Well my old Kodak, like her predecessor of the same brand, has lived a nice long life and provided me with ease of use and in her prime, above average pics during point and shoot use. But battery life has taken a huge hit lately, and I would like moar megapixels (something like 10). Any suggestions? Inexpensive, easy to use for up close pics, and general point and shoot tasks are my requirements, but huge pluses for me would be ease of editing after uploading pics, and perhaps the ability to make resized copies of multiple pics.

1/4/2009 7:46:22 PM

need a number for price range..

1/4/2009 7:55:31 PM

Sony DSC-W120
Canon PowerShot SD1100 IS

1/4/2009 8:06:47 PM

^ Any reasons for those two suggestions? I mean, I enjoy the short and to the point responses I get in TT but without some more info it makes them pretty tough to work with in this situation.

^^ Well it needs to be affordable. I would love to find what I need between $150 and $300.



Honestly I am primarily going to use it for business purposes, including pics for eBay and the like, but being able to operate with one hand and fit in a pocket are huge benefits as well. That brings me to an important reason why I chose my current camera. The camera before was a Kodak with the little telescopic lens like most cameras have these days. Worked perfect till one day it tried to open while in my brother's pocket. Getting it to open up after that was possible but a chore. The camera I found to replace it is a dual lens camera- meaning no telescopic lens, stays flat so no more pocket problems. I have no idea if these are still available or not, but it was a great feature.
Kodak Easyshare V570 (current camera)
http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=7402&pq-locale=en_US&_requestid=11379

[Edited on January 4, 2009 at 9:01 PM. Reason : tghg]

1/4/2009 8:59:29 PM

canon g10

1/4/2009 9:09:40 PM

I like my new Pentax W60. (~$300) Picked it for its versatility/durability. Highlights:

5X 28mm Lens
10megapixels
Macro and Supermacro (less than 1cm)
720p Video footage for entirety of SD storage space (supports HC-SD)
Waterproof
Dustproof
Editing software on camera is very nice and offers a wide range of shooting options.



[Edited on January 4, 2009 at 9:35 PM. Reason : pic ]

1/4/2009 9:28:09 PM

This probably won't sway your decision, but I still prefer a long zoom over the resolution in a camera. I can attest to the fact that my Sony Cybershot DSC-H2 (6MP 12x optical zoom) pictures are less noisy than DSC-S700 (7.2MP 3x Optical Zoom). I was using both in a non-zoomed in situation.

[Edited on January 4, 2009 at 9:34 PM. Reason : :]

1/4/2009 9:33:19 PM

^ I've got an H7, I really love it, but after carrying it around I can understand wanting a slim pocketable one.

I highly recommend the Sony W-series

1/4/2009 10:18:33 PM

RE: resolution- honestly I have taken some pretty damn good pics with my little 5MP cameras, so thats not a priority as much as the rest. But the low light qualitites of the current v570 are next to nothing in its old age, and its getting harder and harder to take a decent picture without going outside.

1/4/2009 10:38:29 PM

http://www.dpreview.com/

Look at the very top for the 4 comparison tests.


Panasonic has some GREAT point and shoots out right now.

1/4/2009 11:19:54 PM

i have the Canon PowerShot SD1100 IS and it is great. Very compact, takes great pics etc etc

I'm impressed to compare pics with it next to my SLR.. they are very comparable

Also I bought a waterproof case for it when I went to the Bahamas and got some great underwater pics

1/5/2009 10:30:55 AM

^ still that cannon is 3x optical. plus the cost of a water case.

if i were you I would check out DPreview as suggested and pick out a nice panasonic or nikon with a lens higher than 4x.

1/5/2009 5:55:33 PM

number of megapixels isn't nearly as important as sensor size

1/5/2009 6:01:21 PM

ding ding ding ^

1/5/2009 6:23:50 PM

My Fuji FinePix F40fd (compact point and shoot) takes some amazing pics, especially in low light and closeups as well. Overall, it takes superb pictures with amazing colors and vibrancy. I hardly ever use the auto setting, and keep on experimenting with the several shooting modes for color richness and faithfulness.

I have set up about 15 pics I took in the summer in the UK as my screensaver which keep changing every few seconds. People passing by my office keep remarking how great the pics are and where I got them!

When I went to buy a camera last year, I was totally set on a Sony (because I had a Sony before). The guy at the store told me Sony was overrated for cameras, and to get one from a company that pretty much makes cameras only.

He told me the best way to compare them in a few seconds: look at the floor of the showroom (wooden) through the camera LCDs of various brands on the 'auto' setting, and see which one shows the color faithfully. Then take a pic and compare again.

