[trackdog]

I'm interested in getting a compact camera to take on rides and snowboarding, just something for snapshots, with a slight possibilty printing out an 8x10 or two if I get a good shot in.

I don't want to spend more than $200 for the camera. Can I get a decent one for this price?

My knowledge on didgital camers is limited. Just know some of the name brands like Nikon, Canon, Kodak, HP..........

Have done some looking, but not sure what to look for?

I just need a good basic camera that will last.

[Suf Daddy]

Make sure the camera can be connected to your computer easily.

This would be limited to what your computer has for connections, speed etc......

Most cameras are over 3 mega pixels. The more meaning clarity in blowing up a picture. 8X10 and beyond.

So since there are a million of these things see which one has the:

Most compatible memory solution.
Cost effective memory solution
and
The best picture quality:
(Best Buy has a book where they compare pictures taken / Circuit City should too. CC better on warrantyyou buy.)

and
The higher number OPTICAL zoom, so all your photo don't look so small like your in the cheap seats at the game or trying to watch the races from the tree line on the North NHIS oval..........

Movie mode can't hurt too.

-Suf Daddy

[ssg]

For <200$ I would look for a Canon Elph SD450. It's small as a tin of Altoids, can do 5.0 megapixels, and has enough manual options to get really nice photos in situations outside of 'auto' range.

I have seen them in the ~240$ range without much looking...but I know they just came out with (actual availability of) the SD600, for about 260$...so I predict the SD450 to be cheaply very soon.

If pocketability isnt a concern, some of the A series from Canon are nice, as are many of the Coolpix models...it really gets to what features you need vs. what you want. I sacrifice crazy SLR quality photos for the portability aspect of a tiny camera...but I also get far more opportunities to use it cause its able to go more places.


edit: My pref. in Cameras is as follows top best, bottom not so best - but I'd maybe still buy it. Sony would be #3 except I hate their stupid memory stick. I have SD for everything else, and I like it.

Canon
Nikon
Casio
Kodak
Sony

[TLRMan]

I have the Canon A95, and can't say anything bad about it. You can get artsy with it, or just point and shoot.
Thing now it's been superceeded with a newer model I think it's the 600 series....About the same price too.

Some other things to think about...

I have the 2500 m/amp NIMH batteries..last a friggen Loooong time.
1 gig memory card will get you 6000 pics at low res, and about 1200 high res. Along with lots of video storage.

[dhuze]

I'm not sure about prices, but you really want atleast a 5mega pixle camera to be happy. The higher you go with the pixels the bigger the pictures can be and still look good. I have a sony and it takes pictures Tha I can print out 8 1/2 x 11's and they come out fine.

[trackdog]

As far as physical attributes, I like the style of that A95, it has the kind of body shape that easy to hold, and I assume some quality comes with the Canon name. Size seems to be right too. I don't need it to be ipod thin, but would like it to fit on the inside pocket of my jacket.

"You can get artsy with it" meaning different modes like B/W and sepia?...would be nice....

I have heard alot of people taking about the SD ELPH series.

I'll look at both.

Batteries? I think after doing some research, I see that this is a MAJOR consideration! I want long battery life. Definitely want rechargeable. But the AA type or one of those lithium ions?

Thanks

[cbrf41999]

I suggest rechargeable AA's with the other brand specific batteries. You could be out someplace realize you forgot to charge your camera, or been gone for a week and forgot your charger. I used to have the sony with AA now we have the wierd batteries, only down side of that camera.

[TLRMan]

Originally posted by trackdog
As far as physical attributes, I like the style of that A95, it has the kind of body shape that easy to hold, and I assume some quality comes with the Canon name. Size seems to be right too. I don't need it to be ipod thin, but would like it to fit on the inside pocket of my jacket.

"You can get artsy with it" meaning different modes like B/W and sepia?...would be nice....

I have heard alot of people taking about the SD ELPH series.

I'll look at both.

Batteries? I think after doing some research, I see that this is a MAJOR consideration! I want long battery life. Definitely want rechargeable. But the AA type or one of those lithium ions?

Thanks

The A95 has 4 AA batteries...NIMH is the way to go...I can run the camera all day long without a hiccup.

You can manually control shutter , and ap., white balance, along with ISO, it does have sepia, and B/W, panoramic, night with lighted backgrounds, fast mode, (take pics of racebikes), Potrait, and a bunch of other stuff. I had another camera that sucked taking indoor shots, this one rocks.

Like you said it's big enough to hold onto, and this was one of the factors when I bought the Canon. I also waited for about 6 months after it came out to make sure it got good reviews, and didn't have any issues. I also have a 4 year warranty, and it doesn't matter what happened to it, like drop it, it'll get replaced.
It's been superceeded, so I guess i would get the next series released. I figure you can still find the A95 though.

I think it was the best bang for the buck. It easily surpassed the Sony for ratings.

[Ducrappy]

Originally posted by dhuze
I'm not sure about prices, but you really want atleast a 5mega pixle camera to be happy. The higher you go with the pixels the bigger the pictures can be and still look good. I have a sony and it takes pictures Tha I can print out 8 1/2 x 11's and they come out fine.

