Camera Recommendations

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

We are thinking about getting a new digital camera, so I thought I'd check
here to see if anyone could recommend something with the following
features.

1. GOOD low light performance! I'm tired of deleting 1/3 of our pictures
because they are too dark, grainy, or blurry (even after post processing).

2. FAST response time. Our Olympus D-550 seems to take forever to turn on
and snap a picture quickly. It also takes forever to take a second shot in
case we missed the first one. Certainly something out there is faster?

3. 3 MEGAPIXELS. We rarely have prints made and when we do 4x6 is the
biggest we get. More resolution just means bigger files to store and worse
light sensitivity. I wouldn't reject a 5MP camera if it met the other
criteria, but it's not my main priority.

4. AUTOMATIC. We're just amateurs who want to be able to take pictures
quickly and easily, usually on the spur of the moment. We've been digital
for over 5 years now and have no intention of turning back. But, we don't
need a bunch of professional controls to worry about. Basically, we want to
turn it on and take a picture.

5. A DECENT ZOOM. 3X optical would be fine (No interest in digital zoom).

6. UNDER $500. Obviously cheaper is better... :)

Thanks for any suggestions!

Anthony
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

"HerHusband" <unknown@unknown.com> wrote in message
news:Xns967AA98057934herhusband@216.196.97.136...
> We are thinking about getting a new digital camera, so I thought I'd check
> here to see if anyone could recommend something with the following
> features.
>
> 1. GOOD low light performance! I'm tired of deleting 1/3 of our pictures
> because they are too dark, grainy, or blurry (even after post processing).
>
> 2. FAST response time. Our Olympus D-550 seems to take forever to turn on
> and snap a picture quickly. It also takes forever to take a second shot in
> case we missed the first one. Certainly something out there is faster?
>
> 3. 3 MEGAPIXELS. We rarely have prints made and when we do 4x6 is the
> biggest we get. More resolution just means bigger files to store and worse
> light sensitivity. I wouldn't reject a 5MP camera if it met the other
> criteria, but it's not my main priority.
>
> 4. AUTOMATIC. We're just amateurs who want to be able to take pictures
> quickly and easily, usually on the spur of the moment. We've been digital
> for over 5 years now and have no intention of turning back. But, we don't
> need a bunch of professional controls to worry about. Basically, we want
> to
> turn it on and take a picture.
>
> 5. A DECENT ZOOM. 3X optical would be fine (No interest in digital zoom).
>
> 6. UNDER $500. Obviously cheaper is better... :)
>
> Thanks for any suggestions!
>
> Anthony

Go to the review sites and compare. The prices on most of these review sites
are the manufacturers suggested retail.
http://www.dpreview.com/
http://www.imaging-resource.com/
http://www.steves-digicams.com/

--
CSM1
http://www.carlmcmillan.com
--
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

"CSM1" <nomoremail@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:4Bwte.169$Lj2.9@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
| "HerHusband" <unknown@unknown.com> wrote in message
| news:Xns967AA98057934herhusband@216.196.97.136...
| > We are thinking about getting a new digital camera, so I thought I'd
check
| > here to see if anyone could recommend something with the following
| > features.
| >
| > 1. GOOD low light performance! I'm tired of deleting 1/3 of our pictures
| > because they are too dark, grainy, or blurry (even after post
processing).
| >
| > 2. FAST response time. Our Olympus D-550 seems to take forever to turn
on
| > and snap a picture quickly. It also takes forever to take a second shot
in
| > case we missed the first one. Certainly something out there is faster?
| >
| > 3. 3 MEGAPIXELS. We rarely have prints made and when we do 4x6 is the
| > biggest we get. More resolution just means bigger files to store and
worse
| > light sensitivity. I wouldn't reject a 5MP camera if it met the other
| > criteria, but it's not my main priority.
| >
| > 4. AUTOMATIC. We're just amateurs who want to be able to take pictures
| > quickly and easily, usually on the spur of the moment. We've been
digital
| > for over 5 years now and have no intention of turning back. But, we
don't
| > need a bunch of professional controls to worry about. Basically, we want
| > to
| > turn it on and take a picture.
| >
| > 5. A DECENT ZOOM. 3X optical would be fine (No interest in digital
zoom).
| >
| > 6. UNDER $500. Obviously cheaper is better... :)
| >
| > Thanks for any suggestions!
| >
| > Anthony
|
| Go to the review sites and compare. The prices on most of these review
sites
| are the manufacturers suggested retail.
| http://www.dpreview.com/
| http://www.imaging-resource.com/
| http://www.steves-digicams.com/
|
| --
| CSM1
| http://www.carlmcmillan.com
| --
|

I can recommend DPReview. I used it myself to decide on my 1st digicam last
year. I picked the Konica-Minolta DImage Z3, after much thought and
comparison. Very happy with my choice.

By the way, many cameras these days have the ability to lower the
picture-taking resolution if you don't want to use the full whack. I
personally wouldn't go below 4Mp. Even if you don't want the maximum
resolution, it may come in handy some time and you could regret the lack. I
got a shot in our local paper of an escaped snake recently - low light,
underexposed, hurried grab. I still had enough pixels to do a useable
clean-up.

HTH


AGOL
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

HerHusband wrote:
> 1. GOOD low light performance! I'm tired of deleting 1/3 of our pictures
> because they are too dark, grainy, or blurry (even after post processing).

Look for wide maximum aperture and a decent flash range, but it is rare to
find consumer digicams with wider than f/2.8 these days. Make sure the
camera you choose has a focus-assist lamp. It does seem that your present
camera is a bit weak in the flash department:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/d550.html
Particularly take note of the flash working range in this and other reviews.

On the other hand, a strong flash when the subject is in the foreground
will result in washed-out skin tones, and if it throttles-down, the background
will still be dark. Consider a slave flash(es).
http://www.steves-digicams.com/ms-1.html
Others brands are available. Some cameras fire a pre-flash. If your camera
does this, get a slave flash(es) that can compensate for this. But if you are in a
room where others are taking pictures, this type of non-wired flash may be useless.

> 2. FAST response time. Our Olympus D-550 seems to take forever to turn on
> and snap a picture quickly. It also takes forever to take a second shot in
> case we missed the first one. Certainly something out there is faster?

My old Kodak DC290 took up to 15 seconds to turn-on, depending upon which
size flash card I had installed. I lost a lot of good pictures due to that. My wife's
Sony W1 is very responsive, but the flash indoors is weak. We have to refrain
from zooming. Sometimes I will raise the ISO to 200 in a large, poorly lit room
to avoid a dark background, but this results in a much greater amount of digital
noise.

Since the trend in digital cameras has been to increase megapixels, three megapixel
cameras are generally in the lower budget category, with features to match.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom