'Which' Digital Camera.

[Burney555]

I am currently looking into purchasing a new digital camera.

 

but

 

Which one is recommended.

 

I am travelling on the NCL Spirit in November and am looking for a good all round camera.

 

At the minute I have a Nikon Coolpix which produces good pictures but the time is now for upgrading.

 

I have heard a lot of people recommending the Nikon D70 but as I have no great knowledge about photography (At the minute it's point and shoot) I am a little concerned about this purchase.

 

Please help.......:)

[Stranger1]

The D70 gets good reviews and as far as I'm concerned you can't go wrong with a Nikon. This is an SLR, or actually a DSLR so although it does have some auto modes it will be quite different from your coolpix point and shoot camera. If you are set on getting a DSLR, I would recommend getting it soon so that you can "play" with it well before your trip. Another option is to upgrade your coolpix (you don't say which one you have) to one of the newer ones like the 7900. I just got one last month and love it. 7.1 mp and many scene modes and very compact. The only downside, if you have an older coolpix model, is that the new ones use SD cards where as the older ones use the compact flash cards

[traci28]

I personally have the Canon PowerShort A85. This is a year or two old, so there is newer models but I love my little camera. I mostly keep the settings on Auto, but have played with it enough that I do use some of the outdoor settings as well. It has a traditional view finder or you can use the screen - however this eats batteries up faster. Batteries - this is important to me, as I like the cameras that use traditional AA batteries - no need to lug a battery charger with you. Oh....it's 4.0 megapixels as well.

[Burney555]

Thank you for you comments

 

I have now made a shortlist of cameras which I am interested in they are as follows:

 

1. Nikon D50 + AF-S DX 18 - 55mm ED & AF-S DX 55 - 200mm ED

 

2. Nikon Coolpix 7900

 

3. Nikon Coolpix P1

 

4. Cannon Powershot S2 IS

 

But the DSLR thing is still at the back of my mind.......

 

Is the transfer from a fully auto digital camera to a DSLR an easy one for someone with limited photography knowledge? As I travel on November I want to make sure that I can use my camera as effective as possible.

[calmac]

My husband purchased a Canon Digital 350D (Digital Rebel) which is a DSLR before our trip to Alaska in the summer. This was a return for him to an SLR after moving to digital point and shoot cameras (only now are DSLRs becoming "affordable"). He spent a couple of months getting used to the camera before going on holiday.

 

Although I've been taking photos for years I've always had one with automatic settings and very seldom used anthing else. If I use the DSLR I use it on automatic settings and have no idea how to use the manual ones. I'm now using my husband's "old" digital camera - Nikon 5700 which is an older version of Nikon 8800. This has a few manual settings but is mainly automatic. My husband still thinks the 5700 has given him some of his best ever pictures.

 

I notice you have the Canon S2 IS on your list - I was very tempted by this camera.

[Tater1800]

Check out the Nikon cp5700, cp8700 and cp8800. This line of cameras is "point and shoot" but also has professional qualities. I have the cp8700 and love it. Check the pricing and reviews at www.dpreview.com.

[Flip2cruise]

I would serious look at the Canon S2 IS. I was planning to get that one, but got such a great deal($238 taxes included) for the Canon S1 IS, that I went ahead an purchased it. Hopefully they will come out with a 7+ MP S3 IS in 2006 and I will move up to that one.

 

Here are some pics I took in auto mode a few weeks ago in Hawaii. Once I learn how to really use all the feature, I will be dangerous :)

 

 

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/ohioalan@sbcglobal.net/album?.dir=a4bf&.src=ph&store=&prodid=&.done=http%3a//photos.yahoo.com/ph//my_photos

 

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/ohioalan@sbcglobal.net/album?.dir=/d134&.src=ph&.tok=phLZbsDBqpvN2_Uz

[deadzone1003]

Going from Nikon Coolpix to Nikon D70 is a pretty big jump. Unless you set it on automatic all the time, learning how to use it may take awhile. Also, have you consider the additional weight and bulk? A DSLR is not something you stick in your pockets, but a camera hanging around your neck. Go to http://www.imaging-resource.com and click on "Find the best camera for you". Its somewhat of a long survey of your tastes and desires, and it tries to come up with the best camera(s) for you.

[cubdaddy]

I was in your shoes and needed to upgrade my digital camera. My brother did some research and found the Konica-Minolta Z6 a great camera. It is a 6 MP with 12X optical zoom. I needed a camera that not only took great pictures outdoors during daylight but took great pictures inside.

 

I picked the camera up last week and found it is awesome. I am looking forward to our next cruise to take pictures!

