Help me buy a digital camera please...

[hennessy1]

Me and my wife are interested in buying a point and shoot digital camera. I'd rather spend a little more money then sacrafice quality. I've also heard that anything much above 5mp is hard to tell quality difference unless your a professional photographer. We don't really have a price range but I looked quickly at best buy and they most expensive isnt out of our reach. We are looking for the best that will last us the longest. We arent committed to a brick&mortor store. Neither of us are professionals. It will mostly be for still pictures but maybe some short videos. If I need to provide more information then please let me know and thank you ahead of time.

 

[troytime]

what do you plan to take photos of? kids? pets? vacations?

where do you plan to take photos? inside? outside? the pool? on a boat?

most modern cameras will suffice for most scenarios - but there are cameras that are better for certain circumstances

 

[hennessy1]

Vacations and holidays things of that nature. Both inside and outside and pools eventually boats. Ill get some more information when we go window shopping tonight.

 

[hennessy1]

So at best buy they told me canon and sony were the best brands to get for that type of camera. They also said that if you want to blow the pictures up to get a larger megapixal. To zoom inmore and have a better picture to get a higher optical zoom because a digital zoom is not as good. Am I on par with this information or were they feeding me the typical BBB best buy bullshit?

 

[jpeyton]

Best point-and-shoot: Canon G9 ~$450

But an entry level compact DSLR will blow any point-and-shoot out of the water; a new/used Nikon D40 (~$400) or a Canon XTi ($550) are good options.

 

[Illusio]

I hate digital zooms. I usually disable them in my cameras. All they do is blow the image up. Optical zoom is what you want to pay attention to.

The first thing you should probably do is decide on point-and-shoot or dslr. A dslr will most likely yeild a much nicer photo, but it's not as convenient or compact. Having to carry around extra lenses and such can be a pain.

 

[hennessy1]

We do want a point and shoot no dslr. The Canon G9 is a little to bulky for our tastes.

 

[Jawo]

How about the Canon SD890 IS? My sister wanted a simple point and shoot and got her the SD800 IS a while ago and she loves it....very compact, yet it takes great pictures.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: hennessy1
So at best buy they told me canon and sony were the best brands to get for that type of camera. They also said that if you want to blow the pictures up to get a larger megapixal. To zoom inmore and have a better picture to get a higher optical zoom because a digital zoom is not as good. Am I on par with this information or were they feeding me the typical BBB best buy bullshit?

you can't compare optical zoom ratios directly. a 10x zoom that starts at 38 mm tops out at 380 mm focal length. a 12x zoom that starts at 28 mm tops out at 336 mm. so the 10x zoom is actually longer.

that said, i'd much much rather have the 12x zoom that starts at 28 because you will notice the extra space on the wide end (especially for group photos in cramped quarters), but you won't notice the extra length on the long end.

best buy weenies probably don't know what the maximum telephoto and widest wide angle of the camera are. though the numbers are printed on each camera lens, you can't really even tell that way because cameras can use different size sensors.

 

[hennessy1]

so with that said ElFenix which way should I go I was noticeing that the cameras that were not "too bulky" had a max optical zoom of 5x.

 

[ElFenix]

canon SD870
sony W170
panasonic fx33/35/55/100/500

panasonic makes a couple of very compact long zoom camera, the TZ-4 and TZ-5. they're a little bigger than the ultra compacts i've got listed above, but smaller than your typical super zoom. so they may not be shirt pocketable, but i'm pretty sure they're pants pocketable (unless you've got emo jeans).

 

[hennessy1]

so if you had to choose with the req. ive said which is the absolute best camera that I should buy?

I ask because she wants to get it before we go on vacation next week talk about last minute lol but hey better late then never...

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Best point-and-shoot: Canon G9 ~$450

But an entry level compact DSLR will blow any point-and-shoot out of the water; a new/used Nikon D40 (~$400) or a Canon XTi ($550) are good options.

So, why is it that DSLRs, even the entry level ones, are much much better than even the best P&S cameras?

Aren't the DSLR's pretty much P&S if you have them set up that way (e.g. the XTi or XSi)?

