|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Jan 9, 2006, 9:53 AM
|
#1 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2
|
I would love to get feedback on which pocket-size camera is the best one going these days. Either 5 or 7MP. Top priority is print quality. Considering Casion EX Z-120, Casio Z-750, or Canon SD-550. Take a lot of beach (scenery) prints and photo's of friends at local gatherings. I have the Kodak DX-7590 (5MP) at home already, but find that it is too bulky to carry on a regular basis. Thanks! JMK
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
|
Jan 9, 2006, 10:24 AM
|
#2 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
Clearly of the cameras mentioned, the SD-550 leads the list for pocket size and great photo quality. That is not to knock the Casio's, but the SD-550 has the edge.
MT |
|
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2006, 6:31 PM
|
#3 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
Perhaps you don't like the Canon SD-550. Here is an alternative. Take a look at the Kodak V-530. Here is a sample V-530 photo.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2006, 4:57 AM
|
#4 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 714
|
How about a Kodak CX7530, 5mp ,compact and takes great pictures.I have one as a second camera.Great value for money
This picture is straight from camera resized only Wrynose Pass , Lake District UK  good luck with your choice TD |
|
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2006, 11:01 PM
|
#5 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
Tommy's Dad-
Frankly, I was amazed today at the performance of our Kodak V-530. It is an amazing digital camera. Here is an example photo taken today at 75 mph WITHOUT stopping as we transited from California to Oregon. It amazed me. MT |
|
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2006, 11:18 PM
|
#6 |
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
|
i am going to put in a vote for the Panasonic Fx9.. one of the smallest digicams out there.. image stabilization allows you to keep the ISO's lower (good, as it gets noisy above 160)... and a great lens..
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2006, 11:51 PM
|
#7 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
But Hards-
Now let's be honest shall we? There is a WHOLE lot of difference between a Kodak V-530 costing just $200 on the internet and the Panasonic FX-9 costing almost $400. Let's get REAL here folks! MT |
|
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2006, 12:55 AM
|
#8 |
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
|
very true... but w/ the canon 550 and casio 750 mentioned, it is an entirely logical option, since it is a direct competitor w/ these cams.. and thus the 300-400 would be within his budget..
also in this higher dollar class... and also worth looking at is the fuji f10.. good in low light, and its 6.3 sensor outresolves almost all compact p&s cams.. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2006, 3:55 AM
|
#9 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 714
|
mtclimber wrote:
Quote:
Thats a crackin shot MT,to say you were goin 75 mph . There are a lot of people out there who underestimate kodak cameras, and don`t include them as a buyableoption. TD |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2006, 10:12 AM
|
#10 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
I tip my hat to Hards-
Yes, the FX-9 is well within the budget range of the poster. You are indeed correct. I am just a bit surprised at the rather amazing performance of the Kodak V-530. I don't own the FX-9, but I have been led to believe that the FX-8 performs better optically and image-wise than the FX-9. Can you give me any data on that issue? MT |
|
|
|
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:29 PM.