[zackiedawg]

Some things to consider:

 

A DSLR has one disadvantage for someone not as knowledgeable about photography, and many people don't realize it or think about it when they purchase one. DSLRs do not have live preview. What this means is: when you are shooting a picture, and lining up the shot...even in automatic mode, you must use the viewfinder and what you are seeing is not what the sensor is actually capturing, but a view directly through the lens of the camera. This can be nice and clear for focusing, and more accurate, but unlike most digital cameras, you lose the convenience of seeing your picture laid out on the LCD screen, shutter speed and aperature affects being shown to you, before you even press the button. Good photographers understand the differences in a camera's settings, and can make appropriate adjustments to the light metering or shutter speed for a given situation. But unskilled photographers will have to hope the auto mode gets it right, and will only know if it did by looking at the photo after you've snapped it. So keep that in mind!

 

Also, what are the main purposes with a digital camera...convenience? Size? Flexibility? Scenery? If you want the most all-around and versatile camera that can come the closest to doing everything in one piece...get an ultra-zoom digital compact. These are the cameras which have 12x optical zoom lenses, but are still reasonably small for portability. They will be capable of decent indoor shots, spontaneous candids, landscapes and sunsets, plus can zoom in on incredibly distant objects giving you much flexibility in what you shoot and from how far away.

 

The Canon S2 IS, Sony H1, and Panasonic FZ5 are three fine examples of this type of camera. I shot extensively last week with a Sony H1 on my Zuiderdam cruise, and found the results to be fantastic and the camera to be very powerful and flexible. It has a 12x optical zoom with image stabilization, 5 megapixels, a large 2.5" LCD screen plus electronic viewfinder, great auto and program modes as well as full manual control if you feel more creative, and has an enormously powerful flash built in, good for more than 25 feet (most are good for 12-15 feet). I was able to buy this excellent camera for $370 online. The Canon S2 IS and Panasonic FZ5 should perform similarly as all three share the same type and range of zoom lens and image stabilization, as well as resolution.

 

Feel free to browse my Zuiderdam album for a sampling of many indoor, outdoor, zoom, and wide shots taken with this cam:

 

http://www.funtigo.com/zackiedawg?b...prev&cr=1&rfm=y

[traci28]

For those of you that are photo savy - how can I avoid the sun glare on my pictures when I'm shooting the sunrise???

[Tater1800]

Normally with sunrise/sunset, glare is an important element in the shot. I may not understand your question, however. Please post a pix with the problem. I have a few sunsets here: http://home.alltel.net/hyatts1/index.htm I think they are normal for sunset shots.

[zackiedawg]

There are a few issues that can arise when shooting into the sun...glare, which often represents as the long streaks which eminate from the brightest point of the shot, and lens flares, which are small round circles or dots of light which appear in the shot.

 

Two things to try to avoid these: first of all, stop down your aperature or lens. If you have the ability to adjust the aperature of the camera (usually designated with the letter F), make the number larger...this reduces the aperature opening and can sometimes counter the flare issues. You will darken the shot a bit overall, but it can sometimes be effective.

 

The other trick is to fire your camera's flash. Most newer cameras, and digital cameras, have synchronized flashes and the camera makes adjustments for the flash. Even though the flash will not reach what you are shooting, there is an effect on the aperature when shooting with flash...and often this can eliminate the flaring.

 

If you are shooting slightly off center from the sun - where the sun is hitting the lens at a bit of an angle, a lens hood on the camera lens can often reduce or eliminate flaring on the lens.

 

If all else fails, a filter can make a big difference. If you use a polarizing filter, you can often eliminate some glare...or you can use Neutral Density (ND) filters to darken the scene and allow you to take pictures of very bright scenes.

 

Here was a sunrise over Key West which I used a circular polarizer, and closed the aperature to F8 in order to avoid flare on an extremely bright sun:

 

 

The downside to making the aperature really small or adding dark filters is that it will darken or silhouette the foreground. Sometimes this is desirable...but other times you may have wanted to preserve some foreground detail. This is a shot taken with the smallest possible aperature, plus a ND4 filter (which lowers the light intake on the camera by two F-stops):

 

 

Notice everything is silhouetted black...though I wanted it for this shot. If you had wanted to still have some foreground lighting, you could have used a flash to light up the foreground.

 

If the subject is too far for a flash, then you have to try to use the fastest shutter speed and then adjust the aperature just enough to get maximum detail without flare. Here is a shot where I wanted to be able to identify the foreground and used a faster shutter with a slightly more open aperature:

 

 

This allows you to see the foreground, and at the same time avoids glare or flare...but notice you don't get as many of the dramatic oranges and reds that you do when you use a smaller aperature...more of the blue sky is visible as well as the foreground.