The Fuji displayed colors the most faithfully, so I went for it.

That might not be the most technical way, but it worked for me.

Actually, it is not mine technically speaking. It was a wedding gift I got for my wife. I am going to be buying a camera in the next 2 months, and I would like to get a Fuji, but I need a waterproof camera, so my choices are limited.

Olympus makes several waterproof/shockproof/freezeproof models, so I will go with them. The Pentax up there is the only other brand I have seen that makes waterproof ones, and I just saw it now for the first time.

So either Olympus or Pentax, then.

Quote :

"number of megapixels isn't nearly as important as sensor size"

Where is that mentioned on cameras? In the manuals? My Fuji has a "Super CCD" sensor.

Oh wow, I didn't know my camera was so famous!!!

http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2007/06/05/Fujifilm-FinePix-F40fd/p3

He says the exact same things I said in this post! I had no idea it was apparently class-leading! And even wikipedia talks about the patented and superb lens:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_ccd <--- read carefully, if you decide to go with a Fuji.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujifilm_FinePix_F-series

Quote :

"The Fujifilm FinePix F-series of digital cameras models which have been called "revolutionary"[1] in terms of low-light performance in the compact class. Due to low image noise and very natural color even at very high ISO settings from Fujifilm's Super CCD sensor, the F-series cameras were the first compact cameras able to consistently take pictures in low light that could be considered "printable". Previously, the consumer digital camera market had not particularly targeted high speed or low light shooting without flash except through image stabilization technology, which at the time had only been implemented in bulkier prosumer models with powerful zoom capability."

Oh how I wish Fuji made waterproof models

P.S. Another great feature is a shooting mode that takes 2 pics upon one click: one without flash, one with! Simply utilitarian!

Do other cameras have that?


[Edited on January 5, 2009 at 9:26 PM. Reason : ]

1/5/2009 9:23:35 PM

Sorry for another post, but just want to separate this:

http://6mpixel.org/en/?p=34

Quote :

"Compare your BIOS Pixel images with those taken with some reference cameras In order to judge the quality of your camera you can find images taken with several cameras as a reference. Please keep in mind that the pixel count does not say anything about the image quality of a camera. you can find 10 or 14 megapixel cameras that creat much worse images compared to a good 6 megapixel camera. Our internal reference consumer camera is the Fujifilm FinePix F31fd which not available anymore. That is a 6 Megapixel camera that was introduced on Photokina 2006 with an image quality no other compact camera has reached until now September 2008. Here are the images for comparison taken at ISO 100 to 3200. FujiFinepixF31fd.zip (15 MB) The Panasonic DMC-LX3 is the first compact camera (with quite a large sensor for a compact camera) that was introduced with the manufacturer statement that the pixel count (10 Megapixel) was selected on a low level in order to increase the image quality. It is the first one that comes close to the quality of the F31fd."

CLick to read more.

Also, check this http://6mpixel.org/en/?p=31 y'all. Try it out with your camera!

Also http://digitalkamera.image-engineering.de/

BTW, did anybody on here know all this about the Fuji FinePix series?

1/5/2009 9:37:08 PM

It still won't stack up to the most basic of consumer digital SLRs.

I will also point out that benchmarks, image quality tests, etc are meaningless with regards to real-world usage.

1/5/2009 11:09:13 PM

my gf's Sony Cybershot DSC-N2 does a pretty darn good job.

1/5/2009 11:26:39 PM

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ5: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmctz5.asp

for the money ($250-275), i think this is probably the best consumer-friendly, feature-packed camera on the market, at the moment:

- 9.1mp (1/2.33" sensor, 0.28cm2 where higher is better)
- 10x (280mm) optical zoom (digital zoom is shit, ignore it)
- HD video (1280x720)
- Leica optics (quality glass matters at high zoom and macro)
- image stabilization (second only to canon's, but not by much)

amazon has 323 user reviews with a 4.5/5...that's pretty damn good: http://tinyurl.com/8683up

my biggest complaint about panasonic cameras are their low-light performance...anything above ISO 800 (this one maxes out at a ridiculous ISO 6400) is going to be grainy no matter what camera you use, but the panasonics, in my experience, are just as bad at 400 as the others are at 800...does this really matter? in most cases, i'd say no, because if you have to be that high, your pictures are going to suck in the first place

4x6 prints will be perfect (of course...anything since 3mp, IMO, should produce quality 4x6's)...i've seen a number of 8x10's produced from this camera that look amazing (especially outdoor/site-seeing type shots...low-light shots are okay in 8x10, just not up close)

i am a self-professed panasonic fanboy, though, because they consistently put out quality products with quality components for a reasonable cost



