What Camera should i BUY?

[cadaveca]

So, all teh USB devices plugged into the wife's machine are toast. This means i need a new camera. At least 6MP, i figure.


Thoughts, suggestions?

[Favu]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

So, all teh USB devices plugged into the wife's machine are toast.

Crickey! how did that happen?

[cadaveca]

Dunno. Lost thier magic smoke i guess. Good reason to upgrade tho!

[QSDT]

Nikon, cannon, in SLR Digital. My point and shot is an Olympus MUJ500 very happy with it weather proof, steel case.

[Áedán]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

Dunno. Lost thier magic smoke i guess. Good reason to upgrade tho!

I take it that they all died at the same time? You might want to ensure it doesn't happen again before plugging another camera in!

I'm using an EOS 350D which works very well for me and allows me the control I want. It is an SLR however, which puts some people off.

[cadaveca]

Yes all at the same time.

That's a snazzy camera Aedan. But it's $1000 bucks aorund these parts.

I'd really like to get an SLR...but it's the cost that puts me off. As my wife an I are not professional photographers, by any means, and simply take pics of our kids and such(me the hardware, of course), does buying a SLR really make sense?

[Áedán]

SLRs tend to be larger than the compact cameras with fixed lenses. They also tend towards being heavier. If you want the versitility of having exchangable lenses, then you can't beat an SLR. However, a good lens is expensive, which bumps the price up. If you'd only ever buy a single lens for an SLR, why bother with the SLR?

[aghastpumpkin]

I don't think you need more than one lens to justify the advantages...

Some of the lenses you can buy today can fill a lot of your needs.
SLR is better primarily because you look through the lens itself. This means you actually get what you see exactly.
This accuracy is singularly easily a good enough reason for anyone serious about photography to want/need an SLR....
And of course the picture quality is generally much better.

[Áedán]

I would disagree about the "picture quality is generally much better". For what reason would picture quality be better?

As far as "accuracy" goes, you get what the lens sees without the aperture being closed. That affects both exposure and depth of focus. This means that the image you see in the viewfinder is not necessarily any more accurate than the image a compact camera shows on it's preview screen.

On another point, many people use the preview screen on compact cameras in order to frame the shot. This makes it possible to not have your face against the camera when you are shooting. There have been occasions that I really wish I could have done that with an SLR in order to get the picture I wanted.

Given that cadaveca wants it to take pictures of both their kids and his hardware, is an SLR appropriate?

[aghastpumpkin]

No, an SLR is not appropriate. This I agree with.
A decent compact will do the job admirably. Sony always tick my boxes, they are a little expensive but always take good pictures.

[dod]

From what you've said I don't think you really want or need a dSLR, plenty of perfectly adequate compacts and "bridge" (SLR features without interchangeable lenses) will do the job fine Personally I'd stick with Nikon or canon but that's just my preferences, not an indication of quality of other brands.

Originally Posted by Áedán

I would disagree about the "picture quality is generally much better". For what reason would picture quality be better?

few reasons

Sensor is generally larger so individual pixels are larger. Leads to less noise and cleaner images at bigger enlargements. Larger sensors also have better high ISO performance, again less noise if you're using it in low light. Possible one of the nicest quality images comes from the Canon 1D Mk1 with only 4 MP. Even though they're about 10 years old now you'll still pay about £700 for a scond hand example with out a lense

Lens quality increases the more you spend. Less distortion and chromatic imperfections (things like purple fringing in high contrast shots). However you can get dogs of interchangeable lenses costing over £200-£300 as well

Relationship between focal length and sensor size has an impact of Depth of field. If you want to isolate a subject from it's surroundings/background it's a lot easier at a given focal length with a dSLR than it is with a compact or bridge camera.

[Áedán]

Larger sensors are significantly more expensive, and at the price point that is being discussed here, is probably not significant to any great deal.

As you've already noted, there are some dogs of lenses over the £200 mark. I've come across one or two. On the basis that low cost SLR lenses are not exactly great, I'd put it that a decent compact isn't any significantly worse off than a cheap SLR.

[dod]

Originally Posted by Áedán

I'd put it that a decent compact isn't any significantly worse off than a cheap SLR.

I'd agree for cadaveca's requirements 100% Usability is another factor to consider here as well. My wife's probably typical of most people, she's happy to use the compact but she won't even pick up the SLR's.

[Rondog]

My PROFESSIONAL recommendation is the Nikon Coolpix P1. Suitable for family snaps. 8.0mp. 3.5 optical zoom, but supporting macro mode for taking close up shots of hardware.

Not too expensive neither. Yes I do love SLR's. The Nikon D80 gives me a warm fuzzy feeling, but SLR's are overkill for what cadaveca needs in my opinion.

[weldzilla]

Well if you want a great small size camera that will fit in a pocket yet take some of the best photos around and is excellent for Mpeg 4 video also dave.
Check out the Casio Elixim EX-Z750. I have seen them now for as low as $195 US even though they came out in early 2005 and have been pretty much replaced in the casio line by more mega-pixels. It is a 7.2 mega pixel camera. It is still ranked in the top 2 even now by consumer reports
for point and shoot. Check into them. there is a pro that uses his virtually exclusively. When I found this on line this morning the photographer named the post. " From the first day with my Casio Elixim
EX-Z750. Check these photos. this guy is truly a photographer!!
Hard to believe it is such a small camera!!

Flickr: Photos from davenyc from the first day with my new toy, the casio elixim z-750. what... This photo is public This photo is licensed This photo is public. ...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davenyc/page6/

Everybody go take a look at this guy's work! His shots of Hong Kong at night. If this camera is good enough for him it is good enough for me.

Click on the tab near the top of his page that says favorites, on the first page to come up on the second to the last row there is an evening shot that is just truly amazing. Well here,http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne...0926977&size=o


WZ

[Ultimate_death]

If you're looking at casios you could try http://www.casioextra.com, they sell surplus and refurbs so can be a whole lot cheaper than elsewhere. As far as i can tell the prices are kind of random though, and they change pretty often. I guess it depends on demand.

[noob]

Depends what you are looking for in a camera.

I chose a Sony DSC V1, as a SLR would be wasted
review: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscv1/

But cannon, Nikon, and Olympus are also very good brands.

As for MP, over about 3MP for a point n shoot is rarely useful, as 1.2MP will take a good 6x4 standard photo (enlargememnts are rubbish though). What you want is quality over quantity. A high quality 3MP camera is far better than an average quality 16MP camera.

What I always do is decide what features I want, then start looking at and comparing cameras,
and then find all the extra features I didn't know about and now need

[cadaveca]

Working on finding some specific choices...thanks for all the input and keep it coming!