 

Whenever shooting directly into the sun, you will have to use smaller aperatures or some combination of filters to avoid flare or glare. If shooting with the sun at an angle to you, where the flare or glare is coming in from the sides, a lens hood will usually solve the problem.

 

Hope that helps!

[Burney555]

I would like to thank you all for your tip's & suggestion's.

 

We eventually ended up purchasing 2 camera's.

 

1. Nikon D50 silver + AF-S DX 18-55 mm ED + AF-S DX 55-200 mm ED + Secure Digital memory card 512 Mb + EN-EL3 compatible battery + Video bag

 

2. Nikon Coolpix 4600 (Including Charger, NiMH Batteries)

 

I think between the two of these, I should cover all my needs and if I struggle at first to get good quality pic's from the D50 we have the old faithful point and shoot camera.

 

I bought the 2 camera's from pixmania.com

 

I think I got a terrific deal considering the accessories included.

 

Once again thanks for your help, this is an excellent forum.

[KMBB]

Anyone with informationon the small pocket cameras?? Would like to have a large screen for viewing, we would only be using it for 4by6 pictures or maybe a 5by7. Any advice?/ Thanks KMBB

[zackiedawg]

Depends on what you want to pay...but there is a powerhouse of a camera coming out within the next month or so that sounds very intriguing...Sony N1.

 

Most compacts are nearly identical, with few differences from one to another - traits they all share tend to be LCD monitors between 1.8" and 2" and sensors which are tiny 1/2.4 or 1/2.5" sensors. What makes this new N1 sound quite amazing are the 3" LCD and the 1/1.8 sensor!

 

Obviously LCD size matters for being able to see the screen...but the size alone is not the only thing to consider. You must also account for brightness and refresh rate. The number of pixels devoted to an LCD make a difference in the sharpness and ability to discern detail, while the refresh rate dictates whether or not your movement in focusing or framing are shown crisp and fast, or if you get streaks and blurs on screen when you move too fast. The N1 will have a very bright 3" LCD with a nice 230,000 pixels and fast refresh rate that can play movies back without pixellation. The screen is also a touch pad, making selections of camera functions right on the screen to reduce the clutter of buttons and allow such a large screen on a compact camera.

 

The 1/1.8 sensor is to me the most important factor. The sensor size is one of the biggest factors for the camera to handle sharpness and detail, control noise in the shot, and provide higher Megapixel with larger pixel size. This camera will be 8MP, and the sensor is the same size used in their larger full-featured DSC-F series cameras. This cam looks capable of excellent detail and color, will be very fast as most Sonys tend to be, and should have very good noise control for higher ISO shots and low light shooting or long exposures.

 

I'm curious to see it myself.

 

As to what is available now, you would do fine with any of the mid-grade compacts such as the Sony P200, Canon SD500, Nikon 5900 or 7900, Panasonic LX5 or 7, etc. For the purposes you stated especially, prints of that size will come out gorgeous even with a 4MP camera...so don't worry about the megapixel race. The bigger factor will be finding one of the compacts with a decent-sized LCD as most don't have optical viewfinders. There are several 'credit card' style cams with large 2.5" screens, and these are very thin and compact...but they don't usually shoot as well in low light or flash conditions (indoors), so be aware of that compromise if you decide to get one (Nikon, Casio, and Sony all make these slim credit card cams...all are fairly equal). Otherwise, stick to the more rectangular compacts which have extending optical lenses, slightly larger lenses for better detail and light capabilities, and bigger battery compartments for extended power.

 

Consider the Fuji F10 if you want a simple-to-use, very versatile camera with awesome battery strength...this camera is one of the very few capable of shooting at ISOs up to 1600 while still controlling noise extremely well, and will last twice as long as any competitor on a full charge. There aren't lots of manual override features...it's mostly an automatic point-and-shoot...but excellent ISO range, decently fast, fairly inexpensive, and great battery life.

[KMBB]

Thank you for the detail information, I'm not real good at understanding and the stuff with the cameras. We have now a CannonPower-shot A40, that was a gift that we got about 3 years ago, I think it too big and would probally realy like the utra thin ones, but don't know alot about them. So thanks for the in-site on them, I'm going to Best buy and look at them. Will hold off buying any thing, cause I know with X-mas coming up there will probally be alot of them coming out. Thanks, KMBB

[Krispy]

Trying to decide between three cameras all are VERY similar - The Canon S2, Sony DSC-H1 and the Konica Minolta Z6 seems as though the biggest difference other than battery is price - I am leaning towards the Sony - but like the color effect on the canon.. Also the Price on the Konica is very tempting - Can someone help me make an educated decision?

