• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

I'm looking to get a digital camera. Need advice.

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

The Shadow

Member
I'm kinda sick of buying those disposable cameras only to have a bunch of the pictures not turn out, or the stupid thing breaking. I took 4 of those on a recent vacation and the part that spools the film broke, meaning I had about 20 pictures I couldn't take.

Anyway, I'm not sure what to get. I'd like to get a camera that has a decent but not professional optical zoom. Size isn't a big concern. I'd rather have a nice camera than something that looks like it could fit in a tin of mints. How many mega pixels is enough? I just want standard sized prints to look nice. I don't need something that'll take poster sized photos.

I'm tempted to buy the Polaroid X530 as it features the X3 chip. It's expensive compared to other cameras of the same MP but the X3 chip supposedly can reproduce all the colors in a picture instead of interpolating them like most other digital cameras. Worth the higher price? Like I said, I'm tempted but at $399 it's really pushing the wallet.
 
Same here...Since I'm attending press events, and going to college to be a Journalist I figured it's about time I pick up a digital camera. Basically what I need to know is...What's the cheapest digital camera I can get, that is still high in quality?
 
i'm about to leave the house now, but just a few tips:

* Any camera at ~$200 will likely suit you (TheShadow)
* Most cameras in this range have a 3x optical zoom and at least 4 megapixels
* A 4MP camera will print a 9x12 (10x13 is possible at slightly less quality)
* Canon and Nikon come easily recommended
* Go to a store and try out cameras to see what you're comfortable with
 
Matlock said:
Be a man! Get a Digital Rebel!

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...102-4248197-8363343?v=glance&s=photo&n=507846

Or this. Canon Powershot A520. Looks nice for the sub-$200 price. 4MP should be enough for what you're doing.
Click to expand...

I have that Powershot. Perfect for what you're needing. Plan to purchase a larger mem card and rechargeable batteries with it. Also, you'll need a carrying case of some kind. I actually use the cheap PSP "sock" that came with the value pack. Fits nice and snug. :)
 
Oh yeah, and as for the memcard--at the 4MP standard, go with 256MB. You'll get around a hundred pics per at highest quality, with room to grow. :)
 
Hey.. that powershot looks sweet.

I bet I could make out the individual muscle strands on my girlfreind's sphincter with that thing!!

AWESOME
 
Don't get a cheap one. I went the cheap route and got a $150 Olympus that is garbage in every way. Fortunately, its crappiness is acceptable for the uses I have for it so it stays. Try to take a sample picture if they allow it. Mine takes a second to shoot, motion blur, and so on.
 
The Shadow said:
Do I absolutely need to buy a photo printer or can I take them somewhere to have them "developed"?
Click to expand...
the best combination is, if you're on a PC, [url="http://www.picasa.com]Picasa[/url] and your online developer of choice. i recommend snapfish - cheap and more than decent quality.
 
I'm down with Canon and Olympus.

Canon has the edge though, in my opinion. One of these days, I'm going to bite the bullet and get me the 8 mega-pixel Digital Rebel.
 
The Shadow said:
Do I absolutely need to buy a photo printer or can I take them somewhere to have them "developed"?
Click to expand...
If you've got an inkjet printer at home, that should suffice for those "instant gratification" prints. Personally, i think those 4x6 printers are a huge ripoff unless you have a business where you need to print pictures immediately. They're limited in the size of prints and the ink is expensive and often hard-to-find. You can just as easily print what you want at a kiosk (i prefer Kodak) for roughly 25 cents per 4x6. There's also online services which can provide better and/or cheaper prints.

Matlock's A520 recommendation was dead on with what i'd recommend. It's a great beginner camera and even has a few manual features. Canon recently announced some newer A-series cameras, so the price on the A520 should drop a bit more. :)

Also, to add to what Matlock said about accessories, you may want to shoot for a 512MB card. That's generally where the sweet spot for most flash card formats is online. i just bought a 512MB Compact Flash card from Buy.com that'll end up being about $23 after rebates. A 512MB card will also accomodate a fair number of video clips on the card. One thing to keep in mind is that it's not generally a good idea to take a card with video and pictures on it to a kiosk -- some kiosks will crash or at least freeze up for a while when trying to read the videos.

