Which digital camera comes the closest in features and picture quality of the Canon AE-1 Program 35mm film camera?
Best Answer: Maybe a professional question. But I think sony is ok. Try to check, maybe you can find the one
http://www.toboc.com/forum3/default.aspx...
- No, unfortunately, Canon dumped that camera system in 1988 in favor of the new Canon EOS system. That left a lot of us having to choose to either to replace all of our cameras and lenses with new Canons or make the switch to Nikon's whose owners were not abandoned and lenses continued to be usable for another twenty years ... and certainly beyond. There were some adapters made for the FD lenses, but they were expensive and the lenses could not be focused to infinity.
Read More ...
I've read in an article that it would take 14 megapixels in order for a digital camera to match a 35mm. in terms of picture image quality. Also is 35mm the "Holy Grail" of image quality in a photograph? Are there new technologies that could surpass the image quality of a 35mm camera?
Best Answer: Being that there are digital cameras on the market such as Hassleblads $30,000 H2 which bosts an impressive 39 megapixels you would assume that digital cameras have far surpassed that of 35mm film, and indeed in the case of the Hasselblad it has indeed surpassed the quality of 35 cameras and has approached the quality that one would expect with larger format film cameras such as 6x4.5 cm film or 6x6cm film. However, film sizes are not limited to 35mm, 6x4.5 cm film or 6x6cm film for that matter. 4inchx5inch and 8inchx10inch are also very popular film sizes amongst professional photographers. If you really want to get down to brass tacks, there is a formula which you can use to figure out the megapixel equivalent of the film you are using. The equation is as follows... (lpm1.6 / 80 lpm)2...squared that is. In the equation, lpm1.6 refers to the published film resolution in line pairs per millimeter with a target with a contrast of 1.6. The digital camera equivalent applies to a monochrome (Bayer) sensor that is common in consumer and pro digital cameras currently on the market. hence.... digital megapixel equivalent (35 mm film) = 10 * (lpm1.6 / 80 lpm)2 digital megapixel equivalent (6x4.5 cm film) = 31 * (lpm1.6 / 80 lpm)2 digital megapixel equivalent (4x5 film) = 150 * (lpm1.6 / 80 lpm)2 digital megapixel equivalent (8x10 film) = 600 * (lpm1.6 / 80 lpm)2 So as you can see the megapixel equivalent of 8x10 film is about 600megapixels(give or take depending upon the type and iso of the film you are using, type of lens etc..). However, for the average consumer who prints 4x6 prints at walgreens this is just an overkill. However if you are making 7 foot by 10 foot mural prints and you want sharp and tonally perfect prints, go with an 8x10 camera. Just because film can surpass the quality of digital cameras should not mean that you should dismiss digital cameras as some kind of novelty. In many ways digital photography has revolutioned many fields of photography from photo journalism to product photography. But film has its niche too especially in the fine art field and in some specialty commercial photo fields. Fact is that your choice of film or digital really depends upon what you are doing in the photo field. Would Ansel Adams or Edward Weston have been the icons that they were using 35mm SLR cameras or 12 megapixel digital cameras? There is no such thing as the perfect camera, but there are cameras that can be perfect for you.
- It takes about 20 megapixels to match film quality. Within another 5 years, many cameras will be 15-20 megapixels with low amounts of noise because of improved sensors. There is actually a camera that you can buy right now that has 160 megapixels!
- Stephen's answer presents a very good discussion about the difficulty comparing film to digital, it doesn't answer your whole question. Based on what I see when I scan slides at 4,000 dpi, I'm guessing that 18-20 MP would be a close technical match for film grain. I will not dispute anything Stephen says about saturation, etc., but I think 18-20 MP could duplicate the grain size in an ISO 50-100 film. Now, as to whether it's NECESSARY or not, that's another question. I think 10-12 MP is probably good enough to give film a run for the money as far as resolution in concerned. This relies on the fact that the human eye just can't see that well without assistance. Let me emphasize that I agree that there are other parameters besides resolution that go in to the overall quality of the image. If you are trying to surpass the image quality of a 35 mm camera, just get into medium format. It may seem too obvious to say it, but I will. The negative is at least four times larger. For any given format (5x7, 8x10, etc) the image will be that much sharper. If you decide to venture into medium format, though, take a boat load of money!