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Muse

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Best point-and-shoot: Canon G9 ~$450

But an entry level compact DSLR will blow any point-and-shoot out of the water; a new/used Nikon D40 (~$400) or a Canon XTi ($550) are good options.

So, why is it that DSLRs, even the entry level ones, are much much better than even the best P&S cameras?

Aren't the DSLR's pretty much P&S if you have them set up that way (e.g. the XTi or XSi)?

it's all about the sensor. the dslr's have much larger sensors, and hence gathers far more information. That and the lenses on them are typically better than that stuff they shove into P&S's (ok, some of it is pretty good actually for what it is, heh).

 

[Fardringle]

Even the entry level DSLRs have much larger sensors which allows them to produce much higher quality (with lower noise) pictures even in low light. In general, even a basic DSLR kit lens is significantly superior in sharpness to a compact P&S lens. DSLRs typically focus much faster than any P&S camera and do it more accurately. There are other benefits, but for me those are the most significant comparisons to a compact P&S camera.

The two primary potential down-sides to an SLR are the relatively limited zoom range unless you go with a big zoom like the 18-200 or 18-250 lenses (which will take it well outside of the "compact" size range) or carry a couple of lenses and swap between them, and they don't do video which may or may not be important to you.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: hennessy1
so if you had to choose with the req. ive said which is the absolute best camera that I should buy?

I ask because she wants to get it before we go on vacation next week talk about last minute lol but hey better late then never...

well if you like big zoom in a small package it's basically the panasonic TZ series. the low light performance isn't anything to write home about but it isn't that much different from anything else on the market (other than the fuji super CCD cameras). the difference between the TZ5 and the TZ4 is that the TZ5 has a larger screen with 2x the resolution, and a slightly larger, slightly higher MP sensor. i'd say it's worth the ~$50 premium over the TZ4, going by beachcamera.com prices.

if you're not lugging a laptop around you'll probably want a couple of 4GB SDHC cards from newegg.





as for why are SLRs better? bigger sensors and speed.

the typical 1/2.5" sensor used in compact cameras has dimensions of 5.7 mm x 4.28 mm, or 24.396 sq. mm. the typical canon SLR has a 22.2 mm x 14.8 mm sensor, or 328.56 sq mm. what does that mean? better light gathering capability for the same exposure (amongst other things). almost 13.5x more light gets captured by the sensor on sheer size alone. as 2x the light is one stop, for every 2x the light we're one stop better. taking the square root, we find that the SLR sensor is 3 and 2/3 stops more sensitive. that means less noise. you could set the SLR to ISO 1250 and get the same amount of noise as the compact at ISO 100.

it also means smaller depth of field for a given aperture ratio and field of view. with an SLR and a bright lens, say an 85 f/1.8, you can take a picture of something and you can choose to blur the objects just in front of and behind the object. you don't have that kind of creative control with the compact, it simply cannot blur those objects. lots of things that you might not want in focus will be in focus.

(note that the above two paragraphs apply to any camera with a larger sensor, not just SLRs. so rangefinders like the RD-1 and M8, and any compact like the sigma SD-1 also gain those benefits.)

the other thing about SLRs is speed. focus speeds are much faster, boot up speeds are much faster, shutter lag is almost non-existent, shot to shot times are much faster, flash recycle times are much faster. (some of this also applies to rangefinders, not much of it applies to the SD-1)

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

as for why are SLRs better? bigger sensors and speed.

the typical 1/2.5" sensor used in compact cameras has dimensions of 5.7 mm x 4.28 mm, or 24.396 sq. mm. the typical canon SLR has a 22.2 mm x 14.8 mm sensor, or 328.56 sq mm. what does that mean? better light gathering capability for the same exposure (amongst other things). almost 13.5x more light gets captured by the sensor on sheer size alone. as 2x the light is one stop, for every 2x the light we're one stop better. taking the square root, we find that the SLR sensor is 3 and 2/3 stops more sensitive. that means less noise. you could set the SLR to ISO 1250 and get the same amount of noise as the compact at ISO 100.

it also means smaller depth of field for a given aperture ratio and field of view. with an SLR and a bright lens, say an 85 f/1.8, you can take a picture of something and you can choose to blur the objects just in front of and behind the object. you don't have that kind of creative control with the compact, it simply cannot blur those objects. lots of things that you might not want in focus will be in focus.