For the best prices on pretty much everything you need, www.techbargains.com. Dell usually has stackable coupons and sales, afterwhich their inflated prices are pretty good. :)

Here's the specs from dpreview.com (review link on the page):
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_a520.asp

Also the gallery -- it's no slouch:
http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/?gallery=canona520_samples/

The Kodak you mentioned has not and may never be released. i remember reading about it, specifically about the Foveon sensor and how it worked over a year ago, and it sounded good on paper, but nothing ever materialized.

ToyMachine: Wait until you start classes and see what the recommended camera is for your classes. A lot of schools still recommend a film camera.
 
I'm not sure that The Shadow is looking for a Digital SLR, guys. :p

I think a point-and-shoot 4MP camera would be perfect, and I agree with aoi that all you really need to do is go to the store, feel out the Nikon and the Canon to see which one you like more, and then go home and order it online. Get an additional memory card and get your shots developed at pretty much anywhere nowadays or online.
 
Fragamemnon said:
I'm not sure that The Shadow is looking for a Digital SLR, guys. :p
Click to expand...

Note only a slight tangent that way, noted for those who who were looking for one and came into this thread. :)


Re: aoi--You make a good point with the 512 deal, but it's up in the air. I can usually waste 80 pics a day, tho, so maybe I'd go with that idea if I were Shadow. :lol
 
I bought a Canon SD400 a few weeks ago for a vacation. It works really well for a camera amateur like me (just point and click, there's various settings you can tweak around with for fun, but nothing too fancy). What I'm most impressed with are the high quality 640 x 480 movie files you can take with it. I really like it.
 
SnowWolf said:
I bought a Canon SD400 a few weeks ago for a vacation. It works really well for a camera amateur like me (just point and click, there's various settings you can tweak around with for fun, but nothing too fancy). What I'm most impressed with are the high quality 640 x 480 movie files you can take with it. I really like it.
Click to expand...
Wow. I just downloaded a sample and the quality is friggin' amazing. Very bright colors too.
 
Fragamemnon said:
I'm not sure that The Shadow is looking for a Digital SLR, guys. :p
Click to expand...

Digital SLR?

aoi:

It's not available in stores but apperently you can buy it off the Polaroid website. At least, they do list how many in stock.

In any case, you can use that as a measure of how much I'm willing to spend. I'd rather spend a little more and keep the camera for a while than spend a little now and then upgrade maybe a year or two later.
 
SLR stands for "single lens reflex". It's a more-professional (and more costly) way of building a camera compared to "point and shoot" styles at lesser price ranges. The big benefit (at least for my GF, who has one) of SLRs is that you can change out the lens of the camera to suit what kind of shot you want to take.

Digital SLR just means digital camera tech with a SLR-style lens mechanism.
 
Three hours and no one knows? :(


Well anyway, I went to Best Buy to check out cameras. They unfortunately seem to come in two flavors. Really big and really tiny. The big ones have a nice 10x or 12x zoom. The tiny ones all seem to have at least a 3x zoom boosted with a worthless digital zoom.

To be honest, I really didn't fall in love with any of them. There was one I looked at more than the others, a 4mp Fuji that boasted a 10x zoom. Not sure if I'm ready to just buy just yet though.
 
The Shadow said:
I'm tempted to buy the Polaroid X530 as it features the X3 chip. It's expensive compared to other cameras of the same MP but the X3 chip supposedly can reproduce all the colors in a picture instead of interpolating them like most other digital cameras. Worth the higher price? Like I said, I'm tempted but at $399 it's really pushing the wallet.
Click to expand...

If you are not going to get an SLR you might as well get a cell phone with a camera that can connect to your computer. The image quality of this generation of phones are quickly approaching the non-SLR's
 
The Olympus C series cameras are pretty nice. I used to have a C-5050 - broke after I dropped it on the beach. I currently have the C-8080 model. It produces some really nice shots.
 