Last week, I had two older ride pictures blown up to 16" X 20". One was taken with an Olympus Stylus 4 megapixel (my current ride camera) and the other was taken with a FujiFilm 3800 (3.24 megapixel, my old camera). The one taken with the 4 megapixel looks amazing, and the one from the 3.24 megapixel came out pretty good with a small loss of clarity.

I also have a bunch of 8" X 10" prints from the 4 megapixel that also look amazing.

With that said, the more megapixels the better, but for the same price, you typically trade off optical zoom or program features for the extra megapixels.

[RandyO]

one thing I have learned is DO NOT LOAD THE SOFTWARE THAT COMES WITH YOUR CAMERA ON TO YOUR COMPUTER

with windows xp, your computer will recognice you camera as a drive as soom as you plug in the usb cord and turn it on. transfer pics using windows explorer

programs like Kodak's Easy Share take over your computer like a virus

I have a Kodak cx7430 4 megapixel I paid right around $200 whe I bought it about a year ago.

[Bhavesh]

Originally posted by RandyO
one thing I have learned is DO NOT LOAD THE SOFTWARE THAT COMES WITH YOUR CAMERA ON TO YOUR COMPUTER

with windows xp, your computer will recognice you camera as a drive as soom as you plug in the usb cord and turn it on. transfer pics using windows explorer

programs like Kodak's Easy Share take over your computer like a virus

I have a Kodak cx7430 4 megapixel I paid right around $200 whe I bought it about a year ago.

I agree with the above. The Kodak EZshare software is a resource whore and ties itself to every image possible. It also has a background utility that's always running in a windows-based machine.

But if you do have a powerful system, it does offer user-friendly options: load pictures, preview, move around, slideshow, etc.

Oh, and the Kodak CX7430 (4mp. 3x optical zoom, SD card) can be bought from $64 and up, used on eBay (the average eBay price is usually around $90).

[sahd03]

OK, so how's about some help for someone looking into a prosumer camera, wanting mad optical zoom (at least 8x) with image stability, optional manual controls, and an excellent macro setting for super-close shots? I'm not into the mega-pixel race, but do need at least 5MP for 11x14 size prints and up.

My online research shows that the Canon S2IS and S3IS might be the ticket. I've also read up on the Sony H2 and H5 extensively. What I really WANT is the Nikon D50 dSLR, but I'm not sure I've got that kind of cash to spend when it's twice the cost of the previously mentioned models and I don't really NEED a dSLR...

Any thoughts? Anyone have expereince with any of the above?

[benVFR]

The prosumer cameras make little sense at this point, just save your pennies and get the D50 or Digital Rebel, you will be happier in the long run.

Yes you get a wider zoom with the prosumer at least to start if you spend the same amount, but those super long zooms on the prosumer cameras are pretty trashy and slow compared to anything you would stick on a D50.

Also you get something like the S3IS and when the camera is no good you are also tossing the lens and most if not all of the accessories. Step up to the Digital Rebel or D50 and you have separated the lens & accessory spending from the camera spending, the lenses and accessories will most likely still work on the latest and greatest DSLR in 2015.

[sahd03]

ya kno, ben, you are absolutely right. when i go online and seriously search prices on the D50 with just the one lens, the price is hovering around a very reasonable $500. I can start there, and buy lenses as I need/want them - christmas comes to mind! besides, my dad will likely end up with the same body and he and i could share/swap lenses.

i'm going with the D50.... I think! I will still shop this weekend, but I am at least going to hold out for dSLR.... I'd also entertain the Canon, but the Nikon does get slightly better reviews. Any experience with the D50 vs. the comparable Canon (name slips my mind at the moment)?

[benVFR]

I'm a Canon guy so I am biased.. I've had a 10D and now I have a 5D..

Nikon vs. Canon often comes down to which one feels better in your hands and which one lines the buttons up better with your fingers.

At the moment a lot of people seem to think Nikon has the better button layout but it is almost inarguable Canon makes the better sensors, which are the heart of the camera.

If you have a friend or relative with one or the other get the same brand they have so you can share stuff...

Either of these look like a pretty sweet deal, you will not be starting with an awesome lens but the lens is still better then 90% of what is available on fixed lens cameras.

Digital Rebel + 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens - $650

D50 + 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens - $650

Then later on you decide what you want to do and get the appropriate equipment, you want to do Macro, you can get a real macro lens for either camera, not a phony "macro mode".

These deals are just sick... only a few years ago you couldn't get anything for under $1500. They are very close to what you would have paid for a film camera 5 years ago, only you don't need to buy film anymore.

[sahd03]

Actually, I found the same setup in both instances for about $550 from... I think it was Amazon.... But I know it was a source I've used before and is considered "trusted".

I'd always been a Nikon fan, becuase my dad was, but now he's a Canon guy. I really don't have a brand preference. I'll check them out and see what feels best. if he feels strongly about one over the other, I'll go his way so we can swap lenses down the road since a lot of our uses are the same.

