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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 7, 2004, 12:08 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 10
Default

I've owned point & shoot all my life...love pictures, just not learning about the camera stuff..

I'm getting my FIRST digital...giving up my Minolta Freedom Zoom 140....so I want portability/size with some(?) zoom if possible

What I NEED:

Camera will be with me AT ALL TIMES, so Ithe smaller the better...(any size purse or pocket for example!!)

I want to take movies with sound.

I want to be able to take many pics (if necessary).

Most of the time - sending pics to family/printing for my own photo albums/nothing too serious....but would like some quality.

-I don't know anything about cameras....and I seriously don't mind it that way...!

I fell in love VISUALLY with the Casio Ex-S100 (love that brushed stainless look & credit card size)...I like the note that said about having a "cradle" where it can charge, and also watch the photos? / and the "bestshot" sounded real handy.

But would I be better off with a higher megapixalnumber for the price, or does that really come into play for someone like me?? (is the 3 enough??)

BUT...for the $$$, is it wiser to get the Pentax OptioS5i? or Minolta Xg??? I also don't know what I'm looking at as far as "memory stix", etc...so that doesn't mean anything to me. I want convenience...

I don't have camera stores physically close by....so seeing them in person is not an option.

Any opinions would be appreciated....

thx


Tessi is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 7, 2004, 3:18 PM   #2
rp3
Member
 
rp3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 63
Default

I have a Canon SD200 which is one camera to consider and I use it for similar purposes. It's 3.2 Megapixels which works quite well for computer based use (a web gallery only needs about .8 MP). It has an amazing video mode.

Since this is your first digital camera, I'll do a little explaining about memory sticks and cards. On a digital camera, every photo is saved as a file on the memory you put in the camera. When you fill it up, you cannot take new pictures until you download them to your computer or delete them from the camera. The memory is reusable so once you do download, you can take photos all over again. At 3MP, you are looking at 1MB/photo on normal settings; 2MB/photo with 5MP.

The second you get a camera, you will need to buy an memory card as noone sells the camera with enough memory to fill your needs. Canon gave me 16MB of memory which is good for 16 pictures on normal settings. The good news is that the memory is cheap. $50 will buy you 512 MB. If you want to take longvideos, you will also want "high speed" memory because otherwise the your camera will not be able to keep recording without pause.

As to size, your camera has the following specs:






Depth


1.83 in.



Height


2.4 in.



Weight


.43 lb.



Width


4.4 in.


The casio you mentioned is .25lb and has dimensions of 3.46x 2.24x.66 inch so it's 7% shorter, 21% less wide 66% thinner and weighs 42% less. If you are trying to get a camera that fits into the same place as your old one you have lots of wiggle room for a larger camera.


rp3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2004, 3:47 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 10
Default

thx so much for the response....my head is just dizzy from all the research I've done in the last week...too much info for me!!!

I'm definitely looking to go as small as possible for a digital camera.

Do you think the 3 megapixals is plenty for what I want? higher is for larger photos isn't it?

Unfortunately, where I live offers zero opportunity to actually see and touch different cameras that I'm considering....

but I THINK I've narrowed it to the Casio Ex-S100 (just love the way it looks!!)..but in serious contention is the Pentax Optio 5Si, and one of the Minolta Dimage's....

wish I could actually handle them....

thx again!
Tessi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2004, 9:54 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Thon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 105
Default

Tessi wrote:
Quote:
thx so much for the response....my head is just dizzy from all the research I've done in the last week...too much info for me!!!

I'm definitely looking to go as small as possible for a digital camera.

Do you think the 3 megapixals is plenty for what I want?* higher is for larger photos isn't it?

Unfortunately, where I live offers zero opportunity to actually see and touch different cameras that I'm considering....

but I THINK I've narrowed it to the Casio Ex-S100 (just love the way it looks!!)..but in serious contention is the Pentax Optio 5Si, and one of the Minolta Dimage's....

wish I could actually handle them....

thx again!
Tell you what, reduce you list to what you really like and read as many reviews as you can. List out the pros and cons for every one (which all digicams would DEFINITELY have) and your choice should be simple. Just make sure you can live with any flaws/shortcomings that your choice has, and learn how to get past them. And take plenty of photos, coz the more you use your camera the more you get to know it and you can work out all the problems.

I have a Oly mju-400(Stylus) which has good outdoor capabilities but poor indoors & no manual controls, the only way to work around it, is to make sure my subjects are not too far from me indoors to reduce the problem.

Thon.
Thon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2004, 8:01 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 10
Default

thx -

will do
Tessi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2004, 1:17 PM   #6
smc
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 46
Default

I've research alot of ultracompact cameras, This site , DCRP, CNET and Amazon consumer reviews. Here's what I've found.

Pentax are nice little cameras, fits in an Altoid's tin(optio s)but heard alot of complaints about reliabilty. Casio are good cameras with good quality pictures, no AV out. Canons have some of the best pic quality and are very small. I've seen and held all the cameras I've mentioned except the Sony and Minolta. My recommendations are Canon sd200, s410 (little bigger than the rest), Casio z40, Fuji f440, Minolta g400 and Sony dsc l1.

I'm leaning towards the sd200, because fast start up &shot to shot, short shutter lag, very small, great video. The Casio z40 is also real nice but no AV out, something I use alot and the pics were better on the s410.

I looked at the Minolta X series but couldn't find a satisfactory price also have same reservations as with the Casio. Sony and Panasonic have great pics but are a little pricey.

I think I'll be happy with a 3MP camera as I rarely print or make 8 x 10 and never bigger than that. It is hard to tell a 3MP from a 4MP at 4 x6 and I'll go out on a limb and say I've seen better larger size pics fromsome 3MP camera than 4 MP cameras.

peeked at the ex-s100 real nice, too pricey for me for especially for a 3MP

Steve


smc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2004, 8:11 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 10
Default

smc -

thx sooo much - lots of info to think about. I super appreciate the time!!

T
Tessi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2004, 10:35 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8
Default

Canon SD200 or SD300 would be your best bet based on what you write.

Is 3 meg enough (SD200) or do you need 4 meg (SD300)?

That depends on how large you want to go with your enlargements.

You can get a decent 8x10 print with the SD200 ..... as long as you don't do any cropping. If you want to print 8x10 from a cropped portion of the picture then the SD300 is the way to go.

Why Canon? Because all reviews consistantly have praised these small cameras for their build quality and picture quality.

Why SD? Because these are smaller, lighterand faster than the previous models.

I've got a Canon S400 and just love the thing, but have looked at the SD300 because they're smaller, faster AND have a larger LCD display!
TheSkipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2004, 6:20 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 10
Default

Tx Skipper !

I will check out the Canons....


Tessi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2004, 8:14 AM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5
Default

Well, I was in your shoes. I was really trying to decide between the sd300 and the sony p150.



It was very tough as each had their advantages. But in the end, I went with the sony. I took a few pics and they look great but I will update everyone later after I get a chance to really use it.

Either way you decide, they are both great pictures. What ultimatly turned me to the sony was that the canon's (even though their picture is nicer) have a lot more purple fringing and the corners seemed more out of focus than the sony.
argoldst 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 6:36 AM.