StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Does anyone have any recommendations? With my current model (an old Fuji 2600), it takes decent pictures in bright sunlight (what camera doesn't?) but in indoor lighting the pictures are often coloured strangely when I use the flash, and if I don't use the flash then it seems to use a really long exposure because it's almost impossible to get a non-blurry picture without a tripod.

I'd like to get something which is less likely to take blurry pictures in low-light (the equivalent of high-speed film in an old-fashioned film camera) and which has at least 6x optical zoom. I don't know why the industry settled on 3x zoom; 3x zoom is totally inadequate for even half-assed photography.

My only tip is don't get hung up on the Megapixel game.

This image is a fullsize 5mp image from my balcony, good enugh for a non professional I would say

Large Image

My only reccomendation is an HP. We've found that they last the longest. We went through 2 or 3 before our current camera, and this one has lasted longer than the last ones combined.

A dSLR would be ideal. They do very well at higher ISO's - 800 is good, 1600 barely usable. A higher ISO, of course, is the same as very fast film. The lens is a bit of a problem though - you will have to pay extra for a lens beyond 3x optical zoom. The other rewards though are sharper pictures and great focusing, and yet others. Whether it's a Canon, Minolta, Pentax or Nikon is really not a huge deal.

If that is out of the price range, there's an upcoming Fuji S9000 zoom, with a 10x optical lens. That has not been reviewed or released, but Fuji's new sensors do a reasonable job of keeping down noise at ISO's over 400. There is a currently available F10 model with that sensor, but that has only a 3x optical zoom.

I was also thinking about image stablized Panasonic's, with 6x-12x optical zooms, but in my experience with another Panasonic model (FX7) imagestablization isn't really an answer to really slow shutter speed, or say, if you shooting moving children at night image stablization doesn't help (because you need a fast shutter anyways, and image stablization won't help there). But say for family stills at night, and moving subjects only in daylight, I suppose the Panasonic FZ4, FZ5, FZ30 and DMC-LZ2 can be considered. All except the last model have that desirable Leica lens too.

Also higher resolution does mean that you can crop the borders out, sort of resembling an optical zoom - or actually, it is a digitial zoom, but at say 7MP, you've got pixels to spare anyways. Generally 7MP sensors on medium-sized cameras are less noisy than 5MP sensors - noise supression improvement, I guess (e.g. Cannon G6 7MP vs Cannon G5 5MP - the G6 does a better noise control job).

I think the strangeness when using the flash is a white-balance problem - what WB settings have you been using?

You'll probably want to look at at DSLR; the Nikon D50 is currently the least expensive of the lot yet is still a fairly capable camera.

Darth Wong wrote:Does anyone have any recommendations? With my current model (an old Fuji 2600), it takes decent pictures in bright sunlight (what camera doesn't?) but in indoor lighting the pictures are often coloured strangely when I use the flash, and if I don't use the flash then it seems to use a really long exposure because it's almost impossible to get a non-blurry picture without a tripod.

I'd like to get something which is less likely to take blurry pictures in low-light (the equivalent of high-speed film in an old-fashioned film camera) and which has at least 6x optical zoom. I don't know why the industry settled on 3x zoom; 3x zoom is totally inadequate for even half-assed photography.

Donot run only after zoom and megapix. mor inportant is how wide is the wide angel. and how good is the optics.

If you vant good lowligth capailtys go fore EOS/Rebel 350 from canon or Nikon D50. those kameras works ok at ISO 1600. alost as good as a poket camera att ISO 400.

Panasoic has a good model with a lens ecv. to 38-458mm with interal stabilation.

no camera under 5mpix.

phongn wrote:You'll probably want to look at at DSLR; the Nikon D50 is currently the least expensive of the lot yet is still a fairly capable camera.

Might want to mention that "least expensive" equates to US$900.

Dalton wrote:

phongn wrote:You'll probably want to look at at DSLR; the Nikon D50 is currently the least expensive of the lot yet is still a fairly capable camera.

Might want to mention that "least expensive" equates to US$900.

Crap, I thought it would be cheaper than that, considering you can get the D70 + 18-70 DX lens for US$950 after MIR (which is better in every way)

Unfortunately, DSLRs are really the only good bet for low-light photography at reasonably high speeds.

EDIT: dpreview has some good reviews.

For my recommdation I would definatly pick the idiot proof Cannon Powershot Series, specifcly the Cannon A75.

For photographic noobies this is the Camera to have and for those who have some idea of what your doing it provides enough options to fiddle with.

That said there are some downsides to this Camera for those of us with large hands, its about the length of your typical Sandwhich but not that tall(Two anda half inches)

It uses compact flash for picture storage, 3.2 Megapixles, good enough for most and it can do 320x240 movies as well.

And can be had for less than three hundred dollers.

I'd recommend the A520 over the A75. Uses only 2 AA as opposed to 4. Standard for the storage doesn't matter too much, if you're not too attached to your old cards. 4x optical zoom, and 4 MP. Bought mine for $240

Beowulf wrote:I'd recommend the A520 over the A75. Uses only 2 AA as opposed to 4. Standard for the storage doesn't matter too much, if you're not too attached to your old cards. 4x optical zoom, and 4 MP. Bought mine for $240

Yes, but the A520 also has half the battery life I prefer CF, honestly, but SD is perfectly fine.

My family has a C-5000Z from Olympus. It's never let us down yet so you might want to look into something in the same line.