[Edited on January 6, 2009 at 9:25 AM. Reason : image]

1/6/2009 9:07:25 AM

panasonic camera are no doubt fantastic cameras. but they are still about twice as expensive as the two i listed, both would be more than enough and fantastic picture quality for a simple point & shoot. the W120 has 4x optical and i got it for <$120 it also has image stabilization and HD video

though another suggestion would be the panasonic LZ8

both the W120 & LZ8 took the top awards this year:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q408budgetgroup/page15.asp

[Edited on January 6, 2009 at 11:38 AM. Reason : /]

1/6/2009 11:36:22 AM

^ they got best in the "budget" category...both of them have smaller sensors than the TZ5 (0.24 vs 0.28) and the TZ5 (10x) has twice the optical zoom of the LZ8 (5x) and more than twice the W120 (4x)...also, i don't see HD video format listed on the sony's info page

don't get me wrong...they're both fine cameras and are definitely good buys for the money...the panny has leica glass and the sony has zeiss, so image quality should be comparable...i (personally) think that the panny's image stabilization beats out sony's hands down (where canon beats them all)...were it between those two, it would come down to the sony's larger aperture range and the panny's better zoom and image stabilization for me to make my choice

in my personal opinion, though, the twice-as-far optical zoom and larger sensor is worth the premium in price...add the HD video capability that the other two don't offer (at least, i don't see it listed), and the extra money is definitely worth it

*shrug*

1/6/2009 11:50:42 AM

so Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ5 huh?

how bad is it in low light? I like to take dark pics and brighten them with software, hows that work out?

1/7/2009 12:10:53 PM

the venus IV engine handles noise much better than the older one (found in the TZ3, the TZ5's predecessor)...noise isn't really a problem until about ISO 800, and even then, unless you're making anything larger than 4x6 or displaying very high-resolution pictures on the computer, it's not going to be very noticeable

this is a problem with all P&S digital cameras...all of them have noise at higher ISO levels, it's the nature of the beast...the old(er) pannys were notorious for being worse than the competitors at ISO 400, but anything less than that and they're right at the top (the VAST majority of your pictures will be at 200 or 100...i don't think most small cameras come with ISO 80 like the prosumer models do)

now, though, the in-camera processing does a pretty good job, right at average (i don't know which brand is the best, but they're very close these days)...also, IIRC, the TZ5 actually has a 10.x megapixel sensor that they only use a portion of (9.1mp) in order to reduce noise, as well

here's the image quality summary from http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_panasonic_lumix_dmc_tz5_2.php:

Quote :

"The Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ5 produced images of very good quality during the review period. The Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ5 dealt extremely well with chromatic aberrations, with limited purple fringing effects appearing only in high contrast situations. The built-in flash worked well indoors, with little red-eye and adequate exposure. The night photograph was excellent, with the maximum shutter speed of 60 seconds allowing you to capture plenty of light. Anti-shake is a feature that sets this camera apart from its competitors and one that works very well when hand-holding the camera in low-light conditions or when using the telephoto end of the zoom range. Macro performance is average, allowing you to focus as close as 5 cms away from the subject. The images were a little soft straight out of the camera at the default sharpening setting and ideally require some further sharpening in an application like Adobe Photoshop, as you can't change the in-camera setting. The 1/2.33 inch, 9.1 megapixel sensor used in the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ5 produces noise-free images at ISO 100 and 200, with ISO 400 also looking good. ISO 800 does have some visible noise and softening of fine detail, and ISO 16000 is even noisier, but overall the DMC-TZ5 improves on the previous DMC-TZ3 model."

[Edited on January 7, 2009 at 12:35 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2009 12:34:17 PM

Quote :

"twice-as-far optical zoom and larger sensor is worth the premium in price"

twice-as-far, for twice-the-price.

i mean for crying out loud you can buy a freakin' D40 for <$350 and it's a DSLR

1/7/2009 3:30:48 PM

Quote :

"twice-as-far, for twice-the-price. i mean for crying out loud you can buy a freakin' D40 for <$350 and it's a DSLR"

i love this argument...it can't be much less valid:

1.) a D40 is 4 times the size
2.) a D40 is 5 times the weight
3.) a D40 is not a point-and-shoot (specifically what he's looking for)
4.) a D40 at $350 is the body only (or, at best, the body with a virtually useless less kit lens)
5.) a D40 that has the same RANGE of functionality as the TZ5 would require $1k and a backpack to carry it around in
6.) a D40 does not offer image stabilization for a reasonable amount of money for the OP's purposes, nor does it take HD video

what else do you have to offer? because your comparison is total and complete shit

