I Need A Good Camera

[Dju]

So! I'm getting a puppy soon and I've been meaning to get myself a camera so I can document his growing up, but alas and alack, the camera choices out there completely overwhelm me. I don't know what any of the stats are supposed to mean, asides from the screen size, basically I'm a bit of a newb.

What I need is something relatively cheap (please no suggestions over $300) which takes awesome, grainy-less, high-quality photos. A simple pointer-and-a-clicker, SLRs are too complicated for me. Ultra-portable would be a nice bonus, but not 100% necessary. If any of you have cameras that fit that description or know cameras that could, I'd love to see examples of the photos they can take! Ah yeah, and I'd reaaaally prefer one that uses a Lithium battery so I can plug the camera in to recharge it instead of buying more batteries or a battery charger. And I have notoriously bad luck with those cameras too, like my Canon, which only takes two minutes to completely drain a set of fully-charged AA batteries for some bizarre reason.

Thank you guys :D

Edited October 17, 2010 by Dju

[kja]

You're asking too much for your budget and for a compact camera - you'll have to compromise on something

I have a teensy Canon SD1200 IS that I bought for about $120. I adore it. If you head to my blog (click Me in my sig) you will see tons of shots with it as it is the camera that goes everywhere with me. Click here to go directly to September last year when I first got it - then Sept, Oct, Nov and Dec archives are full of images with this camera (I think I marked most of those that were with something different). That should give you an idea of what you can expect from one of these little beauties - there are several newer models out, too.

There are no manual controls on this camera so it's purely point and shoot (though there are ways around this).

The Canon G series rocks as does the Canon S90.

The Lumix cameras are also very nice options.

[ellz]

If you shopped around you could probably get an Olympus SP600-UZ for a squeak under $300. I love mine, it is a step up from my Sony Cyber-Shot and takes an amazing photo. You can also do a lot with the manual settings once you get a bit more confident too. Although I'm now saving for a DSLR because my appetite has now been whetted and I want to take my photos to another level.

Has some great features and takes a really good burst series too which can be handy for taking pet photos! I also like the Macro settings which can be fun.

It does take batteries though, although I think it can take Lithium as well. BUT, that said, I take HEAPS of photos every day (often in the region of a couple of hundred) and I don't go chewing through battery power at a great rate of knots. I do have two sets of batteries though, 1 in and one charged, or charging and I find that really handy. And of course if I do happen to run out of batteries when I'm out somewhere and don't have any charged, I could always buy some more.

It's not a tiny camera, but it feels nice in the hand and all of the contours are in the right spots. I'm really happy with what I've been doing with mine. I'll let you know on Thursday what Trafford thinks of it...he was tempted to purchase one as a quick back-up to his professional gear.

And some macro...

[Dju]

Yeah I know I ask for a lot Kja I like high quality photos though, stuff I can work with and edit on the PC without everything getting blotchy.

Ellz, I've been looking at that camera and it looks really good, the photos you posted are deceptive because you've saved a lot of them in JPG which has grabbed them by the scruff of the neck and positively shook them free of the quality they used to possess!

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j8/everh...22aug10_2-1.png That one is probably the only photo I can trust because png saves "as-is", and the quality is really sharp there, really nice! Only downside is those damned batteries. I don't take a lot of shots though, with my old camera, I just had to take one shot, not do anything for a minute, and the battery was already half gone. Bastards, all of them!

I found a bundle on the internet for the Olympus for $210, it comes with:

1. Olympus SP-600 UZ Digital Camera

2. Transcend 4GB HC SecureDigital Class 4 (SDHC) Card

3. Precision Design (4) 2900mAh AA NiMH Batteries & 110/220V Multi-Voltage Rapid Charger

4. Precision Design USB 2.0 SecureDigital (SDHC) High-Speed Memory Card Reader

5. Precision Design PD-C10 Camera/Camcorder Case

6. Precision Design Memory Card Storage Wallet

7. Precision Design Flexible Tabletop Mini Tripod

8. ImageRecall Digital Image Recovery Software

9. Microfiber Cleaning Cloth

Do you think it's a good bargain?