(note that the above two paragraphs apply to any camera with a larger sensor, not just SLRs. so rangefinders like the RD-1 and M8, and any compact like the sigma SD-1 also gain those benefits.)

the other thing about SLRs is speed. focus speeds are much faster, boot up speeds are much faster, shutter lag is almost non-existent, shot to shot times are much faster, flash recycle times are much faster. (some of this also applies to rangefinders, not much of it applies to the SD-1)

What is the SD-1?

Do these comments apply to what was described here as the best P&S, the Canon G9?

I'm looking to step up from my Samsung V3 Digimax, whose biggest problems for me up front are the minimum 7 seconds between shots (at least with the flash on, maybe more with the flash on, not sure), and the sometimes horrible shutter lag (upredictable). If I knew how much better some of my pictures would come out if I was using a better camera, it would probably amaze me! Pardon me please OP for any off topic perception here, I don't want to hijack your thread.

I had a great SLR many years ago (Nikon F 35mm), with a few lenses, but it was swiped out of my apartment. I had built my own darkroom, but with the loss of the Nikon I gave up photography until I got the Samsung.

Right now my biggest irritations with the Samsung are all the great shots I see (generally family events, parties, etc., sometimes with bad lighting) but fail to capture because of the lags. I could snap off shots with the Nikon as fast as I could wind to the next frame, and of course there was no shutter lag. I'm not knowledgable about digital cameras, although I've taken a few thousand shots at this point, sitting on my HDs. Judging from this thread I'm thinking that possibly an entry level DSLR like the XTi or XSi with the stock lens might have a lot of advantages over non DSLR cameras (even the G9), but the G9 might have a big advantage in the telescopic lens. I don't foresee wanting to buy extra lenses for one of the Rebels. I figure I'm probably wrong about some of these things. I appreciate any guidance. If I'm too off topic here, please just say, folks, and I'll start my own thread.

 

[hennessy1]

so the panasonic is the best camera that money can buy with those requirements b/c we are looking for atleast a 5x optical zoom and a very good picture quality. I thought the canon and sonys were the cream of the crop?

I was looking on cnet to see what were the top ones and they said these were
Canon PowerShot SD750 (black)

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W120 (Silver)

for the editors choice that fit.

The most popular were
Canon PowerShot SD850 IS

Canon PowerShot SD750 (black)

Canon PowerShot SD750 (silver)

 

[ElFenix]

er, sigma DP-1. SD is their SLR line (SD-14 being the latest).




most p&s cameras give very similar picture quality. 5x zoom (again, that doesn't really mean much) and smaller than a G9 narrow it down a bit, though.

if it were my money and i were taking one camera on my vacation (given your contraints) i'd pick the panasonic because the lens is 10x zoom and starts out at a true wide angle 28 mm. it's a bit bigger than some of the really tiny cameras, but it's smaller than the G9. dpreview took a look at it

if you go to here and select ultra compact under format and 135+ under zoom tele (T) you can find a lot of small 5x+ zoom cameras. you should also choose yes under image stabilization. of those the canon SD850 and 890 would be my first choice, followed by the sony W.

imaging-resource.com also has a blurb on the SD890 and the TZ5.






as for the G9, it's basically a glorified canon A-series (A650 IS to be exact). while it's arguably better than any other compact on the market, it still has a tiny sensor (though at 1/1.7" it's a stop bigger than most), still uses contrast detect (read: slow) autofocus, is slow to start up, and still has a lens that is a little bit slow on the telephoto end. flash recycle time isn't bad for a compact, but not up to SLR standards. and the wide angle isn't much of a wide angle, like it was on the earlier G series cameras (35 mm now, 28 mm then).

in it's favor it has full photographic control, a hot shoe, a metal body, and it's lens might be subject to better quality control than the A650.

with a hacked firmware a lot of things can be exposed on the A650 to make it very competitive with the G9.

