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

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 27, 2005, 7:48 PM   #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5

Having searched a lot for cameras that satisfy my specifications / pricing needs, i think these two are the final candidates.

I have made a list of the things that really distinguish both cameras (because most of the features are the same) and they`re as follow :

canon : has image stabilizer. has manual focus

kodak : has 2.2'' LCD (versus 1.5 of the canon). has 5 MP resolution (versus 3.2 of the canon)

the price (aprox) at which i can get these cameras in the country i live is 440 for the canon and 510 for the kodak.

what is your recommendation?. I have investigated of buying one of the panasonic lumix models, but they`re not available here and is way too expensive to import (and not to say that there`s not technical support, so i put it out of the list).

Maybe i have overlooked some other model very similar to these ones and you know it exists... in that case, please tell me (of course, always talking in the same price range... ) so i can further investigate.

sepharg is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 27, 2005, 7:54 PM   #2
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 440

sepharg wrote:
what is your recommendation?.
Determine how many megapixels you need, and buy the camera that meets but does not go over your needs.

PhilR. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2005, 6:07 AM   #3
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5

ok but both cameras have almost the same features i like, except the ones listed in the post.
obviously i would like a combination of the best of both (ie : IS, 5MP, manual focus and 2.2' LCD) but as that`s not possible i`m asking advice on which features should be considered more important in general terms. I am not a pro, i`m just starting and want to introduce myself to the snapshot taking hobbie (or call it whatever you like) and that`s why i want to get the best camera i can for starters.
i forgot to mention that the canon has a drawback of using 4 AA batteries, while the canon has it`s internal lithium rechargable battery.

and as i said before, if you know of another model of similar characteristics please comment. thanks
sepharg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2005, 9:03 AM   #4
Senior Member
bmullen@comcast's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 4,435

If you are not goig to be printing anything larger than an 8.5X11, the three megapixel will be adequate. Image stabilization is a very nice feature to have with a long telephoto in order to get sharp shots. Just some thoughts. I have owned an olympus C2100, which was image stabilized with a 10X zoom, and I currently own both a FZ10 and FZ20 which also both are image stabilized. I have been very happy with all three cameras.
bmullen@comcast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2005, 6:01 PM   #5
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 32

The Canon 1S is a good camera but it has one serious flaw: The inability to focus in low light situations (like indoors or cloudy days). The focus will hunt and hunt but won't focus period in many situations.

But the 3.2 megapixel image is one of the better ones (good resolution for a 3 megapixel and sharp colors) and will look fine at 8x10 prints. Even at 13" x 19" it still looks pretty good (on the Canon I9900).

But resolution wise it's not even close to the new Nikon 8800 or Minolta A200 which both have image stabilizers but unfortunately limited video.

The perfect camera has still not been made.

Eventually someone will get it right and quit monkeying around and wasting our time and [email protected]#$!#$#$

wowlfie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2005, 11:51 PM   #6
tanaltan's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 70

I think Nikon 8800 is the one which is most near to the "best" camera that we dream (If we exlucde the DSLR's).

It is the only one having a 2/3'' sensor among the long zoom cameras. And the othres are just of 1/2.5'' not even 1/1.8'' !!!
tanaltan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2005, 12:07 AM   #7
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 47

The battery thing shouldn't be an issue. Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH) AA batteries are cheap and rechargeable and you can have plenty of extras around as backups.The rechargers are cheap, too. And if you're stuck somewhere you can find alkaline AA batteries anywhere. The Kodak battery is proprietary (unique) and while you can get extras, they cost a bit more and are not available everywhere.
hakaplan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2005, 3:17 AM   #8
Senior Member
pagerboy's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 483

I bought the Canon S1IS because of the 10x optical zoom, the image stabilizer and the batteries.

And of course the ease of use.
pagerboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2005, 8:11 AM   #9
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 27

I bought the S1 for the capabilities (you can compensate for the low light issues). Also don't discount the LCD on the S1. It is a little small, but that flexibility is a major plus with me. I have gotten shots I wouldn't have of animals and kids because they couldn't see me getting the pic. The zoom takes you right in even on wild animals. They cooperate much better when they can't see you...

And if video is your thing (not mine), I hear the video reviews on the S1 are superb. But it is still pretty expensive these days considering the competition... I don't know why. When you can get a Z-10 at 199 US and have to still pay 300+ for the S1...


Kavoom is offline   Reply With Quote

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 6:29 AM.