 

I am upgrading from a Olympus Z-4000 right now.. I do have an Nikon SLR and just don't find the nikon digitals to be as good...

[cubdaddy]

Trying to decide between three cameras all are VERY similar - The Canon S2, Sony DSC-H1 and the Konica Minolta Z6 seems as though the biggest difference other than battery is price - I am leaning towards the Sony - but like the color effect on the canon.. Also the Price on the Konica is very tempting - Can someone help me make an educated decision?

 

I am upgrading from a Olympus Z-4000 right now.. I do have an Nikon SLR and just don't find the nikon digitals to be as good...

 

Hey Krispy, take a look at the news release for the Konica-Minolta Z6. The link is listed below. This camera has some awsome features. Like someone else asked in this thread about glare at sunset, this has a setting just for that. Batteries are supposes to last a long time.

 

It even has a rapid fire setting where it will continually take pictures as long as you have the shoot button down.

 

I bought mine a week ago and am still getting familiar with it. I find new stuff out each time I use it.

[Krispy]

Hey Krispy, take a look at the news release for the Konica-Minolta Z6. The link is listed below. This camera has some awsome features. Like someone else asked in this thread about glare at sunset, this has a setting just for that. Batteries are supposes to last a long time.

 

It even has a rapid fire setting where it will continually take pictures as long as you have the shoot button down.

 

I bought mine a week ago and am still getting familiar with it. I find new stuff out each time I use it.

 

Where's the link??? Help!!! I Would love to read it - I am leaning towards this one for price issues... but want to read up a little more on it! :)

[zackiedawg]

Here are some direct comparisons of the features of the three:

 

The Konica is a 6MP camera, while the Canon and Sony are 5MP. This really makes little difference unless you are printing posters...but the extra cropping room of the 6MP might be nice.

 

The Konica ISO range is 50 to 320, the Canon is 50 to 400, and the Sony is 64 to 400. Not big differences, and none are designed for high ISO low light shots. The Konica suffers from the worst noise of the three - graininess in shots visible even at ISO100...the Canon cleans up better, and the Sony beats them both overall in noise control. None of this will matter if you are just making small prints or viewing on a computer screen - only larger prints of 8x10 and up will really show the noise to any detrimental effect.

 

The Konica's 35mm equivalent zoom range is 35-420mm, while the Sony and Canon are 36-432mm - not a huge difference between 420 and 432mm, so here they are pretty even.

 

The Canon has a wide angle maximum aperature of F2.7 and a telephoto maximum aperature of F3.5...the Sony virtually the same at F2.8 wide and F3.7 telephoto. The Konica struggles with light at the telephoto end, with a wide of 2.8 and a tele of 4.5...this makes it really struggle to focus and pull in enough light at max zoom.

 

The Konica flash is effective to 11 feet, which is the weakest of the bunch. The Canon flash manages a stronger 17 feet, and the Sony the best overall with an effective range of 21 feet. The Konica and Sony have automatic pop-up flashes, while the Canon has to be manually engaged.

 

The Sony has a minimum shutter speed of 30 seconds, and a maximum of 1/2000. The Canon has a minimum of 15 seconds and maximum of 1/3200. The Konica has a minimum shutter of 30 seconds and a maximum of 1/1000. The Canon would be the high-speed champ, for shooting moving subjects to freeze the action...the Konica not well equipped for fast movement subjects.

 

All three cameras have light metering from average, center-weighted, and spot...Sony and Canon both offer an innovative capability to move the spot focusing point anywhere within the shot using the joystick 4-way controller - so you can focus in one point of the frame while metering on another, without recomposing your shot. Neat idea.

 

The Konica's continuous drive is good for 1.7 frames per second, and will save the last 10 shots when you let go of the button...it will shoot unlimited but save only the final 10 shots. The Sony is the poorest performer in continuous mode, with only 1.3 frames per second, and limited to just a 9 shot burst before stopping. The Canon is the burst shooting king, capable of 2.3 frames per second until the card runs out.

 

The Canon has the smallest LCD at 1.8" and 115,000 pixels. The Konica's LCD is 2" and 114,000 pixels. The Sony has the biggest LCD at 2.5" and 115,200 pixels. The Sony's is by far the brightest, with no glare and a transreflective screen which can still be seen in direct sunlight. The Konica handles glare well, but will be lost in direct sun. The Canon suffers the worst, basically unseeable in direct sun and with bad glare - BUT the Canon screen is the only one which can be swiveled and moved to shoot at different angles, which gives it some points here.