 

[hennessy1]

So she decided to go with a sony because of the smile detection. we purchased the dsc-t300 yesterday and well start using it tommorow.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: hennessy1
So she decided to go with a sony because of the smile detection. we purchased the dsc-t300 yesterday and well start using it tommorow.

OK, can I hijack the thread now?

I'm leaning to the XSi based on threads I've been reading in this forum (including this, of course) and the reviews I've seen online. I haven't laid eyes or hands on one yet, and only ogled my nephew's XTi, haven't held, etc. any other DSLR's, so obviously I should trip on into CC or BB and do all that. Based on ElFenix's comments, the DSLR's are just miles ahead of the viewfinder cameras in terms of the quality of photos I'm going to get and the responsiveness (seconds, 1/10ths of seconds, milliseconds etc.). People seem to think the XSi's better made and easier to use than the XTi. The biggest downside compared to my Samsung V3 is just that I guess I won't be putting it (or any DSLR) in a pocket.

 

[ElFenix]

CC had a slightly better selection of SLRs than BB did, last i was there. if only because some CCs have the olympus SLRs while i haven't seen any in best buy.

the e-420 is tiny.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
CC had a slightly better selection of SLRs than BB did, last i was there. if only because some CCs have the olympus SLRs while i haven't seen any in best buy.

the e-420 is tiny.

Actually the XSi isn't that much bigger than the e-420:
- - - -
e-420:

5.1 x 3.6 x 2.1in
(130x91x53mm)

16 oz.
- - - -
XSi:

5.1 x 3.8 x 2.4in
(129x98x62mm)

16.8 oz.
- - - -

These stats from imaging-resource.com

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Muse
Actually the XSi isn't that much bigger than the e-420:
- - - -
e-420:

5.1 x 3.6 x 2.1in
(130x91x53mm)

16 oz.
- - - -
XSi:

5.1 x 3.8 x 2.4in
(129x98x62mm)

16.8 oz.
- - - -

These stats from imaging-resource.com

i know what the measurements say, and i know what my hands say when i pick one up.

and it's not just the camera, it's the two kit lenses. the 14-42 is 2.4 x 2.6 inches and the 40-150 is 2.83x2.59. the canon 18-55 is at 2.8x2.7. that's bigger than the e-420's telephoto! canon's kit telezom is 4.3 x 2.8 (granted 250 on canon is quite a bit longer than 150 on olympus), it's huge in comparison

 

[Muse]

I went into CC yesterday to get my first in person comparison etc. of the current crop of DSLR's and etc. They had many cameras out, all tethered and evidently electronically, don't know. On display were:

Nikon D80
Canon XTi
Olympus e-420
Nikon D40

I handled them all, waiting for attention from the staff.

When the person behind the counter finally acknowledged my presence and asked if I needed assistance I asked about the XSi and was told that they have it but it's not out on display. They had a NIB one, and she brought it out and told me I couldn't turn it on. She offered to let me attach the lens, but not having attached a lens to a camera for decades I asked her to do it. I couldn't imagine why people say it feels small or that their hands cramp up when using it. Compared to my Samsung V3, it's gigantic even for my quite large hands.

I asked her if it was true that the lens of the XSi has image stabilization whereas that of the XTi does not, and she confimed this. I really don't know digital cameras, but I figure that this is a major issue. The XSi can be bought for $800 shipped now. I haven't made a decision, but if I were to decide today, it would be the XSi, just because the list of negatives that I'm aware of is the smallest among the cameras I've been researching. The telephoto (3x optical) seems just like that on my Samsung V3, which is 3x optical. One thing I did notice was that the image in the viewfinder was blurry for me at some lens settings, even with my glasses on. I don't know why. I was observing some people about 12-15 feet away. Maybe if the camera were turned on it wouldn't have been blurry. I'm thinking that I should go into Best Buy, where my experience is that the staff is a lot more attentive (although I haven't been in one for 2+ years, I think). Comments?