whats better?

[posyho]

Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-P12
Canon PowerShot IXUS 400 (s400 in USA)
Casio Exilim EX-Z4
Minolta Dimage F300

What do you think of those?
Which is the best & why would you would choose it?

[JimC]

Out of those choices, I would personally go with the Canon S400. It's 4MP 1/1.8" CCD has the best noise profile out of all of them.

I've owned the Sony DSC-P10 (same as the P12 except for cosmetics), and was not pleased with the metering or the ergonomics). Fortunately, the vendor accepted returns, so I was able to get a refund.

The F300 is a very good camera, but it's very slow (both from a startup time perspective, focus lag, and zoom mechanism point of view). It's probably got the best lens, and the most user control. But, it's speed made me rule it out when I looked at pocketable models.

Likewise, I ruled out cameras using denser sensors. The Casio you are looking at uses a 4 Megapixel 1/2.5" CCD, which is smaller, and denser than the 4 Megapixel 1/1.8" CCD used n a camera like the Canon S400.

As a general rule, the denser the sensor, the higher the noise, and the lower the dynamic range.

The Casio is a very small camera for carry, but I think the better image quality with a slightly larger camera and sensor are well worth it.

You may want to consider the Minolta DiMAGE G500, too. It's also marketed as the Konica Revio KD-510z (they are identical cameras). Konica-Minolta just decided to market it under the Konica Label in Asia and Europe, and under the Minolta label in the U.S.

I know of users that have owned both the Canon S400, and the Konica KD-510z. They both preferred the Konica (faster, more accurate focus indoors, better colors, etc.).

See this thread, where I quoted dpreview.com forum poster Nyugen (who owns both the Canon S400, and the Konica KD-510z, which is identical to the Minolta DiMAGE G500, except for the logo). I also included links to his posts about the differences:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=5851793

Also, see this post from dpreview.com forum poster Adam (who has owned both the Canon S400 and the Konica):

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=6277866

I also know of a user that has owned both the Minolta F300, and the Minolta G500 (Konica KD-510z). He also prefers the Konica (faster and easier to use, sturdier, better range of colors, etc.).

This is what he said:

"I did what you mentioned. I got the G500 for a couple of days, used it, and loved it. Compared to the F300, it's faster, the photos have a greater range of tones, it's sturdier and easier to use. I've even played with a few of the images with Photoshop Elements, and the enhanced version I create still is outmatched by the original.--which really surprised me. Thanks for the great information, and for leading me to the details on how to customize the menu options.

Ken"

See the posts from user 1574kc in this thread at megapixel.net:

http://www.megapixel.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=8536

You can see some photos from my Konica KD-510z here, along with links to my user review:

http://www.pbase.com/jcockfield/konica_kd510z

[posyho]

thanks for this big answer

[ralphuk100]

I am curious why no-one ever mentions the QV-R40 casio? I have one and have recently compared it to a Z4 and a Z3 and found that the R40 has better image quality. Its dimensions are pretty much the same except for depth which is about 1.5 Z-4's. It also has a 1/1.8" ccd (according to JimC ) as opposed to a smaller one and a lot more manually setable features . However - I have not seen many people put it forward as an option in their comparisons. Am I missing something?

[slipe]

The F300 is the only compact I know of that has continuous tracking focus. The camera is particularly fast if you pre-focus and the tracking focus makes that practical with moving objects. My big Minolta has it and my little Oly C50 doesn’t. I get a lot of blurred shots of rugrats and unpredictable people motion at gatherings and parties with the Oly that I avoid with the Minolta. The tracking focus takes more battery, but extra NiMH AAs are cheap. I would think you would learn to pre-focus with the tracking focus on as a standard technique. It focuses right up to shutter release if you aren’t familiar with continuous focus. The F300 has 5Mp.

I would personally take the Pentax S4 over the Casio Z4. The Casio has that great 2 inch LCD but the Pentax has more features and is smaller. They both use the same Pentax lens and the Pentax was cheaper the last time I checked – it started out about $50 pricier.

I’m not familiar with the P12 but the recent Sonys have had the 640 X 480 sound movies. It doesn’t make it a camcorder but often the digital is all you have along when you want to capture something. All the others you mention have the old 320 X 240 movies which aren’t good for much.

[Mike_PEAT]

Originally Posted by ralphuk100

I am curious why no-one ever mentions the QV-R40 casio?
Am I missing something?

Again, it's probably because people prefer purchasing cameras that have good optical equivalents rather than from electronics companies (although I like my Casio watch).

[ralphuk100]

IMO the maker has no bearing on the camera. If anything an electronics company should put together a better digital camera than a camera maker. The electronics company has been making small well formed products for years (in the case of casio). And a digital camera is just electronics - obviously excluding the lense which is usually bought in anyway. But my point was more, how come people keep mentioning they are comparing the casio z3 / z4 but dont mention the QV-R40?

[posyho]

I was compering those 2 casios z-4 and r40, and I found z-4 better

[ralphuk100]

in what way? feature wise? I compared the two as well (a friend has the Z4) and found the picture quality to be noticeably better on the R40 - however, I guess that depends what kind of pics you want to take.

[KevinG]

Originally Posted by ralphuk100

IMO the maker has no bearing on the camera. If anything an electronics company should put together a better digital camera than a camera maker.

Hmm.... frankly I see it completely opposite to this.
Once the principles are established, the electronics are the easy part. The sensors and IC's are manufactured by only a few companies... many of the camera manufacturers use the same suppliers.

Getting the optics as sharp and clear as possible under all different zoom and focus conditions, and getting the metering and color balance correct are the primary hurdles. The camera companies have been at this for decades. I think the reviews support this.

Also, how many high-end, professional-level cameras does Casio offer?

And before you say that has no bearing on the consumer level lines... I would argue that of course it does. When a company invests millions in R&D developing their high-end line, they're not just going to throw that out and start over when they design their consumer-level products.

Kevin