[~*Shell*~]

I was always happy with my canon IXUS80IS - I'm about to buy a new one (probably the IXUS210IS touch since my old one has practically died due to an entire 600ml bottle of diet coke being spilt in my bag - in it's defence it still hasn't given up the ghost but has become a little unpredictable).

These were taken on it and edited in light room (pretty much just to bring up the blacks). Zoom was at it's maximum and they're heavily cropped:

Pretty much your best bet is to buy an SLR - you won't get the things you want in a cheap point and shoot. They're always going to be noisy (the photoshop plug in "Noise Ninja" is your friend) and not have the best image quality but hey, you get what you pay for. Give me my 5D over my IXUS if i'm going for quality but for a night out, the IXUS wins hands down.

[ellz]

Yeah I know I ask for a lot Kja I like high quality photos though, stuff I can work with and edit on the PC without everything getting blotchy.

Ellz, I've been looking at that camera and it looks really good, the photos you posted are deceptive because you've saved a lot of them in JPG which has grabbed them by the scruff of the neck and positively shook them free of the quality they used to possess!

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j8/everh...22aug10_2-1.png That one is probably the only photo I can trust because png saves "as-is", and the quality is really sharp there, really nice! Only downside is those damned batteries. I don't take a lot of shots though, with my old camera, I just had to take one shot, not do anything for a minute, and the battery was already half gone. Bastards, all of them!

I found a bundle on the internet for the Olympus for $210, it comes with:

1. Olympus SP-600 UZ Digital Camera

2. Transcend 4GB HC SecureDigital Class 4 (SDHC) Card

3. Precision Design (4) 2900mAh AA NiMH Batteries & 110/220V Multi-Voltage Rapid Charger

4. Precision Design USB 2.0 SecureDigital (SDHC) High-Speed Memory Card Reader

5. Precision Design PD-C10 Camera/Camcorder Case

6. Precision Design Memory Card Storage Wallet

7. Precision Design Flexible Tabletop Mini Tripod

8. ImageRecall Digital Image Recovery Software

9. Microfiber Cleaning Cloth

Do you think it's a good bargain?

That is a really good bargain...but just watch the postage. Last time I saw a bundle like that the postage was over $100.

BTW, they've only been saved as JPG to reduce the size because most will be going on my website in some form or other....the duplicate ones I have stored as PNG are crystal clear and look amazing. Good enough I believe for prints! I only shared these so that you could see what variety the camera was capable of.....from macro to movement and in between.

[Dju]

Shell, again, the jpg pictures bother me because I know how badly they chew up the quality so I can't really tell if the shots are good or no. I think they probably look good, but jpg is being terrible again. The canon is kinda expensive for me though, and an SLR is definitely out of the question--I don't plan to do anything professionally so having so many options would just be a waste of money.

Ellz, the postage on that bundle is about $50. Not great, but not bad I figure for the amount of extras that comes with it. The stuff you took looks pretty impressive, just wish I could see more PNG photos!

[Guest Tess32]

Erm, there isn't really anything wrong with saving in JPG, and it shouldn't effect the quality that much at all in general.

I don't know what program Ellz used to compress them but the amount of compression is the problem, not the fact it's a jpeg.

[Dju]

Erm, there isn't really anything wrong with saving in JPG, and it shouldn't effect the quality that much at all in general.

I don't know what program Ellz used to compress them but the amount of compression is the problem, not the fact it's a jpeg.

Except that's what JPG is used for, compression. You can't ever save something in JPG that will look as good as something saved in PNG.

[Guest Tess32]

Erm, there isn't really anything wrong with saving in JPG, and it shouldn't effect the quality that much at all in general.

I don't know what program Ellz used to compress them but the amount of compression is the problem, not the fact it's a jpeg.

