View Single Post
Old Mar 22, 2007, 8:31 AM   #11
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 51

You probably can build one but it may cost alot more than most people are willing to pay.
:-)Yeah, if they'd only let the consumer design the stuff!

As others mentioned it's a matter of priorities - what's most important? You mention "at a distance" which means a super zoom............but unless that's indoors @ a distance (like a basketball game) then there's no real need for high ISO performance. If it's indoors & not at a distance (like family shots) then likely you don't need a superzoom. Don't forget that things like image stabilization help a great deal, negates to a certain extent the need for higher ISO.

It's all a matter of priorities, determine where most of your shooting will occur & then try to find a camera that matches the best.

Examples -

Want to shoot the occasional movie? The Canon S3IS is a good choice. movie performance is reputed to be good.

Need to shoot indoor basketball games? The Fuji is a good call has the best high ISO performance.

Save a few bucks & have outstanding image & color? Kodak's line can do excellent work @ low ISO settings.

None of these are "bad" cameras, they'll all produce excellent results. It's a simple matter of picking the best choice for your needs.

Remember photography is about 80% the indian & 20% the arrow. Most folks around here could do better with a pinhole camera than I could with a high-end DSLR :-)

Don't forget to factor in things like memory & batteries. For example, I won't own ANY camera that uses a single function memory format - why they'd use it is beyond me. Like xD, though not truly expensive it's the highest cost/MB around (because it's single function) = I'll pass (note: that's a personal decision, just MY .02). Can I walk into any drug store & pick up an emergency battery?

All things to consider and there's TONS of choices :-)which can make it difficult.
Bailey59 is offline   Reply With Quote