Digital camera thread

Discussion in '1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-' started by Sleepy McNastee, Apr 29, 2005.

  1. Sleepy McNastee

    Sleepy McNastee New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    ^^^ Best title ever :banana:

    I want to buy a digital camera that takes stills and video. I want to spend under $500 if that doesn't narrow my options down too much. Also, I would like one that is easy to download to the computer. Any suggestions guys? What have you had luck with? Any help will be appreciated. I know I can search the interwab, but I would like advice from people that aren't selling what I want to buy. Thanks.
     
    #1
  2. Venom351R

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2002
    Messages:
    13,947
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    MAINE
    I have a Cannon Powershot A75 that cost me $200. Its 3.2 Megapixles and so far has been an awesome camera. Takes top notch pics and some really great video, even my brother ( whos really into computer/electronic stuff) said that it takes better video then his $500 5.1 megapixal camera.
     
    #2
  3. 1105

    1105 I AM the random post master...bow down

    Joined:
    May 3, 2003
    Messages:
    3,882
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Daytona Bch, FL
    best title ever? :rlaugh: :lol: you have quite a ways to catch up to my titles :D
     
    #3
  4. teamgs

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2001
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Elk Grove, CA
    I can second the A75 as a great camera. Also uses regular AA batteries.

    Gary
     
    #4
  5. DARK-5.0

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    Messages:
    725
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Leawood, KS
    I've got a Nikon Coolpix 4300 and its great. I had it for about a year before I finally read all the features to it. Its an awesome camera now. It takes stills and 60 sec vids but the only downside is you would have to buy the mic if you wanted sound. I hardly ever take vids on it so it doesn't bother me too much but I dunno why they thought silent movies was a good idea.
    [​IMG]

    Jeremy
     
    #5
  6. GRGT1994

    GRGT1994 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,044
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here's a good site for in depth information and reviews on digicams. Go with Canon, Nikon or Olympus and you can't go wrong. Kodak is good for ease of use. Plenty of other good companies too. Check the site for more detail that you care to know about digital cameras.
    http://www.dcresource.com/
     
    #6
  7. Mustangless

    Mustangless New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Messages:
    905
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    home
    you need to think about what you are going to use it for. I got an olympus camera like 2-3 years ago and its nice just wish it had better macro. If I went with a new one it would either be an olympus, canon or maybe nikon. I have a friend with the a75 and its nice but I think I like my uncles olympus c-765. All what you have to do is read lots of reviews. That site posted above is good
     
    #7
  8. teamgs

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2001
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Elk Grove, CA
    #8
  9. Cobracanuck

    Cobracanuck New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Messages:
    91
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario CANADA
    another vote for Canon A75, my fave camera to date (have also had Canon A20, A40, A60, A70, and A80) --dont worry, i dont pay for them! through work
     
    #9
  10. Sleepy McNastee

    Sleepy McNastee New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Awesome, thanks for all the information and links everybody. I appreciate all the replys.

    It looks like the Canon A75 is a great camera. And only $200. After reading a few reviews on the Epinions site it looked like most people had good things to say. I'll have to look around just a bit, but I'm leaning towards the Canon. Thanks again. :nice:



    1105, I'm workin on my thread title skillz yo, watch out. :D
     
    #10
  11. yellowstang1994

    yellowstang1994 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2004
    Messages:
    339
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just to get this off my chest. My friend has a kodak CX 6770 I think or something and I always loved his camera. I know nothing about digital cameras but the other day I was in a rush and needed a camera so I bought that whole kodak CX 7300 deal for like $100 thinking it would be a decent camera. I was wrong. I could go on with how much stuff I hate about this camera but the biggest thing is it doesn't have autofocus it has fixed focus. So I always have problems with bluriness. I need another camera, this one ****es me off, lol.
     
    #11
  12. Sleepy McNastee

    Sleepy McNastee New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS

    Thanks for the tip. Sorry it didnt work out for ya. Sometimes when I buy a piece of equipment that doesn't live up to my expectations, I think of it as an expensive lesson, more than a waste of money, for what its worth.
     
    #12
  13. GRGT1994

    GRGT1994 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,044
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I would look more to the professional/objective review sites (like the two listed above), rather than Epinions. Have you ever noticed how inconsistent user opinions are? I think it's because the only people who care to post a user review have a strong opinion. Either they hated the product (cause their's was the 1 in 1000 defective or for some other reason), or they really really love the product (and maybe want to counter some of the negative posts). The other 99% of buyers never post an opinion.

    So, it seems you really don't get reliable information from user review. Just my opinion.
     
    #13
  14. illwood

    illwood Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    650
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    17
    Location:
    Worcester, MA
    I say go to the dpreview site.
    dpreview

    This guy really knows what he's talking about and all of the cameras he reviews have picture samples (inlcuding the original full-size, right off camera ones).

    It was the review on this site that sealed the deal for me getting my Olympus C5050Z a few years ago.