- 35mm is not the "Holy Grail" of image quality for film photography. There is a technology older than 35mm film that is far better in quality - medium format - think Hasselblad, Mamiya, Yashica, etc. Medium format is better qualty than 35mm because the negatives are much larger - about 2" x2" - I could stand corrected on this as I'm not that familiar with Medium format. If your mom or grandma had a Brownie - that was medium format. Large format - often used for architectural photography has even better image quality. Anyone who attempts to compare film and digital from a quality perspective is out of perspective and focus [I'm trying to be polite]. The technologies of film and digital sensors are vastly different. For example digital sensors still have a long way to go to match the color saturation of ISO 100 film. It's the old story of apples and oranges. At the end of the day, it's not the tools, it's not the mastery of the tools. It's all about the result - the light, the subject, the composition, etc. A talented photographer can take a cover shot photograph with a drugstore box camera, while an over equipped, untalented buffoon can ruin any Kodak moment.
- Like you must have read in the trail of answers, 35mm is not the "holy grail" of image quality. However, you probably want to compare it to digital imaging. Well yes I think the 14 megapix figure seems about right.
- There are some who will always say that film is better than digital.. that the focus is always better on film.. yada yada yada... While that used to be true, the currently available dslr's on the market are pretty remarkable. (and getting better all the time.) If you intend to print a lot of your pictures then I would not go much under 6 mega pixels in a camera. Now, that said, you need to determine if you want a dslr or what is called a point and shoot camera. The difference is this, the point and shoot has auto settings most of which you cannot over ride for special circumstances to make the picture you want.. the dslr has interchangable lens capability, and most of the auto settings can usually be over ridden. What will you use your camera for? If you want to do professional photos for magazines, newspapers, stock photo sales, then I would say you need to invest in a dslr. (digital single lens reflex) if you want to go digital. I think the pros for this are pretty much self evident, immediate gratification of what you shot, no film processing etc etc. On the film camera side there is the fact that usually you can get a really cheap price on a pretty good camera. In addition to 35 mm there are also the middle range cameras (some have been mentioned in other answers to your question already so I won't repeat them) If you would like to see some of the images taken with a dslr 8 mega pixel you can see them at http://www.silvaspoon.net and on that same site you will find some pretty decent deals on both point and shoot cameras and dslr cameras.(http://www.silvaspoon.net/cameras.html) The left column has links to some of the better camera outlets that usually have sales going on. The truth is that you can take good pictures with just about any camera you have, if you know what you are doing. A photo blog that might interest you is at http://photographmuse.blogspot.com/
- 4 megapixels is plenty. The human eye can't tell the difference unless you either plan to: 1) print huge, poster-sized copies of the photos, or 2) zoom way, way in using software. In fact the more megapixels you get, not only does the price of the camera go up, but fewer pictures fit on your memory card. 4 megapixels is more than enough for 95% of us.
- I pretty much agree with the discussion regarding megapixel quality vs. film quality. The only part of the equation I didnt see discussed is digital image format which also influances image quality on a digital camera. If you shoot in a RAW format, you get the most out of the cameras abilities because you get the best bit depth, and the images are presented just as they are recorded. No image manipulation ocurrs in the camera. The only real down side to RAW format it that there is no standard RAW format! Pretty much every manufacturer has their owm proprietary RAW format, and you need their software to view their RAW photos. Microsoft has a digital image suite that can work with Nikon and Cannon, but if you use anything else you're out of luck unless you have the manufacturers software. Adobe has a RAW format that some suggest should become the RAW standard, but there is no consensus to this yet. The other side of the issue is shooting in JPEG or TIFF or BITMAP or one of the other formats that have a more wide apeal. Their problems are that they don't record the bit depth of RAW, and they all tend to loose pixels when they compress your image. Normally you dont see this loss of quality, unless again you enlarge your image, or you open and close your image several times. In JPEGs case at least this looses pixels with every opening and closing as it uncompresses the image for viewing, and then recompresses the image for storage. Personal opinion...I don't see that there is a one all encompassing "holy grail" of image quality. Each format, digital and film, 35mm medium format, large format all have their pluses and minuses none the least of which is how big the bucket of cash is you'll need to use a chosen format. Figure out what kind of photography you want to do. Studio work, location, nature, whatever. Educate yourself on formats, and film characteristics Then check how many digits are on the bottom line of your checking account, and then buy what works for your situation.
