What camera is worth the money?

[Atticus]

I am looking for a digital camera that any dummy can use to take great pictures of their kid growing up, some wildlife shots, and sweet in tank pictures. What should I get? So far I am looking at the Sony H5, but what do you suggest or use?

 

[wesly2006]

it completely depends what your willing to spend I personaly wouldnt go with anything less than 7 mega pixels. if you go any lower than that your compromising. Im getting a canon 20D and that is prob the best for your money. You can also ge a rebel xl. thats a realy good camera also. but like I said it depend what you wanna spend.

 

[musty baby]

Buying by megapixel is a bad move. You'll get better pictures from better cameras despite what a megapixel rating says. I think wesly's suggestions are overkill for what you're looking for, but I'm too long disconnected from the digital camera hobby to make any useful suggestions. He did get "depends what you want to spend" right, though

 

[Atticus]

Yeah I think DSLR's are a bit over my head at this point. Not looking to go pro just yet.

I am narrowing it down to the Sony H5 and the Canon S3. Very similar and I don't think either will be a bad choice.

 

[Covey]

The canon was one of cameras I am still considering. Check out the review
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons3is/
dpreview is great one of the photo forum mods turn me on to it. really informative.

Anyway if you want to play with the canon first hand Camera Corner has it in stock and will actually have batteries for it versus BB and walmart.

 

[llebcire]

My 2 Cents...

My 2 Cents...

Years ago I found a great spot for digicam reviews - Steve's Digicams @ http://www.steves-digicams.com/best_cameras.html

I was looking for a camera that was idiot proof, took great pictures (read each camera's "conclusions"), had a strong macro mode as well as "scenes" (kids and pets/etc.) and had the flexibility that I could use in the future if I ever take the time to figure out aperature settingss/iso/etc.

Based on the reviews I went with the Canon Powershot A620 and couldn't be happier.

I also stumbled across a buy @ NewEgg.com for the camera and a 1 gig memory stick for $230.

Hope this helps!

 

[Atticus]

Thanks guys. I happened to stumble on www.dpreview.com . Looks like they are pretty even. Only need to decide how much speed I need.... Anyone know what f6 and ISO mean? I am almost thinking I might need the speed to catch fish as they move around.

 

[leeweber85]

F6 is an aperture setting. It controls how much light enters through the lense. With a higher f stop (aperture setting) more of the picture will be in focus (like both the foreground and the background). A low F stop will give you a sharp focus point with a blurry background. The lower the f stop the less light you need to take pictures, the higher the f stop the more light you need to take pictures. Generally you want a range between F3-F8. The ISO is sort of like film speed. The lower the ISO the more light you need and the less grainy the photo will be. A cheap $200 camera gives you OK photos with a 100-200 ISO setting but usually takes a fairly bright environment because they have small sensors. A digital SLR has a much, much larger sensors so an ISO of 400 will give you an excellent quality photo and will be able to take great photos in lower lighting. I know the price difference is a big jump, but the SLRs are truly worth the money if you are meticulous. If you're not wanting to make that big of an investment I would steer towards the canon powershots. They seem to take the best pictures for point and shoots. BUT if you happen to catch the photography buzz you are really going to wish you had gone SLR.

 

[lllosingit]

If your interested I was thinking of selling my camera, It's a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz20/
Like new condition, I've used it about a couple dozen times.
Comes with 1Gb of memory.
I'm in Des Moines.
PM me for price if your interested.

 

[acidlittle]

I have had both cannons and sony's and from my experience the cannons are way better then the sony. Sucks because I'm one of those sony nuts, (TV, reciever, dvd player, car stereo and speakers, laptop, the works are all sony's) the only thing I didn't like that sony made was the digi cam. The cannon would probabaly be the better buy IMO...GL with the hunt!!

 

[Atticus]

Went and looked at them again today... I am no closer than I was last night to a decision... The canon lcd did show better color than the sony, but how much of that is in the lcd and its settings? Which is more important, higher ISO or lower F stop?

 

[jdreefer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8259799#post8259799 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by leeweber85
I know the price difference is a big jump, but the SLRs are truly worth the money if you are meticulous. If you're not wanting to make that big of an investment I would steer towards the canon powershots. They seem to take the best pictures for point and shoots. BUT if you happen to catch the photography buzz you are really going to wish you had gone SLR.

Just thought I would second what was said above. If you think that this is something you are going to get into, you will definitely regret not getting an SLR.

I actually have the Canon S3 and I would say it is a great all-around camera FOR under $400. It is almost dummy proof and very user-friendly for being able to change all of the settings (i.e. ISO, aperture, color, etc) which is something that someone like me needs. However, I think you are going to be disappointed if you buy this camera expecting to get great aquarium shots like you see in the photography forum. Although, it could just be that I suck at taking pictures.