    Personally, I don't like Cannons 'cause their non-slr ones white balance sux. See a sample of pics taken with flourescent light, looks like it was taken through a yellow filter.
     
    #14
  15. Scot_94GT

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    270
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Spring Lake Park, MN
    I recently bought the Cannon SD200. It is the new genration of small ass digicams. It has roughly the same dimensions as a deck of cards. 2" screen, 3X optical zoom, and the video it takes is a REALLY nice feature. It is capabe of taking up to 640x480@30 frames per sec (as opposed to MOST digicams which take video at 15 FPS). It even has a fast frame reate mode where you can take video at 60 fps. It also has the DIG!C II processor, so the cameral is SUPER fast as far as powerup, writing to memory etc. The DIG!C II processor is also what makes the camera capable of streaming video directly to the memory card, instead of storing it on an internal memory buffer...so that means you are not limited in the length of video clip you can take...you can just keep shooting continuously until the memory card is full.

    The only major drawbacks stem from the fact that this camera is so small.
    First of all, the Battery is a custom sized NiMH, which is fairly small...I don't remember of the top of my head but it was only around 2000mAhrs. So it wont last nearly as long on a charge as, say, the Cannon A75, which uses 4 AA batteries.
    Another drawback, is that since the camera is so thin, the actual distance from the lens to the CCD is very short, and the lens is a special aspherical design to accomodate this. The aspherical lens causes some noticable distortion in the corners of the images. 90% of the time you will not notice this, since the foucs of almost all of your pictures will be the center of the frame anyway.
    If you are really into photography, then the picture distortion might annoy you enough, that you might want to go with a camera like the A75. But if you are just going to use it for taking pics on vacation and making small 4x6 prints from them, you will likely never notice any difference in piqture quality between the SD200 and the A75. (BTW, I keep comparing it ot the A75 because they are both 3MP).
    The SD200 has a few different shooting modes, and a SEMI-manual mode. The A75 has full manual features, so if you are into that, get the A75. But even though I am into playing around with shutter speeds and f-settings on my old SLR camera, I find that 99.999% of the time, I just shoot it on full auto mode.

    I personally would not waste money on anything higher than 3 or 4 megapixels. Mine is 3MP, and it is more than enough. Unless you are going to be cropping your pictures dramatically, you will neve notice the difference between a 3MP and a 14MP picture when printed out at 4"x6". Now, if you are printing 8x10's then of course you will notice a better quality picture.
     
    #15
  16. Sleepy McNastee

    Sleepy McNastee New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Thanks again everybody for your replies. I see what you guys are saying about the epinions site. I'll check out the other sites listed and do some more research.

    Scot, thanks a bunch for all the info. The SD200 sounds good as well. I'll have to look around some more. The small battery could be an issue, but the convenience of a small camera is a plus, along with the ability to shoot a longer video. I will definitely keep that camera in mind as well. The more I learn about different cameras, the more I realize I know almost nothing about all the new technology. I will probably buy a beginner camera and maybe go bigger later as I learn. I just want something relatively simple (inexpensive) to take some pics and videos of my car, for now.
     
    #16
  17. GRGT1994

    GRGT1994 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,044
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Read up a little bit then, but don't over think it. A $200 camera from a quality company should do fine for now, just make sure to get the features you want. Then if you want a more advanced camera at some point in the future, do your extensive researching at that point.

    In that vein, Olympus has some ultra zoom point and shoot cameras that might fit. Good luck.
     
    #17
  18. donjohn

    donjohn New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Irvine - Southern California
    i agree with illwook about dpreview.com, it's by far the best camera site although steves digital cameras has more in depth information.

    The A75 was great, but it's outdated. why go with that when they've already made up to what, the A95? besides, there's not a lot of zoom. of course, if you don't care about zoom, sure it's a good camera (and i have used it)

    I have the Canon S1 IS. It's been out for a while so i'd look at newer cams, but it's still selling in circuit city and best buy for the same price i bought it at months ago. It's got 10x optical zoom (about 200mm equivalent) and at the time had the best movie mode out of the less expensive ones (steve's digi cam review site will tell you that)

    If i were to do it again, i'd go for an SLR, but i'm pretty big on taking pics. the SI IS is all I could afford at the time for <$300

    Stick with Canon, sony and kodak make things "easy to use" so they bump up the price... screw that
     
    #18
  19. Scot_94GT

    Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    270
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Spring Lake Park, MN
    Yeah...any by "easy to use" they mean...you put the camera in a cradle (which costs an extra $70-$80 and hit a "share" button (or "download" or whatever the hell they name the button) instead of plugging your camera into a USB port. :rolleyes:
     
    #19
  20. donjohn

    donjohn New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Irvine - Southern California
    seriously though, it's rediculous... that much for a cradle when you just open the port and plug it in yourself

    besides, canon's lenses are the best out of everything
     
    #20

Share This Page