buying a camera????

[ryanfx]

Hey guys, I was curious as to what digital cameras people have had good experience with. I'm looking for one around 300-400 used. I used my friend's canon rebel Xt and the pictures came out freaking ridiculous...I had to take the pictures into the bathroom. Anyone know things to look for, or things they woulda redone if you did it again?

Thanks

[Ian]

ask melissa (79camarodiva) she knows all about cameras

[12secondv6]

I have a Kodak... um.... damn.. I don't know the model #. I'm at work right now.

I'm happy with it. Takes good pictures and video.

I'll post the info when I get home.

[GP99GT]

yeah ask melissa. im partial to Canon digital cameras, i have an A85 (i think they changed the model number to something else now) and it takes pretty nice pictures. was $300 when i bought it 2 years ago so im sure its come down since then. Just remember, megapixels arent everything

[ryanfx]

^ exactly.. which is why I might think about investing the money into one with a nice lens.

[79CamaroDiva]

well, the rebel you used, are you looking for a digital SLR like that was or are you looking more for point and shoot? Do you want something that's easy to carry around and can fit in your pocket or do you not mind the bulk of a bigger lens? Go to www.dpreview.com for reviews on almost every camera out there. Most of the stuff I know is about digital SLR's, but I might be able to help you out in the point and shoot area as well.

[Tsar]

what does SLR stand for?

[ryanfx]

no i'm not a facebook tagging wh0re like some girls lol. This is by no means a carry or party camera.. it's for taking GOOD shots!

[79CamaroDiva]

Originally Posted by Tsar

what does SLR stand for?

SLR = Single Lens Reflex.
Basically, camera's with interchangable lenses.

The most recent issue of Popular Photography has a review of mega zoom non-SLR cameras for under $500, there's four of them that are reviewed, might be worth looking into.

[LS1Hawk]

In SLRs, the viewfinder sees the subject of the picture through the lens by an angled mirror inside the camera that flips up when you fire the shutter, directing light onto the film...or I guess a chip...I'm not quite sure if it's the same with a digital SLR. When I worked at Minolta, film cameras were still the thing to have.

[enRo]

I have 3 digital cameras ... I have a Fujifilm (3 Megapixels), a Sony (5 Megapixels) and a new Canon (7 Megapixels) ... all of them have their good uses, the Fujifilm takes awesome day-to-day pictures, the Sony takes very nice large-resolution pictures, and the Canon does all of the above, plus it takes awesome quality videos (alot better than my miniDV recorder)... I bought it for $300 last christmas, so I suggest the canon. Ill get u the model # tomorrow.

[Tsar]

i have pentax 6mp camera, its pretty fawking sweet.

[79CamaroDiva]

Originally Posted by LS1Hawk

In SLRs, the viewfinder sees the subject of the picture through the lens by an angled mirror inside the camera that flips up when you fire the shutter, directing light onto the film...or I guess a chip...I'm not quite sure if it's the same with a digital SLR. When I worked at Minolta, film cameras were still the thing to have.

well.. sure, if you want to get technical

yes, its the same in a DSLR, the mirror places the image onto the sensor. Which is why in most digital SLR cameras (i won't say all, because i dont know if there is one where you can), you cannot look at the screen to pose your shot before hand like you can with a point and shoot, you have to look through the view finder.

[LS1Hawk]

Originally Posted by 79CamaroDiva

well.. sure, if you want to get technical

yes, its the same in a DSLR, the mirror places the image onto the sensor. Which is why in most digital SLR cameras (i won't say all, because i dont know if there is one where you can), you cannot look at the screen to pose your shot before hand like you can with a point and shoot, you have to look through the view finder.

Yeah, i've always found it interesting with digitals, because I wonder how sensitive a sensor is to light compared to actual film. IMHO, film gives you the best quality, but some of the higher end digitals with good lenses give you really nice shots. I have a little 4mp HP digital with a Pentax lens. It does the job, but when I want to take really nice shots, I use my old Canon AE-1.

[79CamaroDiva]

Originally Posted by LS1Hawk

Yeah, i've always found it interesting with digitals, because I wonder how sensitive a sensor is to light compared to actual film. IMHO, film gives you the best quality, but some of the higher end digitals with good lenses give you really nice shots. I have a little 4mp HP digital with a Pentax lens. It does the job, but when I want to take really nice shots, I use my old Canon AE-1.

Film is still the way to go for quality, however, the majority of professionals and of course consumers have switched to digital for its ease of use. Digital may never reach what it has to in order to surpass film, I've read various claims about the how different films are the equivalent of 20 megapixels or whatever. That many pixels may never be reached with the ability to keep the pixels themselves big enough to not have a rediculous amount of noise.