- I agree that 4 megapixels is enough for most of us, but if you are planning on taking professional pictures, 4 megapixels is not enough. Not only for blowing up the pictures to large sizes. Even playing around in photoshop, 4 megapixels does not capture the pixel depth that a film camera can capture. There is not enough detail in the picture.
- It actually depends on a few factors. With consumer grade lenses, the lens is the limiting factor for resolving power - not the film or sensor. With a good lens, 35mm color film equals roughly 8 mega-pixels. So digital is already better. With a good lens and good black and white film, you can get as much as 25 mega-pixels worth of information. So film would still be better. Then again, you would only notice the difference if you printed larger than 8x10 inches. The newest digital SLR cameras are all 10MP and the the Canon 1Ds Mk2 has 16.7 mega-pixels. Another factor is dynamic range. Digital cameras capture a slightly smaller range than film - they tend to clip the highlights a bit sooner and a bit harsher than film. This is true for all digital cameras, although Sigma's Foveon technology is slightly better than the rest (too bad the Foveon sensors never took off). This is something that the sensor manufacturors are still working on. If you do low light photography, digital is clearly better - and it has been for some time. With digital cameras you can capture clean images at ISO 1600, which is impossible with film (you'd have considerable grain). In short, 99% of the time digital is good enough, which explains why most pros have already switched.
Read More ...
I want to buy a digital camera in the next few months and am aware some of the 'better' digital cameras are very pricey. I looked at previous questions to see which cameras are recommended but this doesn't help me make a decision, I also looked at reviews online.
Could anyone answer the question stating the digital camera they use, and an example of photography they have taken using the camera without any editing and why they personally think it is a good camera (e.g. easy to use, photo quality, functions of the camera).
Thanks!
Best Answer: This is a question only you can answer, if your keen on photography and want to get the maximum control then it has to be a DSLR. There are just too many restrictions with a compact, small sensor and shutter delay are just two. The only advantages they do have is size and portability. When you buy a DSLR you are buying into a system, the camera is just the down payment. The resolution of the camera just determines the size of picture you can print without adding (or removing pixels - 'interpolation), nothing else. As a guide a 6Mp camera will print 'natively' at a tad over A4, a 10Mp at A3+, but that does mean you can crop half the pixels away and still have enough for a good A4. I have 2 Pentax DSLR's a *istDS (6Mp) and a K10D (10Mp) this means I can use the same lens to do comparative tests. When printed at A4 size I can see no difference, even with a magnifying glass, at A3 you don't need the magnifying glass the difference is easy to see, the 10Mp K10D wins hands down. The make of DSLR does not matter one jot, the lens quality does, so go for the most functions for the money. Pentax score heavily here, having Anti Shake in camera means ALL you lenses are Anti Shake, there's not a price premium to pay as with other makes. Plus there are a massive range of quality old lenses all of which can be used on their DSLR's (with some limitations). Chris
- LuLu - some good advice. When you ask a question like this here everyone recommends what they have. Few people will have had hands on experience of more than a very few different cameras. Put Steves Digicams into your search engine. This is an independant american digital camera test site. Look at section the best buys. You will get a list by type and you can bring up very comprehensive test reports complete with sample photo's. Steves Digicams is THE very best site of its type and gets hundreds of thousands of hits and rightly so. If Steve says a camera is good you can take it as 100% gospel. PS When you see people recommending Kodak to you, you should realise that the answers are going to be less help than you hoped.
