Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 30, 2006, 7:49 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 103
Default

I'm just getting into the field of Digital Cameras looking for a good price/performance model.
I want to know what exactly effects the overallquality of a digital camera.. I hear things like zoom size, pixel ammount, LCD size, etc. but i really cant find a list of the things i should be looking out for.

Greatly Appriciated!
Track is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 30, 2006, 8:11 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

Not having four days to write a reply, let me just say that the quality of the lens, the sensor and the processor makeup the overall quality of a digicam. Everything else is considered features...some of which negatively effect the quality of the camera.

You need to determine which features are necessary for you to accomplish your photographic goals...they haven't invented the perfect camera yet. Everything is a tradeoff.

What type of photographs do you want to take? Are you looking for a camera you can stick in your pocket, or doesn't size matter? How critical are you of photo quality? Are you looking to produce National Geographic or Sports Illustrated quality pics, or just 4x6 snapshots, or just something good enough to email a friend?

And, how much are you willing to spend to get into digital photography?

the Hun


rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 30, 2006, 8:26 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 103
Default

Quality of the lens,sensor and processor, right. What abt thing like "f/ number"?

Im not looking for the perfect camera. I bought my last camera in 1999. IThought that if i waited some time before buying a digital camera, then the prices would drop to the point where u can get a good quality camera for cheap.. i mean who needs more than 6-7 MP. As in u can get the perfect camera for a few hundred dollars, and if u wanted to spend more then u would just get features that professionals want. Am i too early?

Id mostly use my camera for when i go on trips, so mostly nature shots.

The size issue is interesting to me, because on one hand the camera i bought back in 1999 is quite big and heavy but at the same time if i had one of those "ultra" compact models, id be afraid to brake it and i wouldnt quite be able to hold it (assumingly its more suiting to women). So i guess something in middle, perhaps a camera that isnt huge but does weigh enough for it to be easier to hold it still.

Im not sure what the difference is beetween National Geographic and Sports Illustrated, but id have togo with National Geographic.I just bought a new Canon Pixma iP4300 Photo Printer mainly for the purpose of printing photos from my future digital camera andIm looking to print 4x6 and 8x10 (or up to A4 size) prints.

I dont live in the US, so prices for me are a little higher.. 250-350$ seems like it would be enough for good camera dont u think?

Oh, and i would also like the ability to record video. Ive only seen 2 500$ cameras that have a 1024x768 resolution, so i guess ill have to go with a camera that has 640x480 as most of them do have that option. From looking at the reviews on this site, i can see that most of the camera record video with a lot of NOISE in them, and since video is quite important to me i would really appriciate it if i could find a camera without very much noise. But of course stills quality is a lot more important.

Thnx!
Track is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 30, 2006, 9:48 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

Track,

F-stop refers to the size of the lens aperture. Better quality lenses usually have the ability to open wider, thereby allowing more light to pass through. This is all part of the lens quality I mentioned.

Digicam prices have dropped dramitically in recent years, and continue to do so. However, they still haven't reached the National Geographic quality for $250 - $350. Maybe $600 -$700, but not $350. You can get a very good camera for your price range, however. You said you liked to take nature shots while on trips. Does that mean landscapes, like pictures of mountains and streams, or wildlife, like little birds up in the tops of trees? What I'm trying to get at, is do you need more of a wide angle lens, or a telephoto lens. You also said you didn't want a large camera, and you didn't want a small camera. I'm not sure, so I'm going to make a suggestion...Take a look at the Fuji S6000, the Sony H2, and the Canon S3 IS. Read a few reviews online. Go to a camera store and pick them up and take a few shots...see how they feel. Then come back and let us know what you think, and we'll continue from there. At least we'll know if they're too big, too expensive, not enough quality,etc. Sound good?

the Hun

rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2006, 11:14 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 103
Default

Alright, well ive been researching the 3 cameras u suggested..

They all have a very high optical zoom, wich i find neat, 6 MegaPixels and they are all priced beetween 300-400$.

I was looking at the S3 IS earlier aswell, since all ive known is Canon and i trust them.. It seems like a great camera - SLR quality but not so huge, but the price is a little more than id like to spend (maybe i should wait until the summer to buy). The only problem with the S3 IS is the LCD size wich is only 2" and from what ive heard its not so easy taking close-up shots with, wich is very important to me. It also has only 6 MP, but i really dont need more with 12x Optical Zoom.

What would be better? The PoweShot A710 IS or the PowerShot S3 IS? They all seem to have the same quality to me.. the S3 has twice the zoom and the A710 has a larger LCD and 7MP instead of 6.

Ive also been searching for stores where i can test some of these cameras out, but im not sure exactly where to look - I dont live in the US currently.

It seems like ALL the camera have negetive aspects, so its going to be a trade off in any case, but they all seem to have IDENTICAL image quality, and maybe thats to be expected after so many years of there being digital cameras. I dont know why i need a 6+ MP photo anyway.. How much would i need for a 10x15 photo?

Track is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2007, 4:39 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Morag2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 820
Default

Well a few things about your last post Track. The S3IS does not even touch SLR-quality, so don't be fooled into believing that. The reason SLR's are bigger is that they have a physically larger light sensor and this gives them huge improvements in image quality. The S3IS has good image quality as far as non-SLR cameras go, but it has nothing on a true SLR sensor.

The difference in megapixels between 6 and 7 is not really important unless you want HUGE prints. I just recently made a 12x18 print with my 5MP non-SLR camera and it turned out just fine (you can't see any pixellation at all).

I would recommend the S3IS over the A710. When I bought my first camera I was deciding between a cheaper, compact camera with 4-5 times zoom or a bigger one with 12x. I took the 12x zoom and have never regretted it. A longer range is far more important than megapixels in my opinion.

The LCD isn't really a big issue. It is best to take shots with the viewfinder (as it reduces image shake) and so I only use the LCD for viewing pictures. I would recommend taking the smaller viewfinder because it makes the camera cheaper and I don't think going from a 2" to a 2.5" is worth the extra money.

As for the close-ups, I haven't used these cameras so I'm afraid I can't help you there.
Morag2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2007, 8:40 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 103
Default

By "viewfinder"u mean the eyehole that you use on film cameras?

If digital cameras have viewfinders aswell, why do they have LCDs, and then why dont Film cameras have LCDs aswell?



I dont think i can afford a digital SLR camera, but i already have a film SLR. Would u reccomend going from a Film SLR toa Digital non-SLR?
Track 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 1:47 PM.