ChrisReid said:
I'd strongly recommend
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...002-9226477-2983219?v=glance&s=photo&n=507846
Only $240, 5 megapixel, 6x optical zoom. Panasonic is pretty good quality too.

Eighteen months ago I bought pretty much the equivalent Panasonic. Back then it was $250, 3 megapixel and only 3x zoom. I also have a higher end Toshiba with 10x zoom, but I mostly take around the Panasonic.
Click to expand...

Right now I'm considering this one (or the LZ1) or the Canon A520. The Panasonic has an anti-shake feature and the Canon has manual features. Right now I'm swinging toward the Panasonic unless someone wants to add something. All of a sudden people got quiet.
 
The Shadow said:
Right now I'm considering this one (or the LZ1) or the Canon A520. The Panasonic has an anti-shake feature and the Canon has manual features. Right now I'm swinging toward the Panasonic unless someone wants to add something. All of a sudden people got quiet.
Click to expand...
The Panasonic also has a lot of noise at ISO 200 and higher and the trademark "watercolor" Panasonic noise reduction effect to take care of it.

i've been out most of the day and night, so my lengthy response will have to wait until tomorrow. In short you were in the same boat as me in transitioning from a crappy camera to your first digital camera. Unless you have no interest in photography and don't forsee gaining one after getting your camera, i'd push your budget a bit higher, or at least shoot for a slightly higher class of camera. More tomorrow.
 
the fuji F10 looks quite nice as well at the high end of that range. from reading the reviews it sounds like you should only go for the panasonic if you want the long zoom. the noise is pretty insane.
 
If you're willing to bump your price range up to $3299, you could have one of these 12.8 megapixel beauties soon:

allroundview-001.jpg


http://www.dpreview.com/articles/canoneos5d/

Canon's press material for the EOS 5D states that it 'defines (a) new D-SLR category', while we're not typically too concerned with marketing talk this particular statement is clearly pretty accurate. The EOS 5D is unlike any previous digital SLR in that it combines a full-frame (35 mm sized) high resolution sensor (12.8 megapixels) with a relatively compact body (slightly larger than the EOS 20D, although in your hand it feels noticeably 'chunkier'). The EOS 5D is aimed to slot in between the EOS 20D and the EOS-1D professional digital SLR's, an important difference when compared to the later is that the EOS 5D doesn't have any environmental seals. While Canon don't specifically refer to the EOS 5D as a 'professional' digital SLR it will have obvious appeal to professionals who want a high quality digital SLR in a body lighter than the EOS-1D. It will also no doubt appeal to current EOS 20D owners (although lets hope they've not bought too many EF-S lenses...)
Click to expand...
 
A camera is worthless if you never have it with you to take pictures. Digital SLRs are leagues beyond point and hoot digitals in quality, but ithey are so damn big, you'll hardly have them on you when you want to take a pic!

Do yourself a favor and get a nice a small point and shoot first. And when you get serious enough about digital photography to plan a shoot in advance and take all the gears with you, then invest in a DSLR.
 
To be fair, I don't think the original poster was ever interested in a DSLR, it's just that a few of us jokingly (or otherwise) tried to steer him in that direction.
 
Shogmaster said:
A camera is worthless if you never have it with you to take pictures. Digital SLRs are leagues beyond point and hoot digitals in quality, but ithey are so damn big, you'll hardly have them on you when you want to take a pic!

Do yourself a favor and get a nice a small point and shoot first. And when you get serious enough about digital photography to plan a shoot in advance and take all the gears with you, then invest in a DSLR.
Click to expand...

I'm kinda heading in that direction anyway. Originally I just wanted a 35mm sized digital camera but after looking at all the cameras at Best Buy, I liked the mega zoom DCs though they would be incredibly tough to take with me anywhere, particularly hiking.

So I think I'm headed in the ultra compact territory. I'd probably take it with me more often and take more pictures if it was smaller.
 
Warning: The following post is brought to you in part by CHEAP BEER.

