Digital cameras

[furrycute]

Anyone into digital cameras here?

I have two. One is a 5mp Sony F717 that I purchased a couple of years ago. Great camera, great pictures, but it's a bit too big to carry around.

Now just recently I got myself a 7mp Casio EX-Z750 (early Christmas present). It's much more compact and easier to carry around. However, I still find the pictures from the Sony F717 to be more pleasing. I guess there is just so much glass you can squeeze into that tiny lens on the Casio.

But overall, the Casion is a compact camera you can carry with you everywhere you go. Plus, the Casio has an amazing mpeg4 movie mode, you can store 30 minutes of mpeg4 movie on a 1gb SD card. And, it has a built in voice recorder. Now I have a swiss army knife of the digital age.

 

[Mr. Lamb Fries]

my Fiance got me a Nikon 4600 for X-mas. I used to have a pentax optio that was about 4 years old. It got stolen a few months ago from the car I just needed a camera for basic uses and I think this one is great!

 

[BMXTRIX]

I got into it several years ago when I was tired of scanning photos for my website. I got the Canon Powershot Pro70 which was a fairly well rated point and click with some advanced features.

Unfortunately, it suffered from severe shutter lag and put me through hell trying to take sports photos. I then had a friend who went to events with me who was able to borrow, then purchase a Nikon D1. This was my first experience with a digital SLR, and was awesome. No people, it's not all about the number of pixels! Good optics, excellent color = great image. Add extra resolution and it's a bonus. But, not the key.

Now, I picked up a Canon Digital Rebel for myself and my wife has a Canon Powershot S1 (10x optical zoom).

The Digital Rebel is simply phenomenal for when I need it, but a bit bulky for day-to-day use. I love that the internal battery lasts for days of usage without need for a charge. Plus, it has nearly zero shutter lag... Of course it's a SLR, so I get lens interchangability with flash and other external options. Love it.

Best site, IMO?

www.dpreview.com

It is definitely the Audioholics of digital cameras.

 

[Shinerman]

Anyone into digital cameras here?

I have two. One is a 5mp Sony F717 that I purchased a couple of years ago. Great camera, great pictures, but it's a bit too big to carry around.

Now just recently I got myself a 7mp Casio EX-Z750 (early Christmas present). It's much more compact and easier to carry around. However, I still find the pictures from the Sony F717 to be more pleasing. I guess there is just so much glass you can squeeze into that tiny lens on the Casio.

But overall, the Casion is a compact camera you can carry with you everywhere you go. Plus, the Casio has an amazing mpeg4 movie mode, you can store 30 minutes of mpeg4 movie on a 1gb SD card. And, it has a built in voice recorder. Now I have a swiss army knife of the digital age.

In terms of non-DSLR compact digital cameras,

The reason you are getting better performace from less MP is that you can only cram so many pixels on a sensor. Many of the first 8mp had horrible noise and the image quality was easily beat by lesser cameras. Point and shoots have very small sensors and to get more pixels on the sensor you have to make smaller pixels. This mean reduced ability to capture information accurately. The Sony 828 8mp is a great(bad?) example of this.

That Sony F717 is a great camera. Think it's got the zeiss lens? Unless your making big enlargements over 8x10, 5mp does a great job.

To me, 5mp cameras are the best value out there in terms of performance and cost for the casual shooter.

Another thing to consider is your ability to steadily hold a very small camera. I can't do it and I have been a semi-pro photographer for many years. You will get lots of camera shake with these "micro" cameras. Just pressing the shutter button cause a lot of movement when the camera weighs about as much as a pack of cigs.

Shinerman?

 

[furrycute]

Camera shake, didn't think of that one before.

The F717 is a beast compared to my Casio. I guess my hands were a lot steadier when holding the F717.

Now I'm regretting that I didn't consider the Panasonic FX9 that has image stabilization built in...

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

As far as sizes go, you have SLR, medium, compact, and ultra compact. As you drop in size, many times you'll drop in quality - especially in low lit areas as well as soft edge issues.

As far as "compact" cameras go, I've not found any better than the Canon S400. I've purchased the newer SD400 for the wife a year ago (since the S400 color and clarity was excellent). It's thinner with a larger LCD, but it just doesn't compare to the quality pics I get with the original S400.

I've never had issues with camera shake. The S400 doesn't suffer from "soft edges" as as many ultra compacts do, like the SD400, some of the Casios and Pentax models, as well as some Nikons and Sonys. I've heard the Olympia compacts are excellent choices. None of these sub $500 cameras will compare to digital SLR's, but they're not meant to. These are pocket/purse sized cameras for the novice, or a second camera for the professional. Almost all of the 4-5mp compact and ultra compact cameras produce outstanding 4x6 prints. If I was in the market again for a compact/ultra compact, I'd pay extra close attention to the quality of the flash, and soft edges. Those IMO are the toughest areas a tiny digital camera has to overcome.

Some of the newer digital cameras will do 30fps at 640x480, and a few do 60fps at 320x240 which is pretty impressive video. With a 1-2gb memory card, you practically have a budget camcorder.

DP review is a great site. Here's another excellent site:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S400/S40A.HTM

 

[furrycute]

My Casio Z750 does 30fps at 640x480, which is quite fun to play with. My F717 only does MPEG1 movies, which aside from the low quality also takes up too much room. With this Casio, I can store 33 minutes of MPEG4 movie on a 1gb SD card.