Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Need mid-level camera suggestions

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
November 28, 2004 12:17:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.point+shoot (More info?)

OK, I am about to make my first digital purchase. I guess I want an
SLR poseur because my next digital will be a Nikon SLR as I have
lenses for it. Looking through ads and some other stuff, I've figured
out that optical zoom is a high priority, so most of the ones I'm
looking at have about 10x. My finances limit me to about 4mp. So far,
it seems the Kodak 6490 is pretty good. But then there's the Olympus
765 too. They both seem about equal in many ways. One is smaller than
the other, which is attractive, but I want strong manual controls for
those artsy shots, and I have the impression (wrongly so, perhaps)
that the smaller the camera, the less manual controls it may have.

I have visited some stores, from Best Buy to Ritz. I have to limit my
purchases to these kinds of stores due to the financing they offer.
Hence, I can't shop via mailorder.

Other cameras I've checked are some Fujis (5100 nice, but doesn't seem
as nice as the others?; the 3100 is almost a nice cheap compromise,
being $100 cheaper than my limit with the others), a Minolta DiMage Z2
(somehow, I don't recall this being as nice as the Kodak), the HP 945
(high MP but I've been told this one is not as good as the others),
Nikon 4800 (seems overrated compared to the others), and I think
that's about it. I know there are a few more, such as the Kyocera
M410R but I haven't seen it yet.

I am curious what some of you would recommend and why? If you can give
good reasons (rather than one like the guy at Best Buy who recommended
the Canon S1 IS as being great and the lack of 4mp won't matter - BS!)
this would be very helpful - thanks!

Diego
Anonymous
November 28, 2004 8:29:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.point+shoot (More info?)

rosenb37 wrote:
[]
> I am curious what some of you would recommend and why? If you can give
> good reasons (rather than one like the guy at Best Buy who recommended
> the Canon S1 IS as being great and the lack of 4mp won't matter - BS!)
> this would be very helpful - thanks!

Having seen some 8 x 10s from a 3.3MP Nikon Coolpix 990 recently I would
ask why you consider the advice bad? If it fits your budget, the S1 IS is
a nice little camera with good movies (if that matters) and an image
stabilised zoom (which certainly /does/ matter if you want 10X zoom).

David
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 1:56:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.point+shoot (More info?)

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:30ug73F35iurjU1@uni-berlin.de...
> rosenb37 wrote:
> []
> > I am curious what some of you would recommend and why? If you can give
> > good reasons (rather than one like the guy at Best Buy who recommended
> > the Canon S1 IS as being great and the lack of 4mp won't matter - BS!)
> > this would be very helpful - thanks!
>
> Having seen some 8 x 10s from a 3.3MP Nikon Coolpix 990 recently I would
> ask why you consider the advice bad? If it fits your budget, the S1 IS is
> a nice little camera with good movies (if that matters) and an image
> stabilised zoom (which certainly /does/ matter if you want 10X zoom).
>
> David
>
>

I just joined the group. Lots of good discussion here. I thought I'd chime
in. I have a 3.1 MP Olympus C3020 and I have managed some good 8 x 10s off
it as well. My experience when I went looking is that the resulting picture
is a function of both the number of megapixels AND the camera's optics (with
a small nod to the processor). I have seen 2.0 MP cameras that will blow
the doors off some 5 MP cameras, simply due to optics. One of the best
all-round cameras I've ever seen for point-and-shoot images is our old
office Kodak DC280. Heavy, bulky, ate batteries etc and definitely not a
modern digicam, but awesome saturation and VERY clear images for a 2.0 MP
camera. It's a corollary to 35 mm film. A $10 point-and shoot and a $5,000
SLR both use 35mm film, but the results vary a bit!

Here's a good website for comparing cameras with a reasonably scientific
approach to the comparison images. There are a LOT of cameras there:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/

Click on the "compare sample images" option on the left side and go to it!

Good luck.

Jeff
Reply by removing the obvious....
Related resources
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 11:22:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.point+shoot (More info?)

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor@invalid.com> wrote in message news:<30ug73F35iurjU1@uni-berlin.de>...

>
> Having seen some 8 x 10s from a 3.3MP Nikon Coolpix 990 recently I would
> ask why you consider the advice bad? If it fits your budget, the S1 IS is
> a nice little camera with good movies (if that matters) and an image
> stabilised zoom (which certainly /does/ matter if you want 10X zoom).
>


Hi, David, thanks for your response. To answer your question . . .
despite me not really going to blow up any pics, I have a feeling that
3.2 is going to be somewhat obsolete when it comes to selling the
camera in the future. I know with 4.0, it will be a bigger selling
point. In addition, I used to do some free-lance writing and if I get
into the game again, I'd like to make sure my photos are of the
highest possible quality without compromises. As I don't know how much
a pic will need to be blown, I'd rather defer on the side of caution.
I s'pose that I like to be slightly ahead of the curve with my
purchases, and the S1 IS appears to be just current. But I'm a newbie,
and I have to rely on the opinions of others to get the real skinny.

A friend of mine, who takes a lot of car pictures, has the Olympus 770
and swears by it, so that's one of the reasons why I am leaning in
that direction. Aside of subjective issues like how it feels in my
hand (not to mention my pocket), I am just interested in getting the
best for my money.

How important is image stabilization? What is it, exactly? What
situations is it an asset? Is there a situation where it's not
necessary?

Thanks,

Diego
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 7:58:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.point+shoot (More info?)

rosenb37 wrote:
[]
> How important is image stabilization? What is it, exactly? What
> situations is it an asset? Is there a situation where it's not
> necessary?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Diego

I think that camera and in particular lens quality are more important than
the absolute number of megapixels, and this should also reflect in the
resale value (although resale value is typically very small in any case).

IS reduces camera shake - and as you asked about a 10X zoom lens, I
assumed that taking extreme telephotos was important to you. In lower
than ideal lighting or if you shake the camera more than average (your
hands are shaky or it's windy), IS will let you get sharper pictures. You
don't need it if you use a tripod, however it can still be an advantage in
less-than-ideal taking conditions. Having used a camera with IS, it is
difficult to swap back to one without.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 7:05:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.point+shoot (More info?)

Canon a95 5mp-- 303.00 with zipzoomfly.com excellent online store


On 28 Nov 2004 09:17:41 -0800, rosenb37@msu.edu (rosenb37) wrote:

>OK, I am about to make my first digital purchase. I guess I want an
>SLR poseur because my next digital will be a Nikon SLR as I have
>lenses for it. Looking through ads and some other stuff, I've figured
>out that optical zoom is a high priority, so most of the ones I'm
>looking at have about 10x. My finances limit me to about 4mp. So far,
>it seems the Kodak 6490 is pretty good. But then there's the Olympus
>765 too. They both seem about equal in many ways. One is smaller than
>the other, which is attractive, but I want strong manual controls for
>those artsy shots, and I have the impression (wrongly so, perhaps)
>that the smaller the camera, the less manual controls it may have.
>
>I have visited some stores, from Best Buy to Ritz. I have to limit my
>purchases to these kinds of stores due to the financing they offer.
>Hence, I can't shop via mailorder.
>
>Other cameras I've checked are some Fujis (5100 nice, but doesn't seem
>as nice as the others?; the 3100 is almost a nice cheap compromise,
>being $100 cheaper than my limit with the others), a Minolta DiMage Z2
>(somehow, I don't recall this being as nice as the Kodak), the HP 945
>(high MP but I've been told this one is not as good as the others),
>Nikon 4800 (seems overrated compared to the others), and I think
>that's about it. I know there are a few more, such as the Kyocera
>M410R but I haven't seen it yet.
>
>I am curious what some of you would recommend and why? If you can give
>good reasons (rather than one like the guy at Best Buy who recommended
>the Canon S1 IS as being great and the lack of 4mp won't matter - BS!)
>this would be very helpful - thanks!
>
>Diego
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 1:09:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.point+shoot (More info?)

Thanks, guys - I bought the Olympus 770. It was more than what I
wanted to spend, but the NY stores had it for the same price as Best
Buy's 765, so I got my mom to pay for it (airline miles, after all)
and I can pay her in installments.

Thanks again,

Diego
!