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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 2, 2005, 12:30 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 54
Default

Whatare the smallest, most compact digital slr's on the market with above 6MP?
brendak2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 2, 2005, 12:47 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Above6 Megapixels, huh? These both have 8:

Canon Digital Rebel XT (EOS-350D), OlympusE-300 EVOLT.

If you can live with 6 instead of 8, also take a look at the Pentax *ist DS.

AFAIK, these 3 cameras are the 3 smallest DSLR models now.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2005, 5:32 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10
Default

Smallest = Pentax *ist DS
Lightest = Canon 350D (Rebel XT)

Both are very comprable in size to each other though. The Canon wins in the weight dept because it doesn't use AA size battery like the Pentax.
dorseto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2005, 6:21 PM   #4
KSV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
Default

dorseto wrote:
Quote:
Canon wins in the weight dept because it doesn't use AA size battery like the Pentax.
No, because there is no metal inside - just plastic :-)
KSV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2005, 9:08 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 54
Default

I guess I'm a bit confused. When I look up the camera's that I've been looking at (the Nikon 8800, Nikon 8700, the Dimage A200, even the Fuji S5100) The "camera format" is listed as "SLR" I guess I'm maybe calling them by their wrong name. I don't need a DSLR camera, just a high quality prosumer one I guess. Is that the right name--prosumer?

All I'd really like is medium size (the closer to the S5100 in size the better), with high mp, lots of zoom, the ability to basically point and shoot (for me), and the ability manual focus (for my husband). I'd also like it to look more like the SLR type of camera as opposed to the small, flat cybershot for example.


brendak2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2005, 9:46 PM   #6
KSV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
Default

brendak2000 wrote:
Quote:
The "camera format" is listed as "SLR"
They referring as "SLR-like". It means that they only look like traditional SLR - nothing more then that :-)There is no strict criteria what is consumer and what is prosumer. Generally consumer means basic P&S camera and prosumer more advanced withability of some manual controls. It look to me that you need "prosumer" camera. :-)


Have a look at Panasonic FZ20 also. And do not be tempered with megapixels - more megapixels not necessarily means better picture, quite on the contrary, particularly on hyperzoom cameras.

KSV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2005, 1:52 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 54
Default

Quote:
And do not be tempered with megapixels - more megapixels not necessarily means better picture, quite on the contrary, particularly on hyperzoom cameras.
See this just makes me confused. :? Wouldn't I be better off with a camera that had lots of zoom, lot's of options, AND more mp's?

When we looke at the S5100 I Really liked it but we decided against buying it because we thought we'd be compromising on the mp's. We already have a Kodak DX3500 which is OK so we thought we'd make our next camera something that could grow with us. We figure we'll have it for at least a few years so we thought we'd make sure to get a good one. We didn't want to be kicking ourselves in a few years for not paying the extra bucks to get more mp's.

So what you're saying is that sometimes lower mp's (like 5) can actually be Better than a higher mp camera?

I'm so confused! We've been looking and looking at specs on camera's online for so long now and sometimes it just makes me want to throw my hands in the air :? There's so many to choose from and all seem to have some pluses and minuses! :-)
brendak2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2005, 3:33 AM   #8
KSV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
Default

brendak2000 wrote:
Quote:
So what you're saying is that sometimes lower mp's (like 5) can actually be Better than a higher mp camera?
Very much like that. You need MP only for enlargement. 4 mp for example is enough for A4 printout. Do you plan to print bigger photos? I do not think so. So in reality 5 is plenty even considering some small cropping (witchshould belimited is you using your zoom properly). Why MP is bad? Because each pixel became smaller and as result you have bad and noisy performance in low light condition. Especially noticeable in ultrazoom cameras with tiny sensor. This is why 6 mp DSLR give heaps betterquality then 8 mp prosumers. BTW this has been discussed many times in this forum - try to search it and I am sure you find heaps to read.

Cheers
KSV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2005, 11:25 AM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 54
Default

Thank you for all the information. I really appreciate it and while I'm still not entirely sure which camera we'll end up picking, you really opened my eyes and made me retink what we really want.
brendak2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2005, 12:05 PM   #10
Administrator
 
steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,535
Default

KSV wrote:
Quote:
dorseto wrote:
Quote:
Canon wins in the weight dept because it doesn't use AA size battery like the Pentax.
No, because there is no metal inside - just plastic :-)

Wrong! The Rebel XT has a stainless steel inner chassis frame with a polycarbonate outer shell.
steve 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 12:40 AM.