1/7/2009 3:51:54 PM

except you're trying to justify a $100 price jump for 10x optical zoom and HD video and i'm justifying another $100 price jump for a DSLR, completely different tier of camera... you can't compare them.

i would not spend $250 on a P&S when i can get a DSLR (D40 for $315 w/ lens) (D60 for <$400 with lens) that gives you complete control over your photos unlike a P&S, and while he's not asking about a P&S, he's not asking about HD video either.

your attempt to compare a P&S to a DSLR is laughable.

but hey, if you want to pay twice as much for 10x optical zoom and image stabilization, be my guest.

but hey, i'll give you these:
a) it does fit in the OP's price range
b) it will fit in a pocket and operable with one hand

i just think the <$150 are better bang for buck, i mean that's the only thing we're disagreeing on is best camera for the money. i am not doubting that the panny is a good camera.

[Edited on January 7, 2009 at 5:28 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2009 5:11:13 PM

just since this thread is recent. this is a little off topic, but has anyone heard of Sonic Cameras (dot com)

An ad for them showed up on the gmail ad bar when I registered for a digital SLR photography course a few days ago. I went to their website and they had amazingly good prices on a d80 kit I wanted.

basically, they are a complete scam operation. they took my credit card info, and sent me a "confirmation" email, but when you call, you get put on hold for 15 minutes, then hung up on. There are a ton of websites that a simple google search could have shown me BEFORE i bought from them

just wanted to post a warning. this place HAS to be a mob front. they take your credit card info, cancel your transaction, then apparently charge your card 6 months later from some european country.

1/7/2009 6:33:17 PM

Quote :

"4.) a D40 at $350 is the body only (or, at best, the body with a virtually useless less kit lens)"

You can take great pictures with the kit lens.

1/7/2009 6:42:32 PM

^^ http://www.resellerratings.com/store/Sonic_Cameras

Overall Customer Satisfaction Rating

Six-Month Rating: 0.64 / 10 Six-Month Reviews: 157

Lifetime Reviews: 266


Lifetime Rating: 0.85 / 10

1/7/2009 6:50:20 PM

1/8/2009 12:59:01 PM

Quote :

"you can't compare them ... your attempt to compare a P&S to a DSLR is laughable."

exactly my point, dumbass...this thread is about point-and-shoot cameras...bringing a DSLR into the mix is absolutely fucktarded (though i'm not surprised you did it, nor am i surprised that you then admitted how stupid it was for you to even bring it up...it's amazing how often your fingers get away from your brain)

i would think that, with as much time as you spend in tech talk, you would realize by now that you pay for quality in a smaller size...am i saying that the TZ5 is comparable to a DSLR? of course not...but there's a reason a DSLR is as big as it is - you can't get that type of quality in something smaller without spending $alaska

he can spend $75 on digital camera that will do what he wants...but the quality won't be there...the cameras you listed are by no means bad cameras...but they are most definitely inferior to the TZ5 (at the very least, you DO realize that they offer a smaller sensor, right?)

Quote :

"but hey, if you want to pay twice as much for 10x optical zoom and image stabilization, be my guest."

FWIW, buy.com had the TZ5 (in blue only) on sale, for the second time in 2 weeks, for $239 with no shipping or taxes...that's only ~$110 more than the sony w120 or panasonic lz8

and yes, i think the better sensor (than either), more than DOUBLE optical zoom (than both), better image stabilization (than the sony), and HD video feature (which neither offer) are well worth the premium...but then, i daresay i do more with the pictures i take than the "average" consumer...it really comes down to what he wants to spend...if he wants a basic point-and-shoot, then the features and "better thans" i listed do him no good and so they are of no value (just like your dumb DSLR reference)...if he thinks he might eventually care about quality images and/or HD video, it's worth the premium since the other two can't compete

Quote :

"You can take great pictures with the kit lens."

i never said you couldn't...but for the MASSIVE hit in weight and size, and the very fact that the DSLR will provide him absolutely NO benefit based on the requirements he listed, it's ridiculously limited and of no value (in this case)

[Edited on January 8, 2009 at 3:06 PM. Reason : double quote?]

1/8/2009 3:05:57 PM

i was making a comparable in relationship to price, all i said is that for X amount more you might as well get a DSLR, i never compared the features like you did.

nor did i call you fucktarded or a dumbass.

get a grip dude.

and it's funny you keep bringing up 10x optical zoom and HD video and neither are in his priorities, he only mentions taking picture for ebay and close-up pictures and indoor pictures... all of which the W120, the SD1100 IS, and the LZ8 do just fine.... while you and i both like large optical zooms (i have an H5 for that reason w/ 12x optical) it doesn't mean he needs all that stuff.