What's everyone's thoughts on the Sony DSC-P200?

phongn wrote:

Beowulf wrote:I'd recommend the A520 over the A75. Uses only 2 AA as opposed to 4. Standard for the storage doesn't matter too much, if you're not too attached to your old cards. 4x optical zoom, and 4 MP. Bought mine for $240

Yes, but the A520 also has half the battery life I prefer CF, honestly, but SD is perfectly fine.

Half the battery life, but half the batteries. Still ends up being more compact. Only problem is flash recharge rate is better with the A75. More current can be sourced from 4 AA than from 2 AA. I use rechargables though, and those can source alot more than an alkaline.

Arrow Mk84 wrote:What's everyone's thoughts on the Sony DSC-P200?

I've never owned one, but I worked in a store that sold it, so I've handled it and snapped a few pics with it. It was by far my favorite camera that we carried.

The A520's lens isn't that great, and on the topic for the thread it wouldn't work for ah-Wong-sir wants a 6x optical. The A75's lens, iirc, is a bit better. But my brush with a camera like this has left me hungry for more control - it's too big to be a pocket party snapper, too small to be fun for the serious shoot.

On the P200 - a good camera, and iirc with a fair bit of manual control. It's not worth it though for the normal snapshooter - what advantages has it over the FX7 (now FX8/9), especially given its higher price?

The D50 is indeed a good choice for a dSLR. More comfortable than a Rebel XT/ 350D, not too big, but does well without compromise to its price. I'm still looking the Minolta 5D, though, since that throws in sensor anti-shake.

got mine for sale

(spam! spam! spam!)

because i bought one of these babies instead now
Compact, flashy colour, easy to use & good quality

Mr Bean wrote:For my recommdation I would definatly pick the idiot proof Cannon Powershot Series, specifcly the Cannon A75.

For photographic noobies this is the Camera to have and for those who have some idea of what your doing it provides enough options to fiddle with.

That said there are some downsides to this Camera for those of us with large hands, its about the length of your typical Sandwhich but not that tall(Two anda half inches)

It uses compact flash for picture storage, 3.2 Megapixles, good enough for most and it can do 320x240 movies as well.

And can be had for less than three hundred dollers.

The Powershots have done me ok, performance wise I've been very happy. But buying a Powershot 60 and a Powershot 85, both have had problems with lenses which have been near fatal. The first time I had the 60 repaired, it came back with more damage, but I couldn't get it fixed because of various problems and it ended up dieing. I'm now 3 months into ownership of the 85 and the lens aperture is making odd noises and is going to need repairing. Both problems occurred without any mistreatment as far as I know - the next camera I get will not be a canon.

I've personally been partial to the CoolPix series of cameras. If you're just looking for a really good, not quite professional quality digi, then a CoolPix 3200 does the job very well.

El Moose Monstero wrote:
The Powershots have done me ok, performance wise I've been very happy. But buying a Powershot 60 and a Powershot 85, both have had problems with lenses which have been near fatal. The first time I had the 60 repaired, it came back with more damage, but I couldn't get it fixed because of various problems and it ended up dieing. I'm now 3 months into ownership of the 85 and the lens aperture is making odd noises and is going to need repairing. Both problems occurred without any mistreatment as far as I know - the next camera I get will not be a canon.

Thats why the 75 and the 70 are the highest rated Cameras according to both Consumer reports(As of last year) and Cnet's reviews(As of now)
They work, they work well, and they are damn near idiot proof when backed up with Windows XP since all the view settings are in tiny little pictographs which a seven year old could grasp.

Given my interest in taking pictures in indoor venues where lighting may not always be good and flash may not always be a good idea, I decided to go with something that could go all the way up to ISO1600, so I checked out the Nikon D50 and picked one up this afternoon.

It's certainly an impressive camera, and it came with an 18mm-55mm lens, I also grabbed a 75mm-300mm lens for those long shots, a 512MB memory card, and a couple of filters. Pretty slick; I just got the battery charged and took a couple of point-and-shoot pictures, and the auto white balance is far, far superior to my old camera, that's for sure. But I haven't really scratched the surface of its features yet, so I'll be plowing through the manual for a while. I don't want to be an auto-P&S man forever.

That looks like a very nice camera. Enjoy it and post more pictures made with it.

My mother uses a Canon Digital Rebel, it's a pretty solid camera, but you need to purchase good lenses for it, it doesn't have a push-button zoom, nor can you take pictures using the viewfinder. I believe it's more of a professional camera, and you'll end up spending a close to a grand to get just what you want, I'm sure. I'd say it's pretty good, but more than a little expensive. Also knowing a thing or two about cameras is a plus, since it's got all sorts of options, though I have been able to get some pretty good pictures out of it with basically no tinkering.

I've got an A70, and I'd like to add one other note to the commentary: it's a pretty tough camera. I'm somewhat klutzy (especially after a few drinks) and that camera's taken some good knocks without any noticeable damage aside from one or two knicks in the casing.

I think you made a great choice, Mike. Personally, I think Nikon and Canon are the best brands. Few others can even hope to match their quality and durability.

For those who might also be thinking of buying a camera, here's a link to possibly the best digital camera-related website in the existence: http://www.dpreview.com It features in-depth reviews, user commentary, example shots, etc. When contemplating buying a digital SLR last year, I turned to dpreview.com and haven't regretted one bit. So have all my friends who are into photography.

Darth Wong wrote:But I haven't really scratched the surface of its features yet, so I'll be plowing through the manual for a while. I don't want to be an auto-P&S man forever.

Reading manual is always helpful, but with photography it's best to practise a lot.