Except that's what JPG is used for, compression. You can't ever save something in JPG that will look as good as something saved in PNG.

Yes of course JPG compresses, but no one is uploading full, high res files for you to look at and be able to compare. The differences between a file those sizes in jpeg or another format would be negligable on the web, so obviously something 'else' has happened to the files rather than just a normal jpg saving.

All my web copies are saved in jpeg.....I seriously doubt at web size you could really see a huge difference between that and the RAW file.

[huga]

All my web copies are JPEG too. I don't know that many point and shoot cameras give you the option of shooting in RAW anyway. My Lumix doesn't and that's a pretty decent little P&S.

[ellz]

No, there aren't any P & S that give the option of RAW. All save as JPEG. The best you can do after that is whatever you do in your graphics program. Saving as PNG is still not the same as saving in RAW but it is a better option than JPEG but the file sizes are HUGE and my computer just wouldn't cope with them because it is old and slow.

Whenever I want to do anything with PNG or decent graphic program I have to kick Mr Ellz off his laptop and that doesn't happen often without a fight.

[Dju]

This is not going to turn into a jpg/png debate I will personally always save in PNG because being a perfectionist, I DO see the differences between photos saved in different ways, but that's my prerogative.

I was looking at the Lumix a few days ago, and then the salesperson scared me off and said something like "you click and wait a few seconds for it to take the photo" and I thought that was kind of stupid, because I mean, come on, a lot of things can happen in a few seconds, and I want my action now now now! That's not actually true, is it?

[Guest Tess32]

If you're a perfectionist then good luck with the P&S! hehe.

[Dju]

No, there aren't any P & S that give the option of RAW. All save as JPEG. The best you can do after that is whatever you do in your graphics program. Saving as PNG is still not the same as saving in RAW but it is a better option than JPEG but the file sizes are HUGE and my computer just wouldn't cope with them because it is old and slow.

Whenever I want to do anything with PNG or decent graphic program I have to kick Mr Ellz off his laptop and that doesn't happen often without a fight.

Ah okay see I have a beast of a machine and I do artworks on Photoshop really frequently so there's no excuse for me not to save in PNG. Besides, unless we're talking huge res images, whereas I rarely upload anything larger than 500x500 pixels, the size difference between the two file types is pretty negligible. If the Olympus saves in jpg but you've gotten such pretty shots with it, I'm sure it wouldn't be that bad

[Dju]

If you're a perfectionist then good luck with the P&S! hehe.

Naww I think I'm leaning towards the Olympus It tickles my perfectionist side, especially the picture of the flower. If I can get quality shots like that every time, hell yes, let me get out my credit card!

[ellz]

OK...photo I have literally just taken now (for a completely different type of comparison debate! )

All that I have done to it is cropped it and reduced size by 50% (was 1382 x 1283 after the crop).

JPG

PNG

[huga]

This is not going to turn into a jpg/png debate I will personally always save in PNG because being a perfectionist, I DO see the differences between photos saved in different ways, but that's my prerogative.

I was looking at the Lumix a few days ago, and then the salesperson scared me off and said something like "you click and wait a few seconds for it to take the photo" and I thought that was kind of stupid, because I mean, come on, a lot of things can happen in a few seconds, and I want my action now now now! That's not actually true, is it?

They're talking about shutter lag and all P&S cameras will have that.

ETA Outside in natural light it is faster, inside in the dark - it srtuggles. You need to know the limits and work within them. Hell, even most DSLRs will struggle in low light unless you bump the ISO up and then it's possible that the images will be noisy.

Edited October 18, 2010 by huga

[ellz]

They're talking about shutter lag and all P&S cameras will have that.

The Olympus is negligible, depending upon your settings. Certainly a MAJOR difference from my Sony Cyber-Shot.

[huga]

They're talking about shutter lag and all P&S cameras will have that.

The Olympus is negligible, depending upon your settings. Certainly a MAJOR difference from my Sony Cyber-Shot.

I found it worse on my Olympus than my Lumix.