[Edited on January 8, 2009 at 3:27 PM. Reason : .]

1/8/2009 3:15:51 PM

i guess we should start saying what he REALLY needs, then, don't you think?

he's obviously not a techie or a photo enthusiast, so really, he doesn't NEED 10mp, despite what he thinks, right? you and i know the sensors are crap, anyway, so he might as well get a 6mp nikon L11 or something and save himself another $30-40

hell, if his "resized" copies are only 4x6, he can get away with a $50 4-5mp and not notice any difference in quality...by those standards, your $120-130 suggestions are MORE THAN TWICE as much as he "needs" to spend

i suppose my mistake was pointing out the best quality, most feature-packed and versatile camera for the money...but we both overshot the mark in what he "needs"

if he EVER thinks he might want to take decent video or get anything of quality to hang on a wall, your suggestions are unacceptable...if not, then you're right in that he should save the money...i'll see what i can find on super-cheap, barely-do-the-job units, though, since that's what we've both decided he really needs

[Edited on January 8, 2009 at 4:41 PM. Reason : .]

1/8/2009 4:40:39 PM

hell I've got an SD550 I believe it is that I've never really used..lost the battery charger.. I'd sell it cheap and it'd more than do the job.

Interested? You'd have to find a charger on ebay or something..

[Edited on January 8, 2009 at 4:51 PM. Reason : r]

1/8/2009 4:48:56 PM

^^you just really want to beat this into the ground don't you.

fwiw, ALL the cameras i mentioned are some of the bestselling cameras on the market. they all produce quality digital prints that "yes" (gasp!) they can be put on a wall up to an 8"x10" with superior picture quality

dude and seriously you need to read up on MP vs. print size, in terms of picture size, any 6MP can do QUALITY 8x10's just fine, in relation to the 9MP camera you are suggesting, it's only 1.8MP different than a W120, the only difference being the sensor size, both would print 8x10's at a superior level, anything over an 8x10, and i'd question why you aren't using a DSLR.

Quote :

"Inexpensive, easy to use for up close pics, and general point and shoot tasks are my requirements"

show me where he gives a shit about video. the W120 even has a feature for auto-sensing macro shots, you can't get any easier.

a) i would never mention anything less than $80 as it probably isn't name brand or have major design flaws
b) ALL the cameras i mentioned take excellent pictures, read the reviews
c) he did mention $150-$300 range, so in that regard we are both on the money with our recommendations

he does not need a cheap bottom of the line camera that craps out on him again. if you read the OP you'd know this.

the problem is, like i said before, you and I just have a difference of opinion on what features are "worth the money" and which one's are not, let's just leave it at that and let him decide.

[Edited on January 8, 2009 at 5:04 PM. Reason : .]

1/8/2009 4:57:26 PM

Ok, so I'm going to be in the market for a new camera in the next couple of months. I know I can wait and let the high-tech stuff come down in price.

I'm looking to get an advanced point-and-shoot for the fiancee. An SLR would be nice, but I'm trying to find something that's not as heavy or as bulky for her. She's more likely to take casual pictures than she is to try and do some professional level stuff.

I understand that optical zoom > digital zoom.

I know that having 8+ MP is more than enough for pictures unless I'm trying to create a giant poster picture.

I'm initially leaning towards Canon and Nikon, brand wise. I keep hearing something about quality glass (Leica, or Zeiss). How am I supposed to tell if a camera possesses that type of glass? Is it labeled? Is it brand specific?

Thx for teh halp!

1/9/2009 1:05:58 AM

^ what do you mean by advanced? point-and-shoots vary in their features, but when someone says "advanced," i assume that means things like manual f-stop/ISO/focus/white balance control, which you will be hard pressed to find (all of them together, at least) in a small-form point-and-shoot

there are cameras out there like the sony H5 and panasonic FZ30/50 that are DSLR form factor, with all of the manual controls and a better sensor than you'd find in a point-and-shoot, but they ARE bulkier than a pocket camera, albeit smaller than a DSLR (and you don't have to carry around lenses)

the next level down are cameras like the panasonic FZ28, which offers all of those features (i think, i'll have to double check)...it's larger than a pocket, but a LOT smaller than a DSLR, and still offers 18x (~486mm) OPTICAL zoom...i'm sure there are similar super/mega/ultra-zoom cameras out there by other manufacturers, but i don't have any experience with them

i don't know if anyone will argue the point, but i'd say quality glass on a point-and-shoot ONLY matters at either end of the zoom spectrum: macro and full-optical-zoom shots...past those two circumstances, all are pretty much the same...leica only works with panasonic and zeiss only works with sony...i don't recall if nikon has a specialty-glass (nikkor?) line of point-and-shoots, but that's because i've never liked how nikon sets up their menus, so i try to avoid them...i like canon well enough, but i'm pretty sure they don't offer a specialty-glass line

as for megapixels, you can ignore them on a specific basis...in that, if you have two cameras and the difference is 1-2mp, don't let that be a determining factor...as mentioned above, the sensor is what's important...if you have a 8mp camera and a 10mp camera (as is the case with the panasonic FZ30/50 that i use) and the sensor is the same size (which they are), there is no real-world difference...the larger the sensor, the more it's able to capture