My original post was going to be longer, but since you've decided on a compact camera, that helped me

i was in the same boat as you three years ago when i bought my Canon S40, my first "real" digital camera. It was rated as a prosumer point and shoot camera at the time, and was much more camera than i thought i'd need. Now, everything about the camera pisses me off. No manual focus and slow autofocus, a "broken" flash that could be simply fixed through a firmware update, and practically everything requires diving into a menu. Menus are a pain in the ass when jumping from varying scene conditions. FWIW, i've been having a blast with my uncle's old Pentax K-1000, an ancient 35mm camera that takes good pictures and is fully manual (no batteries even). With a basis of photographic elements under my belt, i find the 35mm (and the accompanying 35mm, 50mm, and 100mm lenses) to be even more fun than my digital, which offers instant gratification. Maybe you'll be the same some day.

i was ready to hate on the Sony P200 because, well, it's a point and shoot Sony and they're typically not my first or second choice for recomendations. Those spots are generally reserved for Canon and Nikon. But after redaing reviews and checking shots, i'd have to go with the P200 over the SD400. The Sony has manual controls and optional lenses should you wish to take your photography a step further than just point and shoot. The additional two megapixels are just butter on an already sweet package.

In short, Sony P200 > Canon SD400.
 
Thanks for the help aoi.

Originally I did want a beefy camera but when I started thinking realistically about it, I think I shifted to the compacts. I generally take pictures when the occation calls for it, never as a hobby. Once I thought of it in that way, I realized the ultra-zooms were probably too much for what I wanted to do.

Having a compact would be a huge help though. Taking those disposable 35mm cameras hiking is always a pain and when I went on vacation, there were 3-4 of them all over my car. I'd pick one up and realize it was one of the broken ones and then have to search for a good one.

So I think a compact is the way to go. The size will allow for me to have it on hand more often and who knows, maybe it will open a new hobby for me. For now though, it's probably the best choice.
 
Doh!


Alright. Now I have a question about memory. I'm ready to buy the P200 but I see that it works best with Memory Stick Pro memory. I see a Sony brand Memory Stick Pro and a ScanDisk Memory Stick Pro Duo with an adaptor for Memory Stick Pro use. Both are 512mb. Which is recommended and what generally is a good price for a 512mb stick?
 
Shogmaster said:
A camera is worthless if you never have it with you to take pictures. Digital SLRs are leagues beyond point and hoot digitals in quality, but ithey are so damn big, you'll hardly have them on you when you want to take a pic!
Click to expand...

I carry my 20D wherever I go. 30mm 1.4 Sigma lens. Isn't THAT big.
 
174_DSC40-1.jpg

I got a Cybershot DSC-40 for my last travel to Italy and the results were more than ok...4M pixels photos are enough good imo.
Most of my mates were using this one:
sonyp150_3q-001.jpg


Sure is a lot better...but the price is in another galaxy !


Here are some of my photos. Keep in mind they were done with the AUTO program...I didn't mess a lot with the camera options...Just point and click.

roma17bn.jpg

roma21en.jpg

roma37uk.jpg
 
Sho Nuff said:
I carry my 20D wherever I go. 30mm 1.4 Sigma lens. Isn't THAT big.
Click to expand...

Assuming that the Digi Reb line is fairly similar in size, it's not really the most opportune thing to carry around.



Ultraportables like the Cybershot and the Powershot line are far more suited for traveling.
 
My 20D with the 17-85 IS walkaround lens seems pretty sizeable to me. I carry it in a Lowepro holster-style case worn around my belt, and while I love the solid, rugged feel of it, it's not something I carry around with me casually. One day I'd like to get a more compact digicam I can take with me anywhere for impulse shooting, but I've already spent enough on photo gear this year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Does anyone need a Landscaper? I'm getting fired. Lol
15
421
EverydayBeast replied
Is There Any Shopify Business Owners That Visit Neogaf? I’m Looking For Advice.
Community Business 
2
353
L3E2 replied
Healthy Gaf, looking some advice
35
1K
The Cockatrice replied
Anyone using a Digital Audio Player?
11
278
Cyberpunkd replied
  • Poll
Advice for new TV
10
373
Little Mac replied
Top Bottom