- I have this camera and I'm very happy with it: Olympus SP500 UZ - see here for details: http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&... good picture quality, easy to use but plenty of options for advanced users as well (aperture or shutter priority, or completely manual); even the macro mode is really good - it's really a semi-pro camera you can grow on - there's nothing I don't like about it please download my sample picture from here: http://rapidshare.de/files/39946354/P305... now I'm thinking about going SLR and I think I will stick to Olympus, maybe this one since I've seen some pictures and I'm impressed, great quality and very low noise Olympus E510 SLR - see here for details: http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&... sorry, I don't have a picture sample for this one I would really suggest an SLR if you are wishing to spend a little more. I've tried Nikon and Canon as well but as far as image quality is concerned I prefer Olympus.
- I have a Pentax K110D, 6.1mp and have just aquired a nice new Pentax K200D, 10.2mp which, including your cashback, costs £400. Use it for all sorts of photography. If you want to see results, message me, and I will send a link to you. Very easy to use. Uses 4xAA batteries. I use rechargeables, and get about 400 shots from each set. (without flash). Great 'Kit Lens' also. Small and lightweight. Regarding Pixels. 6 is fine, but you dont need more than 10. My 6mp K110D, I sold a picture to someone who wanted it 50x70cm, and it looked great, otherwise they wouldnt have bought it, would they.
- That's a bit of an open question... What is your budget, and do you want to slip it into your pocket/handbag or want something with megazoom and a big lens that definitely won't fit in your pocket... Edit: With that budget you can buy a decent dSLR. Check out ebay item no. 170235455533 I can highly recommend that because I have one. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse...
- I have a Kodak ZD710. It's a great digital camera for not to much money. I love it. It takes great pictures, they print out great too! I have taken tons of pics with it. It has settings for sports type stuff, fireworks, scenic stuff, and lots more. It has tons of zoom too.
- You need to ask yourself this question first. What am I going to use it for and how often. If you are just using it for pleasure taking holiday snaps pictures of the dog etc then to spend that kind of money is pointless and wasteful you can get one for £70 that will do that just as well . If you want to take serious pictures then you need to get a digital SLR a proper camera with proper lenses and all the flexibility you need for general use. I have a Sony and that is excellent Canon are more mainstream and there are more things for them but that is a matter of personal choice. There are many to choose from and most are well within your budget go to a camera shop like jessops or similar to get good advice the high street stores are only interested in volume. You need some spotty faced 17year old telling you what to buy because he has to like a hole in the head you need someone that understands cameras and taking pictures not just an ill informed salesman. Hope you find what you want my camera has never let me down once, some of the shots are great and some are less so but I never let anyone see those the beauty of digital I love it.
- I have a Panasonic FX33 - a compact which easily fits in your pocket. It has 4.6 times zoom, which I have used to get photos of insects while on a trip to the Amazon jungle (for larger wildlife, further away from you, a better zoom is required). I also have fantastic photos of wildlife in the Galapagos islands. The camera has stabilisation (great if you're on a small boat or train, and therefore a bit wobbly), face recognition, easy focussing. It is simple to use and excellent all round. No matter which camera you choose, I would recommend that you buy a second battery and carry it with you (the FX33 has a flat, special battery for compacts, not the AA type). With the features and the flexibility of digitals - ie zoom, photo review and the fact you can take lots of photos and delete later - you can use up a battery quite quickly (particularly when getting used to the camera). I bought my spare battery at:- www.ukdigitalcameras.co.uk
- My family has few cameras of different spec's. I personally have a Canon PowerShot A710 IS. I think it's great! I've used it on nights out, for landscapes, action shot's...the list goes on. -Easy to use -AA batteries so can be replace anywhere -picture quality is fantastic. -build quality is spot on. -Lasted 1 weeks of heavy use at -40oC in Canada. Got to say something lol I’m sure there will be a new model out now but i think Canon have really done a good job. So happy with it i bought a second one the same. It was £200 1 year ago. If you are looking for a proper camera than the SLI Canon D5 is..........just woooow. Great for everything. Probably expect that from a £2000 camera with lens lol. Is hard to use tho you get used to it. Cant say much about it as I’ve not had chance to use it.