Quote :

"you just really want to beat this into the ground don't you."

the only thing i want to beat into the ground is to point out that you're a hypocrite in how you judge your contributions versus others'...you bring DSLR into the mix as a reference point, despite the fact that it has absolutely NO bearing on this thread...a DSLR wasn't an option from the OP, so your comparison means absolutely nothing...when you bring it up, though, you seem to think you contributed something of value, but you assert that my comparison of features, form factor, weight, and size has no value...when the truth is that your original point was about as valid as me comparing the price of a digital camera to how many cantaloupes he could get for the same price

no one can make the OP buy one or another model...all of the ones mentioned in this thread are good, and he's not going to go wrong with any of them...it really just comes down to what he knows he needs now, what he thinks he might want/need later, and how much all of that it worth monetarily at the moment...the only thing you and i are disagreeing on is how much your opinion of unrelated products is worth in the context of this thread

[Edited on January 9, 2009 at 8:37 AM. Reason : .]

1/9/2009 8:31:15 AM

I was googling for a good sword/cock fighting picture but can't find one

so let this message serve as one

1/9/2009 8:55:15 AM

I guess when I meant "advanced P&S", I really meant a "megazoom" camera such as the Canon SX10 IS or the Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ18, Nikon P80, Olympus SP 570, etc.

Bigger than a pocket camera but smaller and lighter than an SLR. I'm trying to find the best of both worlds. Hopefully the happy medium doesn't result in a crappy camera, where I was better off going one route or the other. I know the SLR has superior picture quality, but I don't want to deal with a bulky camera.

I hear a lot about ISO. What is that exactly? It seems that the smaller the ISO number, the better quality of the picture. I'm guessing that SLR cameras can have high quality pictures even at higher ISO numbers. I'm trying to understand the significance of taking a picture at a higher ISO number when a smaller ISO number could yield a better quality photo.

1/9/2009 11:34:14 AM

^^^you got called out on comparing the DSLR features so don't even go there, i already backed up my points. for the record, i never was suggesting a DSLR to the OP, it was meant to put your price point in perspective, in response to YOUR POST, irrelevant to the OP yes, but not irrelevant in regards to performance for the price (value). if you read my post in context, rather than reading it a serious suggestion like you've CLEARLY DONE. then it makes sense. so just drop it. you attempts at insulting me continue to FAIL.

hypocrite? you don't even know what an advanced point & shoot is, you probably haven't heard of "SLR-like" either, both are industry terms for cameras and mean the same thing.

i already gave my recommendations to the OP - Sony DSC-W120, Canon PowerShot SD1100 IS, Panasonic LZ8

^i'd recommend a Sony DSC-H5, or H2, or H7, all of Sony's "SLR-like" advanced point & shoot cameras are great. i own an H5 and my dad has one know as well, it's super easy to use and the picture quality is outstanding, all have 12x-15x Optical Zoom and 6-8MP depending on model. they are all compatible with 58mm filters and lens with the adapter ring

ISO is equivalent to film speed, to what equates now in digital cameras as sensitivity. basically the ISO setting is how sensitive the image sensor is to the amount of light there is in the scene. typically the more light, you'll want the lower ISO number. typically with lower light you'll want a higher ISO number for a longer exposure. the result of most ISO settings in digital cameras are seen in what they call noise (vs. grain in film) it has to do with the gain of the sensor and the output of the "lightness" of the output, having the ISO number too high with too small of a sensor and you'll get noise. having the ISO set to the right number in a scene can reduce the amount of noise in a scene. in general you are right, you get the best image quality by using the lowest ISO possible

[Edited on January 9, 2009 at 12:10 PM. Reason : .]

