boomana Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 I seem to have lost my camera. It was quite old and not very good anyway. I'm in the market to get a new one. Wants: Ease of use. I'm not much of a photographer, but would like to be able to quickly, easily take a pic without much fuss and bother. Small size and fairly durable. Can drop in my purse without fear (my purse is actually very neat with no random debris lying about the bottom). Not expensive. Since I have no plans to use it often, I see no need to spend big bucks on this. I'm looking at $100-300. I've been looking around at cameras, and there are hundred that seem to fit my want list. I'm trying to narrow down the choices, so if anyone has any suggestions, I'll take them.
jinp6301 Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 I havent tried many cameras but I like the one I have (Panasonic Lumix LZ8) but that seems to be replaced by the Lumix LZ10. DCRP Review: Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ10 The only downside (or upside) is that you'll need rechargable AA batteries + charger
Torpedo Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 I've owned two Canon Ixus (in USA are the "digital Elph") and have been very pleased with them. Somthing like this would fit your needs quite well. They're very portable and resistant, take decent pics... Another great option, albeit a bit above your target budget, are the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS3S. They use Leica lenses and take great pics, better than Canon's IMHO. A friend of mine owns one of these and is very pleased. His other camera is a "big" Canon EOS, can't recall the model, and when he needs portability he takes the Panasonic without much regret I suppose the photo experts in here will give you much better advice
guzziguy Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 I had bad luck with a Canon P&S. It had to go back once for repair under warranty (still have to pay shipping) and then failed again just after warranty. I replaced it with a Panasonic and have been using it since. So I also recommend the Panasonic. They are great for everything except night photography.
Grahame Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 Go to your local Costco. See what takes your fancy. If you don't like it after a while, take it back. Repeat until satisfied. And remember MOAR pixels ain't necessarily better. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/technology/personaltech/13basics.html Giz Explains: Why More Megapixels Isn't Always More Better - Digital Cameras - Gizmodo
Cankin Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 another happy Canada P&S user here, the optical image stabilizer works really well
agile_one Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 Vicki ... Canon and Panasonic have the best P&S cameras. Specific recommendations for your needs from those lines would be: - Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS42 (great value, compact size) - Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZR1 (wider zoom range, image stabilization, but top of budget) - Canon SD780 IS - Canon SD1200 IS Overall, I like the Panasonics better. As others have said, if you have time, go to big box place and check for yourself. Hopefully they have stock in what you are interested in. If you want to wait, we can do some camera shopping at the 12/4 meet.
Cankin Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 another happy Canada P&S user here, the optical image stabilizer works really well Canada? Canon? sorry, I meant Canon this should be my stupidest of the week
guzziguy Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 I highly recommend getting image stabilization. Having it makes for much better pictures. At least it does in my shaky hands.
blessingx Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 I agree with the Pana Lumix recommendations, though usually point to the DMC-FS series. Or DMC-LX3 if you want to increase the budget. Pick by size and zoom requirements. Only downside is they tend to get grainy at higher ISOs before Canon. On only picture quality I'd pick Canon, but p+s about more than just quality. If expecting lots of low-light scenarios likely Fuji should be added to the list. And pick up an Eye-Fi card. Like a good camera phone it's a game changer.
boomana Posted November 7, 2009 Author Report Posted November 7, 2009 How does the Panasonic do in low light conditions? The Lumix DMC-ZR3 is $276 and the Lumix DMC-ZR1 is $232 right now on Amazon. What the heck is an Eye-Fi card?
dcpoor Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 staples will have some good deals on the canon sd1200 and sd780 starting tommorow. Starting 11/8: Canon Powershot SD1200 IS (other deals too) ------- SD1200 is $100 or $105 AC and after $50 Gift card Rebate - OR as low as $80 for some - SlickDeals.net Forums
Grahame Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 What the heck is an Eye-Fi card? Eye-Fi memory cards: wireless photo and video uploads straight from your camera to your computer & the web.
jinp6301 Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 What the heck is an Eye-Fi card? Eye-Fi is a 2 / 4GB SD memory card that has Wi-Fi capabilities. All products can wirelessly upload JPEG photos from a camera to a local computer running Microsoft Windows or Mac OS X. Basically, you can upload your pictures onto your computer without using wires
Torpedo Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 How the hell can they fit the Wifi Tx/Rx into the card? Unbelievable the things they invent
guzziguy Posted November 7, 2009 Report Posted November 7, 2009 How does the Panasonic do in low light conditions? The Lumix DMC-ZR3 is $276 and the Lumix DMC-ZR1 is $232 right now on Amazon. I haven't checked cameras in 3 or 4 years or so, but typically Canon has better low light performance than Panasonic. If you are willing to post process, they are about the same. I suggest that you read reviews in the better review sites and see what makes sense for you. Here are the review sites I like: Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ Steve's Digicams - Main Menu Unbiased Digital Camera Reviews and News | Digital Camera Resource Page
aerius Posted November 8, 2009 Report Posted November 8, 2009 Personally I'd go with Canons since some of them still have optical viewfinders. I often take pictures in lighting conditions where the LCD screen is next to useless because of glare so I need a way to frame the picture and make it work. If you rarely or never run into lighting conditions such as this then any camera from Canon, Olympus, or Panasonic is good to go. Go to a store, handle a bunch of them, and see which one feels most comfortable.