edit...... i didnt see the £500 budget. Sorry. And don’t be fooled by a mega pixel number!!!! You could have a 12 Mp camera which is worse then a 5 mp good camera
- I'm at work so cannot attach an example right now. However: If you are after a good point and shoot digital, I recommend the Canon Ixus range. I have an Ixus 50, it's small enough to go into my pocket, easy to use with an automatic setting, but also fun to mess around with for different effects. Has a 3 X optical and 10 X digital zoom (which is surprisingly clear), the battery life is excellent (generally don't have to re-charge on a week's holiday with lots of use). It has anti-shake so no blurry images and picks up fantastic colour detail. I have some excellent shots of New York and if you want to see one I took of St Patrick's church, mail me and I'll send you a copy (as I'm very proud of it). Hope that helps.
Read More ...
We're looking to buy a new digital camera this year for christmas. After about 8 years of the HUGE floppy digital camera, we figured it was time to switch :)
We're looking for one that is small, thin, but DURABLE. Something that we can stick in our pocket and not look like a nerd.
I've been looking at the Canon PowerShot SD8800 IS and the Sony DSC-T300
What camera do you think is the best? Why?
Thank you so much for your help :)
Best Answer: I definitely recommend the Canon PowerShots, any of them, are great for you! We have 2 at our house, and they were great. They are very user friendly, thin, compact, durable, and take excellent photos for its class. Canon is very reliable! Hope this helps!
- To find the best user friendly digital camera on the market today, read all text and links below. You will know what to look for in a camera. There is no one particular place to get great buys, but you may see something below that really helps you find the best buy. Click on the first link in the information below for an example and search for your camera of choice at the upper left.
This may not be an SLR, but Canon seems to make the best cameras for the money. Just saw this camera at Best Buy and think it is a great camera and a best buy. It has an optical viewfinder, image stabilizer, auto focus, and uses NiMH rechargeable batteries. Read as much of the following as you can for other information and help with choosing a camera. Canon A590IS $149.99 at Best Buy store yesterday. http://bountii.com/deal-1523871-canon-po... ...
There are so many cameras out there it is difficult to say which is best, but digital is definitely the way to go. The second source link will be very helpful as it list most of the cameras out there with prices.
What gives a camera its picture quality? The following information should help you know what to look for in a camera.
The short answer is that it is mostly the skill of the photographer that produces high quality pictures. The lens and camera are very important, but the ability to set the scene, adjust the cameras settings, and hold the camera very still or use a tripod with auto or remote shutter actuation when required is what gets the great pictures.
Many of the new cameras come with only an LCD screen which is almost impossible to see in bright sun so you should try to find one that also has an optical view finder.
Check replacement battery prices when buying a new camera. Some Lithium batteries cost almost as much as the camera and may be only good for 200 shots between charges.
Higher mega pixels may not really be the best thing to look for. It is more expensive, takes longer to process, and may not be needed unless you are making a really large picture or blowing up a small part of a picture. Maximum print size for a 3 mega pixel setting is 8 x 10 inches. http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.j... ... http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.h... ...
Lots of great camera tips in these two links. http://www.danscamera.com/Learning/going... ... http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.j... ...
Check this more for the money camera. FUJIFILM - FinePix 10.0-Megapixel Digital. Life time Warranty (Parts & Labor).
Wide-angle shooting, a 12x optical zoom and picture stabilization mode combine in this camera for exceptional shooting performance, even at a distance. Plentiful scene modes, autofocus and automatic white balance controls make this camera a snap to operate. You may be able to find it on the Internet for a lower price. http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?... ... http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/defau... ...
This could be the best slim line camera with a viewfinder. It's PINK! http://shopping.yahoo.com/p:Sony%20Cyber... ... http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/defau... ...
