Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 14, 2004, 10:35 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
sci0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
Default

Hey guys, the last post I tried for this wasn't to successfull probably because it was too specific. But basically, this is the usual "I need a digicam, which one should I get?" post.

I've tried to email steve but didn't get a response which is understandable, hes probably really busy and gets hundreds of emails a day (no sarcasm intended)

Anywho, I've looked at Elphs, exilims, optio-s4i's the usual candidates.

I really am interested in either the kodak ls743, or the sony dsc-p93. My neighbor has the kodak which takes awesome pics, and uses SD memory. The sony is 5MP and takes better video, but it also uses the more expensive memory stick pro card.

If you guys could lend ANY help on this, or reccomend ANY other digicam, and why, it would be awesome. I'm looking to spend around 300 dollars, which makes the kodak a good choice and the sony a decent one. One of the guys at my work does photography for the building I work in, and said kodak makes a real good camera which further complicates which one I should get.

Hope this wasn't to specific, and thanks for all the help.
sci0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 14, 2004, 11:52 AM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Actually, your first post was the way to do it. Usually, someone asks the "which camera should I buy question" without giving any information on what they are looking for.

That's one of the reasons you got some responses. Many posts with this question, go unanswered by anyone.

Without more information, it's sort of like asking "which is best: theToyota Camry,the Ford F150 Pickup, or the Dodge Caravan"?

There are simply too many variables inuser preferences/needs, to say which one is "best" for them.

As far as Steve, see this post started by him, titled "The worst question is what camera should I buy"

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...amp;forum_id=2

Steve writesdetailed reviews, so you can compare features (and sample photos), and try to determine which ones are more important to you. Then, you can "test drive" the cameras in person (many stores have demos setup for this purpose). Would you buy a new car without test driving it?

Between the two models in your current list (Kodak LS443, and Sony DSC-P93), I'd personally be inclined to go with the Kodak. From what I've seen, it's a better performer at higher ISO Speeds, compared to the Sony. This is probably because it's CCD sensor is not as dense. Sometimes, higher megapixels does NOT equal higher quality. It's MPEG4 Video would also use less space compared to the videos from the Sony.

Although, some users don't like the Kodaks for a couple of reasons. One is that their colors tend to be too saturated (to some eyes), another is that most Kodak models offer no ability for the user to control JPEGQuality (amount of compression being applied to the images). Since JPEG is a "lossy" compression technique, too much can result in loss of detail, and visible artifacts in images from the compression. A lot depends on the type of scene. Although, in most cases, the Kodaks seem to work fine.

To be fair,sometimes Sony is also criticized for their colors, too. I purchased (and returned) a Sony DSC-P10 last year, in part for this reason (color). In many lighting conditions, the "greens" tended to be what I would consider to be "flourescent" (more saturated, compared to other colors). I simply could not live with it (but I'm probably more critical than most users). I was also very dissapointed with the indoor photos (mostly due to a combination of noise, long flash recycle times,and metering difficulties). Some Sony models may be much better in this respect.

Also, some users may prefer the look of the photos from the Kodaks,or from some of the Sonys (compared to more "neutral" colors).

That's one of the reasons that nobody can say which one is best for you. Each user will have their own preferences in a camera.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 12:34 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
sci0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
Default

Well, it didn't get hardly any replies, I figured it was too specific. This way I figured that more people who use a wide variety of cameras would be able to help...

My fault for not reading the "board rules"

Steve emailed me back, and that was super, I know hes a busy guy so I'm glad about that.

He also suggested going with the Kodak over the Sony, I was a bit thrown off before he suggested that because the Kodak didn't appear on his buyers guide, while both sonys (4mp + 5mp) did.

So, I'm going to be ordering this camera this friday so speak up or forever hold your peace!

Thanks for everything Jim
sci0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 1:22 PM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Great! I think you'll like it -- but I'd still "test drive" them in a store. :!:

The Kodakphotos do have a lot more "pop", compared to images frommost models "straight from the camera". Some users like this, some don't. Also, Kodak's white balance algorithms seem to work better than most. This is important so that your whites don't look pink, etc.in complex lighting. Although, no camera always gets it right.

I think it'll be much easier for you to learn how to get the best out of the Kodak, too. They've got a super menu system in their models (with descriptions of what menu selections do).

I also think it's got a better CCD than the Sony you're looking at. The 5MP 1/1.8" CCD tends to be pretty noisy as you increase ISO speeds (althoughnone of the smaller sensors are particularly good at higher ISO speeds -- some are just worse than others).

Now, don't forget the accessories. You'll definitely need to buy a large memory card (especially if you want to take videos). Get a spare battery, too.

This model uses Secure Digital Cards. If I were you, I'd stick to Panasonic or Simpletech (rated at 10mb/second in larger 256mb and 512mb size, so they appear to be using Panasonic Components). Lexar's "High Speed" cards are also fine, as are Sandisk's new Ultra II series cards.

It's not just about speed, it's about reliability.3 manufacturers jointly developed Secure Digital: Panasonic, Sandisk and Toshiba. Even if a manufacturer "really" manufacturers other types of flash memory, with Secure Digital, you'll find that most are using components from the "big 3". For whatever reason, in larger sizes (256mb, 512mb), Sandisk's "Standard Speed"components seem to have more problems. I don't think it just has to do with the speed (although they are VERY slow, compared to 256mb and 512mb cardsusingPanasonic components).