For me, the decision came down to wanting a good, easy to use everyday camera that would take the occasional decent (not great) aquarium shot and the S3 is definitely that. Although one would be nice to have, SLRs aren't of much use to me 95% of the time I take pictures.

You know anyone with an S3 or any of the other cameras you are looking at in your area? Also, have you checked out the new Canon G-7? I think they were talking about it in the photography forum recently. It has an aquarium mode on it. I know nothing more about it than that as it wasn't an option when I was buying.

Good luck.

 

[cabenn]

Travis if I remember correctly. The higher ISO typically leads to more grainy pictures. The lower the number the better if I remember.

For instance on my Canon S30 I have multiple settings.

ISO 50 is the best but it also needs the most light to give you the best pictures

ISO-100 is a little worse in picture quality but needs less light.

ISO-200 is just a little worse then the previous

ISo-400 keeps getting worse but needs even less light.

I'll see if I can take some pictures with the different settings to give you an idea. But the lower the ISO the brighter the flash needs to be or the longer the shutter needs to stay open to give it the ammount of light it needs.

The F-Stop is typically just how much light is allowed into the lens. http://www.uscoles.com/fstop.htm

That will give you a quick and dirty difference between the shutter speed (also important) and f-stop(how much light is let in).

 

[musty baby]

Since you're debating a sony and canon, I CAN say from experience that Canon generally puts out nicer color. This has been my personal experience with using four seperate cameras, and I can say that without a doubt that pictures from my older Canon s400 (4 mp) look MUCH better than comparable (but higher megapixel) Sonys. My opinion.

 

[JR719]

Canon, building camera's for many years.... Sony, electronics and not really camera's. What else????

I have a Canon point and shoot. Love it, great camera, can get a f2.8 with that tiny lens. Great color, great camera, for a point and shoot. Don't use the lcd as a determining factor, you'll regret it.

I have a Nikon pro that actually has a crappy lcd. It takes great pics (prof remember). The lcd is only used to check for useful pics. Just about anything you shoot can be adjusted in a photo program such as photoshop.

My wife is a prof photographer, she never uses the lcd. I use it all the time though. That is why I like the Canon Point and shoot. Her Nikon, can't use the lcd for shots, have to look thru the viewfinder. My Canon is only around a 3 or 4 megapixel camera. It takes great shots, I would not spend my money on a camera made by any other company than one that MAKES CAMERAS only! You won't be dissapointed with a Canon, or Nikon.

If your looking for close up macro shots, you'll need a macro lens. OR rings, that's it.

 

[leeweber85]

I should mention to pick one that is easy for you to navigate thru the menus and starts up fast. I also like the cameras that come with the lithium battery packs. You can take pictures for a LONG time before they need recharged whereas the normal AA batteries burn thru after like 30 minutes of use... they can be nice if you're on vacation and don't have power access for a long time... but I've never had a problem with the battery packs.

I'm not sure where you are looking at purchasing one, but I'm sure you could go to an actual camera store (rather than bestbuy or the similar) and they would let you take pictures and compare.

 

[cmheiple]

I personally would consider going with the Canon S3. I have one myself and have been very pleased with it.

 

[Sk8r]

If you're beginning with a camera, get one that's got a good AUTO function, but that still lets you make adjustments as you begin to learn the ropes. leeweber has a good notion: you can actually try the camera at a camera store, and since much of picture-taking is personal taste, you can make an informed choice. I use a Canon EOS SLR that weighs a ton, a real drawback for purposes other than serious photo expeditions. You can get good photos from something a lot cheaper, lighter, and easier to use. The battery business is major: I can use a major flash card and take hundreds of pictures on one lithium battery, while a friend of mine, who uses rechargable AAs, is constantly having to change batteries. The builtin zoom lenses are great on the small cameras, but if you do get one, take care of it: they're fragile and don't take to being banged about. Mine's interchangeable, but getting a good average zoom, from almost-macro to infinity, means it will do almost any job, and you end up not using any other lens, anyway: those macro suckers are pricey. Lot of tradeoffs. But don't figure on being point-and-shoot forever: pretty soon you'll be thinking if you could adjust the Fstop down a bit you'd get a richer picture, etc. The beauty of digital is that you get to experiment without paying for development---my horse of a digital paid for itself in 10 trips when I didn't take real film and have to have it developed.

 

[Bullet]

So what did you figure out Travis? I am kinda in the same boat. I want a "good" camera that I can take good pictues of everything . I have always had Sony's and not really happy with any of them.

 

[Atticus]

I went with the Canon S3 it will be here Thursday. If money weren't an issue I really wanted the Canon rebel XTi, but I could not justify the cost of adding lenses.