[LS1Hawk]

Originally Posted by 79CamaroDiva

Film is still the way to go for quality, however, the majority of professionals and of course consumers have switched to digital for its ease of use. Digital may never reach what it has to in order to surpass film, I've read various claims about the how different films are the equivalent of 20 megapixels or whatever. That many pixels may never be reached with the ability to keep the pixels themselves big enough to not have a rediculous amount of noise.

Yeah, I read that somewhere too. They say if you want the same quality as a good film SLR, you'd need a digital with 25 mp. The file sizes would be ridiculous. And you could imagine too how much those would cost...

[Tru2Chevy]

http://www.dcresource.com/

I'm looking at getting a new camera soon too. I need to replace my Olympus C3040-Z.

Looking at one of these:

Olympus SP-500 Ultra Zoom
Canon PowerShot S2 IS
Canon PowerShot S3 IS

- Justin

[V]

I have a Kodak easyshare P850. 5.1mp, and i can get different lenses to add onto it. it was a huge improvement over my 1mp HP camera from a few years ago.

[Rob WS6]

Originally Posted by SmokingSS

I have a Kodak easyshare P850. 5.1mp, and i can get different lenses to add onto it. it was a huge improvement over my 1mp HP camera from a few years ago.

Yup, I just got the same one for $299 at CompUSA... AWESOME camera for the money, more features than I know what to do with, and the 12x optical zoom kicks ass.

[Koll]

200-350 dollar range

There are many options to be had in this price range but IMO the company that gives the best bang for your buck is Canon.

Manual Options

for 200 dollars you can own the Canon Powershot A510.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/a510.html
This camera is great. its semi compact, 3x zoom, 3.2 megapixels and takes two AA batteries. It has manual options that let you grow as a photographer but plenty of pre set modes that allow for simple point and shoot pictures. The A510 is an upgrade from the A75

An upgrade to that camera would be the A520
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/a520.html
this camera will set you back 250 bucks and offers more megapixels and little else. The added pixels will help with cropping and picture quality. The A520 is an upgrade from the A85

For a slightly older camera with more weight and more options the A95 is your best bet.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/a95.html
It has a fold out screen, 5 megapixels and a bunch of other goodies. ITs a quality camera for around 300 bucks.

Portability

If you need something portable then the SD series from canon is a great idea. For around 280 dollars you can get a SD 200.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/sd200.html
The 200 is a 3.2 megapixel camera with less features then the A510. It is compact and can easily be lost in your pocket. It is perfect for just a point and shoot. Again, it has some manual options but no where near the A510, 520, and 95

If more megapixels is your style and you have around 350 bucks to burn, the SD300 is just right. It is jsut as tiny as the SD200 but packs more of a punch. with 4 million megapixels it allows more cropping and all that jazz. Just compare it to the A520 as if the SD 300 was the A520's little bulimic sister.

------------------------------------------------------
So, if manual options is your style then the Powershot series by Canon can't let you down. If portability is more your style then the SD series is just great. If you buy the A510 and all of his "A" buddies i suggest you buy rechargable batteries and larger memory. If you buy the SD series you do not need to buy batteries becuase the SDs have a little lition ion battery but i urge you to buy more memory.

Take note I only know about Canon Cams due to my Canon Fanboydom. BUT in the 200-350 dollar pricerange Canon makes some of the best cameras for the buck. Thats it for now, hope you enjoy buying a Canon.

$500 - $999 Range

Below are links to DPReview.com's reviews. These are very in-depth and show EVERYTHING you would need to know. Most people here will either recommend Canon or Nikon. Some of these are DSLRs which basically means they can interchange lenses.

Konica Minolta DiMAGE A200
4.25/5 Stars


Nikon Coolpix 8400
4/5 Stars

Nikon CoolPix 8700
4/5 Stars

Canon EOS Digital Rebel
4.25/5 Stars

Fuji FinePix S20 Pro
4.25/5 Stars

Nikon D50
4.25/5 Stars

Nikon D70
4.5/5 Stars

Canon EOS 350D Digital Rebel XT
4.25/5 Stars

Olympus EVOLT E-300
4.5/5 Stars

Pricing:
Use http://www.pricegrabber.com/ with http://www.resellerratings.com/ to find your camera once you decide.

[ryanfx]

Thanks a ton for all your help guys

[LS1Hawk]

If you want to check out the new issue of Consumer Reports...they cover digital cameras in it. Note to others, they also rate car waxes.