the kids, etc. For taking distance shots, i.e. buildings, I wouldn't think you would want anything under 7MP, but I know very little about cameras, so educate me please, why isn't more MP better?
The Megapixels in those consumer cameras are all marketing. All you need is a 4 MP camera.
If you are printing out 4x6, you can print out great ones with a 2MP camera. These photos WILL look better than consumer film cameras.
The only reason you would want to go with bigger MP cameras is because those cameras usually have better features than their older counterparts. Quality will be the exact same, but you might have Fast shutter response time, faster start up time, ect.
The lens is important, but the size of the CCD or sensor is perhaps just as important when considering image quality in consumer cameras. Camera manufacturers say that they can squeeze more megapixels into the same size sensor and not hurt image quality by improving the DSP or digital signal processor. Quality DSP's are nice, but you can't make lemons from lemonade. FYI, Canon's DSP is called DIGIC which is on its third iteration.jlblues wrote:Why? I didn't think a 5MP camera would be considered good quality...at least not for taking anything other than portraits, party pics, pics of the kids, etc. For taking distance shots, i.e. buildings, I wouldn't think you would want anything under 7MP, but I know very little about cameras, so educate me please, why isn't more MP better?Grover wrote:The 2S is 5MP and the SD1000 is 7MP, but I wouldn't worry about anything above 5MP - the lense and processor quality will determine the quality of your pics.
In any case, the information below may be too uninteresting to most people because it is somewhat technical. In this case, just read camera reviews before you buy. In the end, it's the picture that matters!
If you happen to like technical camera knowledge, I encourage you to read the information below which is from this website: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori ... -pixel.htm
Also, check out the table of Megapixels vs. Maximum Print Size. You'll also want to take cropping into consideration as well. If you crop, you effectively lower the number of megapixels and thus decrease maximum print size accordingly.
DIGITAL SENSOR SIZE: NOT ALL PIXELS ARE CREATED EQUAL
Even if two cameras have the same number of pixels, it does not necessarily mean that the size of their pixels are also equal. The main distinguishing factor between a more expensive digital SLR and a compact camera is that the former has a much greater digital sensor area. This means that if both an SLR and a compact camera have the same number of pixels, the size of each pixel in the SLR camera will be much larger.
Why does one care about how big the pixels are? A larger pixel has more light-gathering area, which means the light signal is stronger over a given interval of time.
This usually results in an improved signal to noise ratio (SNR), which creates a smoother and more detailed image. Furthermore, the dynamic range of the images (range of light to dark which the camera can capture without becoming either black or clipping highlights) also increases with larger pixels. This is because each pixel well can contain more photons before it fills up and becomes completely white.
Does this mean that it is bad to squeeze more pixels into the same sensor area?
This will usually produce more noise, but only when viewed at 100% on your computer monitor. In an actual print, the higher megapixel model's noise will be much more finely spaced-- even though it appears noisier on screen (see "Image Noise: Frequency and Magnitude"). This advantage usually offsets any increase in noise when going to a larger megapixel model (with a few exceptions).
- 11K
Don't forget that getting the max optical zoom is important. That extra 6MP does bupkis if you use digital zoom.
Grover wrote:Don't forget that getting the max optical zoom is important. That extra 6MP does bupkis if you use digital zoom.
True.
NEVER USE DIGITAL ZOOM!
It may seem like a cool feature when you're shooting, but in reality you're just limiting what you can do later on the computer.
It just crops the image and zooms in, reducing the resolution.
Thanks. I guess I should have grabbed that 5x optical, 6 MP camera for under $100 when I saw it...