1/9/2009 11:41:15 AM

Quote :

"you got called out on comparing the DSLR features so don't even go there, i already backed up my points."

responding to something is not the same as "backing up" your points...your point was something of no intrinsic value to the topic at hand costs more (but close!) to something else whose value is very relevant...that's just talking, there is no "point" you were making

Quote :

"for the record, i never was suggesting a DSLR to the OP, fit was meant to put your price point in perspective, in response to YOUR POST, irrelevant to the OP yes, but not irrelevant in regards to performance for the price (value)."

the problem is that you STILL don't realize that the cost/value comparison of a DSLR to a point-and-shoot is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT...weight/size alone throw the DSLR out the window as a valid comparison, even as a reference, since those two aspects alone make your comparison absolutely useless...since the DSLR is not even remotely an option, then how can you possibly see it as a valid comparison? you really don't get it, do you? the cost/value of size and weight is completely subjective and, in this case, the associated hit in cost/value (in time, extra equipment, extra space, etc.) of a DSLR is undefinable...as such, you can't use it as a comparison...jeebus, just go ahead and admit that since a DSLR is irrelevant, your retarded reference is pointless...miniaturization cost money, kid

Quote :

"if you read my post in context, rather than reading it a serious suggestion like you've CLEARLY DONE. then it makes sense. so just drop it. you attempts at insulting me continue to FAIL."

it's a shame you see them as insults instead of what they really are - an attempt to educate in a way you desperately need...you should really understand how to categorically compare items/issues of likeness

Quote :

"hypocrite? you don't even know what an advanced point & shoot is, you probably haven't heard of "SLR-like" either, both are industry terms for cameras and mean the same thing."

i don't? do you ever spend any time in the DSLR thread (message_topic.aspx?topic=391741)? haha, i think you should take a look at that and take a look at my work before you start acting like your opinion is of ultimate value in this thread

i'm not saying that you don't raise (some) good points...but i'll gladly stack my work (using my FZ30) against anything you put out...i am by NO means a professional, but i know what i'm doing and i can prove it...where's your shit, kid?

Quote :

"I guess when I meant "advanced P&S", I really meant a "megazoom" camera such as the Canon SX10 IS or the Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ18, Nikon P80, Olympus SP 570, etc."

i, personally, have no experience with any of those but the FZ28 (the successor to the FZ18)...it takes great shots at both ends of the spectrum (macro and full zoom)...all of the controls EXCEPT the manual focus are intuitive...i really dislike the focus because it's not really done by hand - it's all done in camera using the thumb control, rather than a focus ring around the lens (like SLRs)...i'm FAIRLY sure only the FZ28 (out of your list) has "quality" glass, but i don't know enough about the models to be able to say for sure

[Edited on January 9, 2009 at 12:31 PM. Reason : .]

1/9/2009 12:24:00 PM

Quote :

"i don't? do you ever spend any time in the DSLR thread (message_topic.aspx?topic=391741)? haha, i think you should take a look at that and take a look at my work before you start acting like your opinion is of ultimate value in this thread i'm not saying that you don't raise (some) good points...but i'll gladly stack my work (using my FZ30) against anything you put out...i am by NO means a professional, but i know what i'm doing and i can prove it...where's your shit, kid?"

i have posted in the DSLR thread with my pictures, so don't come after me with this. you insult me by talking down to me, i agree with everything you have posted except for what's the value in an expensive P&S vs. what someone needs or wants. so don't judge my photography ability or knowledge by the mere fact that i disagree with you on best bang for buck

message_topic.aspx?topic=391741&page=49#10924827

i'll post some more recent ones from 2008 later.

[Edited on January 9, 2009 at 12:53 PM. Reason : .]

1/9/2009 12:47:54 PM

^^^to SuperDude - Of the cameras you listed, you're probably going to get the most feedback on the Panasonic (as quagmire has already done) or the Canon (or a suggestion on comparable Sony models as prospero has made) since they're the more popular brands, but Nikon and Olympus make some fine products as well.

For my money, I'd take a long look at the Canon SX10 IS. I have one of its direct ancestors (the S3 IS) and while I'm not a serious photographer or even a "serious" hobbyist, I'm a big fan of the camera. No, it doesn't have Leica/Zeiss/"quality" glass, but it's responsive, easy to use, the menus and buttons are well designed, and battery life is above average plus it uses common AA's instead of some proprietary brick. And above all that, it's a fun camera to shoot with and, to my untrained eye, produces great images. The SX10 will, knowing canon's "if it ain't broke don't fix it" philosophy to UI and looking at the specs, continue all these things, plus you get a very versatile range--20x zoom on the long end (upgrading from the same 12x zoom lens the S2, S3, and S5 all used) and a 28mm wide-angle on the other end, which is really useful to have and a new feature on this series. Panasonic definitely makes a competitive product, and does have higher-quality glass, so I would definitely consider them too. But when I upgrade, which will probably be sometime this year, the SX10 is going to be first on my list. Check it out. Hopefully it will get reviewed in the near future by dpreview.com, always a helpful resource.