 

The Konica and Sony have extremely fast focus systems, both handily beating the Canon in focus time. The Konica struggles to focus in low light though, while the other two can manage to lock on...and the Konica seems to be the only one without a focus assist light. The Sony's focus assist light is very bright...helpful in focusing but might annoy others when you are taking a picture in a darkened area. All three cameras seem to struggle a bit with low contrast subjects when zoomed all the way in.

 

The Konica and Canon both use 4 AA rechargeable batteries, which are not supplied with the camera. The Sony uses 2 AA rechargeable batteries, and supplies a basic set with the camera (2100). Using 2500 rechargeable AAs in each camera will yield 420 shots in the Canon, 400 shots in the Konica, and 380 shots with the Sony (on two less batteries). Not using the LCD on all three will increase battery life, as will less use of the flash.

 

Other noted issues - the Canon has been singled out in most reviews as having the worst chromic abbheration, notably purple fringing. It isn't horrible, and won't be noticeable in most shots...but it seems to suffer red color drift and purple fringe more than the other two. The Konica is singled out as suffering the worst noise of the three even at lower ISOs. Color is a personal choice, so whether any of the three has better color than the others is a matter of taste or preference...all three will yield sharp, realistic colors, and all three have in camera adjustments of sharpness, contrast, and saturation to tweak the output. The Canon is the only one here that doesn't offer a live histogram for shooting...a very useful feature the Konica and Sony both have that allows you to adjust your metering in automatic mode to avoid blown-out highlights or underexposed shots by looking at a little bar graph.

 

Hopefully that will help with some of the information on these three cameras...you wouldn't go wrong with any of the three. Price-wise, the Konica can be found in the $330-340 region by aggressive shoppers, the Sony for $370-390 if you put some effort into the search, and the Canon for $450 or so. I purchased the Sony H1 last month at Dell for $354 shipped...by looking all over the internet for stackable online coupons.

 

Good luck!

[Krispy]

Zackie - OMG - talk about a lot to digest - you are wonderful though - I had pretty much knocked the canon off my list and was thinking about the Sony or the Konica... I guess I will go with my instincts and probably choose the Sony - just have to get a good deal on it!!! And find a good deal on the memory as well!

 

But what scares me more is I understood about 95% of that!!!

 

Kristina

[zackiedawg]

Glad to help. I'm a camera nerd, so it's always a good topic for me. The Konica is a fine choice...as I said, can't go wrong with any of them really...but it doesn't seem to have quite beefed up on all the features and capabilities of the other two here. The Canon is definately the choice if you want to shoot sports, dancing, any continuous action, or anything where you want to freeze the action with a fast shutter...and assuming price is not a factor. The Sony is a great all-around performer and amazingly well featured, but won't keep up with the Canon in continuous shooting. But it will do better at handling noise, focuses faster and more accurately, and suffers less lens abherrations. It is also less expensive.

 

Of course, this is all picking at hairs...one may be better than the others in certain areas but all are quite capable and would likely satisfy the majority of people buying them. I've been very happy with the Sony H1...and it served very well on my Zuiderdam cruise. I also have an older Sony 717 digital, a Canon Sd300 compact digital, a Sony L1 ultra-compact digital, a Canon EOS IX SLR, and an older Pentax SLR. You can see I like cameras! I've owned Canon, Sony, Minolta, Pentax, and Nikon over the years...no brand loyalty...I just pick what I like after reading up and taking a few sample shots.

 

BTW - Search the online coupon sites before you buy. Google 'sony coupons', 'dell coupons', 'amazon coupons', etc...I had great luck when I googled Dell coupons to buy my H1...they had a $60 off coupon for purchases of $500 or more, a $35 coupon for purchases of $300 or more which could be used with the first coupon, and a 15% off electronics which applied to cameras. With all 3 coupons applied, the $499 retail price of the H1 was reduced to $329 plus tax, and I even found a free shipping coupon - $350 shipped for the H1 was a pretty great deal! Dell and Amazon sell all brands of cameras, and sometimes have some pretty aggressive sales and coupons...so whatever you decide to buy, do some internet shopping first.

[Krispy]

Zackie - I really appreciate all your help - i am leaning towards the Sony - I want less noise etc... I don't think i would notice issues with shooting faster type subjects so thats not that big of a deal. But I want something that when I take a picture it can be printed enlarged etc and not be too grainy and i think thats where the Sony is going to be the winner..

 

I always search for the coupons on most of my internet purchases you never know what you'll find! :)

 

Kris

[traci28]

Sun flares - that was my issue. However, I think I have found the answer - thank you all...... Now - to get my butt out of bed early enough to experience another sunrise..... ~UGH ~!