Thanks for the thoughts.... now I'm having trouble concentrating and just want to go to a camera shop! I'll probably not buy until later in the summer, but it will be fun to be shopping!

[SSearchVT]

There were a few things I looked for when I bought my camera a few years ago. Granted I was just looking for point and click for hiking, skiing, and rides. I ended up with a 3 mpixel Sony.

- Small size, but big enough buttons to easily use.
- Uses AA batteries (available anywhere - even East Nowhere Vermont)
- Simple computer cord hookup to USB port
- Integrated lens cap

Good luck...

[benVFR]

For small ones my roommate just got a Canon SD600? I am quite impressed at how far those little cameras have come.

I've played with 2-3 of them over the years and the SD600 is now very nice.

I have an S50, the SD600 appears to have much better picture quality.

[dhuze]

Originally posted by benVFR
I'm a Canon guy so I am biased.. ...............

Holy shit thats as bad as being a Honda guy.

[benVFR]

I was locked in on Canon from way back when I had a film camera. I made the decision at that point based mostly on button layouts and how the camera felt in my hand. If I had gone with Nikon back then I would still be using Nikon today.

If you've got a pile of lenses, flashes, etc.. you don't just go out and buy a camera from a different company without really thinking about it first, and once you have some good stuff from either company the quality of your images is completely based on you as opposed to the camera.

The smaller point and shoot cameras and digicams do occasionally limit you, there are some things you just can't do with them, but with the DSLRs there are very few limits, so it really doesn't matter which one you have.

[ssg]

Scary but I agree with ben here . I too am a Canon guy from the first 'real' camera I bought. I had an Olympus 1.3mp as my (official) first digital...it was 400$ and took AA batteries ..next after that was an early digi elph, now im on my 4th (SD600 , arriving tomorrow ).

Most of my friends that are anywhere near professional all use Canon stuff. I tried to deviate with a Pentax last year and I borrowed a Casio recently, but at the end of the day nothing beats the Canon's imagery...and although they may not be feature loaded (with geek features) they take silly shots where others fall short - and thats what its about right?


Though I must say - the S2/S3 IS's do appeal to me. Why? cause I have enough hobbies...I want something that I can get awesome shots with but not have to be a rocket scientist or make further investments. Considering my (altoid tin-sized) P&S S or SD Canon models have gotten some sick shots, I'm sure the S2/S3 would be all that I'd need unless I wanted to sell prints or something.


Ben you make some good points about the leap to a rebel from a 'prosumer' model, and while I agree - the variable is your time and investment into the camera. dSLR's require a bit more time to really learn em out to get the quality of shots that would be that much better then the prosumer units.

Oh and since you're (sahd03) selling yourself on a 500$ camera...don't forget the S2 IS can be had for <260$ shipped as of today .


Not sure where your checking for reviews, but these two sites are decent:

www.stevesdigicams.com
www.dpreview.com

[sahd03]

somestrangeguy also has good point. I, too, think that prob'ly the S2/S3 is going to give me what I actually need and would actually use. my hesitation at going to a dSLR is this: am I going to really use the camera's abilities enough to justify the extra cash? who knows! But I also want something that in 15 years is still going to be a great camera - and for that, I lean toward the D50. but with prices coming down every few months, maybe I wait another year....

The Canon vs Nikon debate would be easy for me if I could use my film Nikon lenses on the dSLR. Then I'd buy the nikon becuase of the cash I have invested in my lenses. But since that's not the case I have the freedom to pick. I think the photo quality of both is absolutley comparable for someone not printing National Geographic quality photos.

I'm going to visit a great shop that my dad uses next week, do some playing, maybe borrow a friend's H1 for a weekend and play with it....so many choices. It's so much easier to buy a bike...

[benVFR]

Originally posted by sahd03

The Canon vs Nikon debate would be easy for me if I could use my film Nikon lenses on the dSLR. Then I'd buy the nikon becuase of the cash I have invested in my lenses. But since that's not the case I have the freedom to pick. I think the photo quality of both is absolutley comparable for someone not printing National Geographic quality photos.

You can use the film Nikon lenses on the D50, that's the whole point.. buy a D50.

If the lenses are *really* old mechanical manual focus lenses they may not work on the D50. In that case though a lot of those old lenses are so good it would be worth it to drop big cash and just get a D200, as the D200 and D2x/h cameras can use all the old lenses all the way back to the very beginning of the Nikon F mount.

[sahd03]

You can use the film Nikon lenses on the D50, that's the whole point.. buy a D50.

awww man! i best start saving then, cuz I think all my lenses will work on the D50.......... benvfr, you are NOT helping! I'm trying to be financially responsible and not over-spend on a toy.... and you are making it awfully tough to do so!!

[NinjaSwan]

Call or email me for pricing!!!!!!!!!!! Please tell me you're from the NESR site. Rob (Reiobard) can sell you cameras too if you have closer relationship with him. -cjs

http://www.pcconnection.com/B2C/PM/S...t+Beginner.htm

Curtis J. Swanson
PC Connection Acct Manager
1-800-800-0014 x 33177
cswanson@pcconnection.com
MSN Mesg: pcc_cswanson@hotmail.com