1/9/2009 12:51:52 PM

fwiw, canon always puts out some of the best quality images even though they don't use proprietary glass

also the H5 uses AA's, the H7 & H9 i believe use Lithium-Ion

to be fair, i should point out that you can get a DSLR for the same price as an SLR-like but like, but like quagmire02 has kindly pointed out some people want to keep it simple

[Edited on January 9, 2009 at 1:02 PM. Reason : .]

1/9/2009 12:58:09 PM

Quote :

"you insult me by talking down to me, i agree with everything you have posted except for what's the value in an expensive P&S vs. what someone needs or wants. so don't judge my photography ability or knowledge by the mere fact that i disagree with you on best bang for buck"

i talk down to you because you brought up something of NO relevance and act like you've contributed something...DSLR, IN THIS THREAD, is not an option, at all, and therefore has no bearing on the discussion...at all...in any way

i'm okay with us disagreeing on bang-for-buck value...i am not, however, okay with you being a complete and utter ass for no reason whatsoever...DSLR is not relevant, and so, therefore, it had no place in this thread...you made a stupid comparison and you should learn from your mistake, that's all...eventually, you'll get it and i certainly won't hold it against you until you do

Quote :

"i'll post some more recent ones from 2008 later."

you should...i'd love to see more "prosumer-grade" photography in there

Quote :

"fwiw, canon always puts out some of the best quality images even though they don't use proprietary glass"

i'm not arguing it, but i'd like to see some TRULY comparable examples (meaning, equivalent models, specs, subject matter, lighting, etc.)...as i noted, i don't think that it much matters unless you're macro/telephoto end...in which case, i have specifically noticed a difference in quality between those of "quality" glass and canon...was it major? no...but then, if i can notice it, then i'd rather choose the better option

it's been a few years since i compared them, when i was picking out my FZ30...so maybe things have changed and, at those extremes, maybe there's no difference, or less than it used to be

at last check, canon still makes the best IS (though the margin has closed)...and i suspect they do really well in low-light tests...i'd really like to see a comprehensive comparison for modern models, though

Quote :

"also the H5 uses AA's, the H7 & H9 i believe use Lithium-Ion"

this is definitely something you may want to consider...the convenience of AAs can't be ignored, since you can buy them pretty much anywhere and they're cheap...but li-ion is lighter, more compact, and you'll get more shots per charge...you can get li-ion batteries on the cheap from ebay (i ended up getting 3 high-capacity ones for my camera for $9 shipped, so i could take them out in the field with me)

1/9/2009 2:12:18 PM

when i need the pro's of lithium-ion (particularly cold-weather performance) i do sometimes buy the lithium-ion AA batteries for my camera.... but it's at a loss since they aren't rechargable like my standard Ni-MH

Quote :

"at last check, canon still makes the best IS"

i don't think that's changed although panasonic's IS is pretty much at the same level now.

i should have clarified the glass statement, i meant when it came to P&S, i couldn't tell much difference (except the obvious, like you noted macro/tele).

1/9/2009 2:20:41 PM

Quote :

"when i need the pro's of lithium-ion (particularly cold-weather performance) i do sometimes buy the lithium-ion AA batteries for my camera.... but it's at a loss since they aren't rechargable like my standard Ni-MH"

i had forgotten about the cold-weather performance...also, i know that ni-mh technology has changed a bit recently (in that, you can get the ni-mh batteries that have a 10-12 month shelf life with minimal loss), so they might be better than i remember, but they used to be awful in high-drain devices like cameras compared to alkaline and li-ion

i think that, overall, canon still dominates the p&s market...if you go with a canon, DEFINITELY get an "IS" model (do they even offer ones without it, anymore?)

1/9/2009 3:05:25 PM

Some of the lower-end models in the SD series and a good chunk of the entry-level A series models don't have it, but as far as I know the nicer ones (upper-end SD's, nicer A's, all of the S/SX/G series) have it.

There are only 3 current canon models without it, and two of those appear to be older models who have been superseded by one with IS and will soon be dropped.

[Edited on January 9, 2009 at 5:16 PM. Reason : research]

1/9/2009 5:13:28 PM

bttt

there's a lot of [words] in here

looking something to give my gf. basic point and shoot. decent quality and, most importantly, something that lasts. video is not important at all. budget of about $200. suggestions?



btw, she got me one of the olympus 1030 sw waterproof ones and i really like it so far. ruggedness is more important than awesome quality for me because it'll spend a lot of time in the canoe/boat/side of the river.

3/3/2009 11:06:24 PM

I've been looking at the Canon PowerShot A2000 IS. It seems pretty decent from what I have read.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830120286

3/3/2009 11:32:58 PM