What Do You Think To This

[Kyra]

I'm looking around for a new camera and came across this one..

http://www.crazysales.com.au/protax-12-meg...ngle_p1821.html

Just want it for taking some nice pics of the dogs and my soon to be god daughter.

Does anyone have one and do they take nice pics?

[kja]

Dunno, never heard of it. Looks big, ugly and clunky to me. Lens doesn't appear to be fast.

If you have an extra $200 laying around and don't care if it turns out to be a piece of junk, go for it - you might be pleasantly surprised. I doubt it, honestly, but it could happen.

A good compact might be a better, safer, smaller, more user friendly option

[rubiton]

Agree with kja - never heard of it or the seller. For that price easier to stick with the name brands point and shoot.

[Kyra]

Thanks

[Kyra]

What's the difference between optical and digital zoom? what are some of the main "necessities" to have on a camera? i'm not a photographer, just want something that will do the job.

[persephone]

I think you would be better served buying a compact camera from a recognised camera 'name'

have a look here

LINK 1

LINK 2

LINK 3

LINK 4

and LINK 5

just to get you started!

Don't be fooled by heaps of megapixels, and digital zoom!!

I use an ols sony cybershot.. a small one ..and a fuji finepix...no DSLR..and definitely no 12 megapixels

my pics

more of my pics

not as good quality as a DSLR.. but good enough for me

Optical zoom is what you get when you 'zoom' the lens.

Digital zoom is kinda like zooming in on the already taken picture.... not very clear, and not a true 'zoom'

Edited August 23, 2009 by persephone

[PossumCorner]

Optical zoom is real zoom - the glass, the lens. Digital zoom isn't "real" zoom, it's just cropping, like editing in-camera. So will not be as clear/sharp an image as optical zoom (assuming in focus anyway). Quite a few of the digital point-shoot cameras have both. I'd run away from it. But as kja said, you don't know til you try, and it could give exactly the outcome you are after. And some fun trying. Some mobile phones give a reasonable shot, and if people didn't always apologise for posting an image from their phone, often no-one would know - or just assume it was a snapshot from their DSLR. Is that the Protax model with the video mode, you could do clips for u-tube with it as well if that's the case.

There are no necessities on a camera, simple cameras give absolutely superb results if used within their limitations by photographers who care enough to learn the camera.

It's a circular conundrum though, because the more you understand the basics of light and composition, exposure and depth of field, (which you still need to understand anyway, to get the best result from the el-cheapo camera), the more you realise that you can use that knowledge to better effect with a better camera. So using a cheap camera is not a cheap ticket to not doing any homework. If you buy the Protax, or a better known brand P&S, spend a few of the dollars you've saved on a book like "Understanding Exposure", and you will still take lovely shots of the new godchild that will blow some of the expensive-camera shots here out of the water.

Edit to add: Snap, Perseph.

Edited August 23, 2009 by PossumCorner