The information about my camera is just to show that you don't need the biggest and best. Just know how to use the one you have. My camera has 5.2 mega pixel, but I use 3 most of the time because it gives great results, is faster, and takes less memory. Also, it only has a 3 x optical zoom and 7x digital zoom. I never use the digital zoom because making pictures larger works better on the computer. This is an old camera, but everyone is impressed with the quality pictures it takes ... like magic.
Check with the Geeks in several stores and compare prices. Ask what cameras they own, but don't believe everything you hear. Once you select a camera read all about it in the owner's manual. Just learned that my camera has red-eye prevention and correction. It also has adaptive lighting. You may be able to view owners manuals at this link, but will need to Login. http://www.retrevo.com/s/digital+camera ...
The source links will show most of the cameras out there with prices and help make your digital cameras work better.
Read More ...
I've used digital cameras many times, but I've never owned one personally. My price range is between $200-$300. I wouldn't want to go much higher than 300. What's the best camera that I can get in my price range?
Best Answer: CANON definitely. You can find really good ones almost professional like for a really good price.
- waterproof is nice but i think its $400 somewhere look around sony is a nice brand but cannon specializes in cameras good luck
- Here is the PERFECT camera for you! Its in you price range AND its waterproof! You should get the PENTAX Optio W30. It has TONS of features, VERY good picture quality, its sleek & stylish. And to add to all that, its waterproof! You can see the camera here: http://www.pentaximaging.com/products/pr... I have had the PENTAX Optio W10 (a slighty older version) for a few years now and I absolutely LOVE it!
- Sony's have Carl Zeiss lenses which are great, canon makes a great camera as well. I would suggest one of the two brands. Go for something with at least 3X optical zoom and 6 megapixels......about 6.5 megapixels will produce a picture you may be used to with a standard 35mm camera. Use your money wisely and get more megapixels instead of more useless features.
- I have a Sony DSC-T50 and it's incredible. The newer T100 should be just as good, if not better. And you can find them at about $300, I think. Otherwise, Cannon is good, but larger in size. If speed is a concern, stay away from Nikon. I had one for only a few months before my Sony and one THEN did I realize speed matters in a camera.
- I would recommend the Cannon Power Shot S3 IS I've had mine for a year now and really like it.
- I just bought the Canon S3 for $288. I am very happy with it. You will love the 12x zoom. I did a lot of research before I chose the S3.
- If you like plenty of zoom, these models should be on sale because I think they are being phased out. Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H2. 12X optical zoom, 6 megapixels. Canon PowerShot S2 IS. 12X optical zoom, 5 megapixels. Check out Website dpreview.com Both cameras will give you an excellent 8X10 print along with Fujifilm Finepix S5200. 10X optical zoom, 5 megapixels.
- canon or sony
I really believe buying a camera is an individual choice. The person needs to read alot of reviews on cameras and learn as much as they can from the internet. Go to the store and hold them and try them to see what they feel like and how they take pictures. I can only give a suggestion of what to look for in a new digital camera. Good Luck my suggestion go to yahoo shopping digital cameras digital camera GUIDE be sure to check titles on the left side the guide should answer your questions
- for that price i would get a 7.2 mp camera. to me, CANON powershot is the best, but kinda expensive. so ibought a sony cybershot. and i love it.
Read More ...
I have a good digital camera, that is able to video record. I also have a way to hook it up to my pc and transfer pic %26amp; vids to my files. I would like to use this camera as a web cam, my old one is pretty cheap %26amp; doesn't work so well. Does any one know how to hook up a digital camera as a web cam?
Best Answer: I really don't think you are able to do this with most modern digital cameras. The USB connection is used to transfer pics and video between PC and camera, not to stream live video. You can get a descent web cam for around $30 though! Good Luck =)
- Most 'good' digital cameras can't be used as webcams. Check the directions, if it can record video there may be a way to stream the video from the camera to the computer and use that as a webcam (I do this with a video camera)
- You don't give a make or model, so I can't be specific. In general, if it is possible to do this with your camera, you would find the program/drivers to do this on the disc that came with your camera or at the manufacturer's website.