blessingx Posted November 8, 2009 Report Posted November 8, 2009 How does the Panasonic do in low light conditions? The Lumix DMC-ZR3 is $276 and the Lumix DMC-ZR1 is $232 right now on Amazon. What the heck is an Eye-Fi card?Don't know those specific models, but the Lumix tends to not perform as well as similar Canon and Fujis overall in darkness/higher ISOs (800 and sometimes 400). Crisp, and saturated, but grainy. A couple of the Fujis tends to excel. The F200EXR for instance has a ISO 6400 at 6MP resolution & 12800 at 3MP resolution modes. Review here. And Grahame answered the Eye-Fi, but quick uploads from any wifi location to Facebook, Flickr, Picasa, Shutterfly, etc. is a hugh plus in my book. Almost like a phone camera.
luvdunhill Posted November 8, 2009 Report Posted November 8, 2009 Vicki: I have a next to new Canon Power Shot SD1200 IS sitting here I'd work you a deal on. Used for a couple weeks, as I left our camera at home on vacation and just haven't got around to Ebaying it...
Dusty Chalk Posted November 8, 2009 Report Posted November 8, 2009 You might want to add: "has a good macro" to your list of desires/requirements, if you ever want to take pictures of the insides of the Singlepower, or if you want to sell something not large and take pictures of it.
boomana Posted November 9, 2009 Author Report Posted November 9, 2009 Vicki: I have a next to new Canon Power Shot SD1200 IS sitting here I'd work you a deal on. Used for a couple weeks, as I left our camera at home on vacation and just haven't got around to Ebaying it... I might take you up on that. Let me look around a bit (I haven't actually looked at any cameras in person yet) and I'll get back to you.
purk Posted November 9, 2009 Report Posted November 9, 2009 Another vote for Panasonic Lumix! I've been very pleased with my DMC-FX55 that I got from Fry's at closed out for $119. My wife love her Canon SD800IS as well.
wualta Posted November 9, 2009 Report Posted November 9, 2009 In everyday nonpicky use, the affordable Pana and Canon P&Ss (less than $200 and preferably less than $150) are roughly equivalent-- if you had to buy them sight unseen you'd be able to get good photos from both. They're just not that different. They both take AA cells and SD cards. One will have a slightly wider-angle lens. The other will weigh less or be more compact. Once pickiness enters the picture, things change. If you take a lot of time exposures longer than 8 seconds, go Canon. If you've seen one too many purple halos around bright objects and can't stand to see another one, go Panasonic. If you like shooting indoor video clips of your cat, go Canon. If you value sharpness over smoothness, go Panasonic, and so on.
CarlSeibert Posted November 9, 2009 Report Posted November 9, 2009 Vicki, Most professionals have a Canon G-something stashed away in their laptop cases/purses/backpacks or the like. I just checked Amazon and eBay and they seem to be a bit out of your price range. And maybe a tad too big, too. I haven't bought a pocket-sized point and shoot in a while, but I can offer some generalities: A bunch of people seem to do well with the Lumixes. The lenses seem to be better than the average bear. The chimping screens work well, too. (Which is really important on a point and shoot, since never mind chimping, the screen is often the only way to point the darn thing in the right direction to make a picture.) If your camera doesn't have an optical viewfinder or has one that's poor enough that you end up using the screen as the viewfinder, REAL image stabilization would be highly recommended. I don't remember the euphemisms used, but point and shoot purveyors sometimes try to pass off a little unsharp mask in the imaging processing firmware or some sort of burst shooting scheme as image stabilization. Make sure it's the real deal. The point here is that when you use a camera with an optical viewfinder, your forehead is the image stabilizer. When the camera is bobbing about at the end of your arm, a little piezoelectric help is most welcome. I very much like the idea of throw-away batteries in a camera that I don't use often. If I forget to charge the battery, I can grab some alkalines at a seven-eleven. The how many megapixels question is tricky. It is true that there are better and worse sensor implementations at any given resolution. But words and specifications don't tell you what you need to know. The only way to know whether a camera is doing a decent job is to look at the files it creates. (At any given ISO, I might add. Point and shoots tend to get nasty noisy very quickly as ISO goes up.) That said, resolution is resolution. Old school film is equivalent to about 24 megapixels, give or take. I'd insist on at least 10 MP from any digital I'd buy at this point. Oh, and look at the corners of the frame. Sometimes the trade off for very thin pocket-size bodies is really b-a-d fuzziness in the corners. I like to go to the camera store with an SD card in my pocket, shoot a few frames and retire to my laptop to see what's what. I'll ask around at the office tomorrow if anybody has any specific and up-to-date advice.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now