This does not seem to effect all camera models. So, the Kodak may work fine with any of them. I'd just personally air towards the side of caution, since I've seen far too many problems reported with some Secure Digital Cards.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 1:34 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
sci0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
Default

thanks! I am a big computer nerd and I was thinking about getting a Kingston SD card, they make decent computer RAM, but how do you feel about their SD capabilities? My main reason for this can be seen at this link:

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Produc...ductCode=82031

Do you think I should get that, or go with a more expensive SD card?
sci0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 1:51 PM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'd personally avoid it. For one, the specs on the page in you link say that it's a 2mb/second card. That means it's usingslow Components.

Someof their cards seem to be using the "Good" (i.e, reliable) components; and some seem to being using what I consider to be the "Bad" (unreliable) components (and you can't tell which, untilyou open the package). Some of these guys may be using more than one OEM supplier, too.

See this list for an example of how the codes on the back work:

http://sdprob.aximsite.com/theproblemlist.htm

Again, some cameras may work fine with all cards. I'd just air towards caution. I've seen far too many SD reliability problems reported from using the slower cards in some digital camera models.

Heck, with my latest camera (one of the "pocketable" models - a Konica KD-510z), only Panasonic and Toshiba SD cards are supported in 256mb size, and only Panasonic is supported in 512mb size. Slower cards in these sizes can cause the camera to malfunction.

Konica-Minolta even had specific warnings about using Sandisk's standardcards in 256mb size in their compatibility charts for some models. However, they have recently removed the specific warnings (they just don't show Sandisk as being a tested card now). My guess is that some "pressure" was applied.

Again, my personal preference in SD would be Panasonic, Simpletech, or Lexar's "High Speed" (not the standard) cards in larger sizes.

Edit:

I see that the vendor you were looking at also sells the Transcend 45x Secure Digital Card. I know very little about this card, but I have seen Steve recommend it.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 2:31 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
sci0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
Default

Thanks so much! I was really close to ordering that Kingston one. I will probably go with the Transcend one, it is 45x, which is faster then the lexar 32x, and it has a slightly better price. I am a student working so price is always a factor.

One last question (sorry I seem to be bugging you) but in your last post you didn't really mention San Disk, and it kinda seemed like you suggested I stray away from them. But previous to that the San Disk UltraII cards you said were ok, they seem to have a higher read/write speed then even the 45x transcend card, so would you say they are allright or not?

Once again, sorry if i'm bugging you, this topic is kinda straying away from the title, so if you want I can post it somewhere else.:?
sci0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 2:45 PM   #8
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Actually, I've seen virtually no reliability problems reported from users of the newer Sandisk Ultra II cards. I did see a post from one user with a bad"out of the box" Ultra II card (but you're going to get this from any manufacturer from time to time). His replacement Ultra II is working fine.

In fact, I've seen some benchmark tests showing the Ultra IIas faster than Panasonic cards in larger sizes (even though the Ultra II is rated at 9mb/second, and the Panasonic is rated at 10mb/second).

So, it appears that Sandisk "has their act together" now on newer Secure Digital Card offerings.

Of course, what works fine in one camera, may have problems in another. Such is the nature of the game.

My lastest camera is probably more "finnicky" than most on Secure Digital Memory Type. So, that's one of the reasons I'm more cautious. So, personally, I wouldn't risk going with most Secure Digital offerings.

You may find that your Kodak works fine with any of them. I just wouldn't feel comfortable recommending most, since I've seen too many Secure Digital problems reported (from users of more thanmanufacturer's camera).






JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2004, 5:22 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
RyanH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 452
Default

I have a question, you said you are a big computer nerd. Then why the basic point and shoot camera? Most computer nerds I know, me included, always want the best toys.

I was just curious since us computer nerds seem to outgrow the toys we purchase very fast. I would think if you bought a basic point and shoot camera, you will outgrow the features and want more camera withing six months or so.
RyanH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 15, 2004, 10:36 AM   #10
Junior Member
 
sci0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 25
Default

if i get a basic point and shoot, it will get me what i need to get done. 300 dollars for a 4MP camera seems pretty good to me, the fact is im 17 and I dont have a HUGE cash supply to work with.

a lot of the cameras out there, have really advanced features like cropping and trimming and all that stuff, but the point in hand, i can do all of that on my computer. i got the full adobe cs suite, so anything i need to do to the pictures, doesnt really need to come with all the zips and thingys on the more expensive ones. i am a nerd yes, but i try to get the best deal for my money because i tend not to have a lot of it.

if you were wondering my current computer rig it is:

Thermal Take Xaser2 Case
Thermal Take Dragon 7 CPU Cooler
AMD Athlon 2500+ Barton
Soyo Dragon Ultra Platnium KT600
Western Digital 120gig 7200 8mb HD
HIS Hightech Excalibur 9800PRO
Apacer DDR PC2700 1gig
7 Thermal Take Case Fans
802.11B Dlink Wireless Card
Samsung DVD CD-RW Combo Drive 32x24x40x
Ultra 400watt Power Supply Blue LED

This rig is getting old and dated, but like I said, for me, it gets the job done. I've just slowly been upgrading the older parts over time, and I realized, I can be a nerd and still do what I need to do, and not spend top dollar on everything especially when money is hard to come by. Yes, I have a decent paying job, but car insurance, and car payments, and all that stuff come into mind too. Finally, I've been wanting a camera for a few months, and now I've decided to get one, one that is the best bang for the buck.

Hope that helps!

-Mike
sci0n is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:46 AM.