Read More ...
I'm going on a study abroad trip to Australia and want to get a digital camera. I know pretty much nothing about them (I've never owned one) so I'm just looking for something that takes good pictures. However, I also was contemplating getting a video camera as well so I could record memories, so I want to know if there is a digital camera that is good at doing both?
Best Answer: almost all of them polaroid camaras are great
- yu can get a free cam at http://istuff.freepay.com/?r=44551733
Read More ...
We are looking to purchase a digital camera to use in taking photographs of wildlife on our Alaskan vacation this summer. We currently have point and shoot digital cameras but are thinking we should probably get a digital SLR with a telephoto lens. Ease of use would be helpful as we would be novices with this type of camera. Cost is not really an issue as we are looking at this as a once in a lifetime trip and want to make sure we have photos to preserve it. There is no specialty camera store anywhere near where we live so any advice would be appreciated. Thanks.
Best Answer: my suggestion go to yahoo shopping digital cameras digital camera GUIDE be sure to check titles on the left side the guide should answer your questions
- Since cost is not an issue i would recommend NIKON D80 with 70-300 vr ZOOM.You will never regret.I have a Nikon D40 with 55-200 vr which is good enough for me.Hope this helps RAJA
I want a digital camera that gives me the best point-and-click capabilities, and gives me the best quality digital photographs for around $300. I've looked at the Nikon Coolpix and some Sony and Canon camera's. Can someone that knows what their talking about give me some professional advice as to what camera would be best for me?
Best Answer: If you are really on a budget and want the best quality for the money, check out the P&S Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 which has more features than most pro DSLRs that require auxiliary lenses not even equal to the single initial full-range lense that comes with the FZ28. It is reviewed at: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2008_revi... It just came out on November 4, 2008. It's an all-in-one 10.1 megapixel DSLR camera which includes (i) built-in image stabilization; (ii) HDTV quality video [Quicktime]; (iii) a 18x zoom [27 - 486 mm (35mm equiv.)] "Leica" lense for nature photography; (iv) up to 0.39 inch macro option; (v) up to 6400 ASA; (vi) takes up to 380 pictures per 120 min. battery charge; (vii) has a "burst speed" of 13 fps; and sells new for $270 at amazon.com. Here's an actual handheld picture of the moon: http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/... Good luck!
- a professional advice at 300$ is quite difficult, add a few bugs and buy a D40 from Nikon, add a few more and get a D60 or a D80 that are sold to clean last stocks.. If you go for a click 'n go pocket gadget, get a Panasonic LZ8 or some Canons in the same range for 100$. Take the leftover and buy a good photoprinter. A low budget ormid range pocket has never anything professional anyway, they are what they are with there small captur devices. Just on edvice, avoid higher pixel count then 8 mpix. They destroy the qualitty of the shot to flatten the noise once it's abit dark or shady. If ever you can, go dslr.
- Trust me on this one. Canon SD880 IS is the best possible choice for point and click. Not only does it used a latest technology from Canon -DiGiC 4 Chip, which also used by other professional high-end cameras, but also allows you to record 2 sizes of videos with zoom-in-out functions during recording. It also has some of the newest technology such as face detection as well as face detection timer. There are just too many features that on this small little thing, my opinion: get this point n shoot or get a professional one. I bought one of these two weeks ago. After reviewing all the features and the techologies, my uncle asked me to purchase one for him, too. You can purchase it on eBay for $260 free shipping. The follow two reviews are from professionals, I think they should help you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdybCjJ5s... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDLtfyeUe... P.S. You can also go to cnet.com and view the videos reviews on other cameras before making your decision. :-) Best Luck,
- I would go with the Canon Powershot SD880 IS because it's high-res (10 mp), 4x optical zoom with image stabilization. You'll want to add at least a 4gb SD memory card. Price for both is under $300 ... Try Amazon's Canon Powershot Store for the best prices: http://tinyurl.com/sd880
- Maybe the Canon PowerShot SX10 IS? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/58... http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/contro...
Read More ...
