Help with the technical stuff?

[rallison]

I've made the decision to go digital. I think I've researched Point & Shoots enough to kill a mere mortal. The one thing I can't get a good handle on is how important to the average newbie is all the technical stuff from camera to camera?

As an example, in a very general sense, canons tend to have high picture quality but poor movies, Sonys are fast but everythings proprietary, Nikon has great macro but are noisy, Fujis have great movies but lesser picture quality, Kodaks are great for reducing red-eye but overprocess the picture...well, you get the point.

All things being equal (optics quality, MP, ISO setting, etc) when I print out an 8X10 from a 3,4,5 MP camera, will I really "see" the difference in "noise" say from a Nikon to a Canon in the print or will the Sony really "show" better detail than the Fuji in the print? With all the red-eye fix software is red-eye really an issue?

By the way, picture quality is at the top of my list as well as speed/performance. I have two toddlers that I'd like to be able to capture spontaneously. Would like to grow and experiment a little with the camera also. May use indoors quite a lot and some nature and skyline pics occasionally.

Ok, that's it...all the words I know are out of my head. Sorry so verbose.

RAllison

[photoweborama]

I think I get great quality out of my Fuji camera.

http://photoweborama.com/v-web/gallery/albums/mwasst/mwasst07.sized.jpg

[ReF]

shooting indoors, you might want to get something that can support an external flash that can be pointed upwards, so that the light is bounced off the ceiling, so that your shots don't come out looking like there were spot lights shining in the face of your toddlers. light bouncing off the ceiling will probably be better for their eyes than the kind that shoots right into them as well. a few point and shoots offer a hot shoe, but i would be concerned about their ability to focus indoors quickly. if you don't have a lot to spend, the low cost d-slrs are really cheap nowadays with the kit lens. you'll probably be getting at least equal or better lens performance than the better point and shoot cams with much faster performance and lower noise.

[Rex914]

Your needs and the conditions in which you shoot point directly to the DSLR realm. There's really no better choice when you say that you want spontaneous shots, low light shots, shots of toddlers (which can be counted as "action shots" :)).

One thing's for certain - you won't have to worry about any of these aforementioned issues on a DSLR. All DSLR's are great in their own right.

[rallison]

photoweborama
That certainly is a great photo! I spoke with a guy last night that explained that when dealing with DSLRs among the top brands like Fuji, Canon, Nikon, etc, trying to pick a camera based on my concerns was splitting hairs for a general user like myself. He said to forget about the noise and image stuff and just find one that has the features I want and "feels" right. Most all of them are going to give great photos. Seeing your photo of the guitar (I'm a musician so you've hit a chord with me, sorry for the pun) gives me confidence in Fuji. It was an awesome photo!

ReF
I hadn't really considered the DSLRs much but will check them out. I'm glad you pointed out the flash option. I've never really taken many pictures, digital or otherwise, so I don't even know what's important. Thank you very much. By the way, there was a tag on your reply that said to treat others with respect on this forum. Was that just a tag you put on all your posts or did I say something disrespectful? I'm sorry if I did. Anyway, thanks for your reply, it was very helpful!

Rex914
What you said supports what was told to me last night (see first "thanks" reply in this post). That making decisions on the details may not be the wisest choice. Instead, find the features and feel first. I hadn't really considered the DSLRs mainly because I thought it was too much camera for my first digital experience. I thought I would keep it in the $300 and below arena to get the most of my investment (nothing worse than having an $800 camera that I use merely as a point and shoot and never go beyond what a $200 camera could've done). That being said, I will look into the DSLRs a bit. I just wonder how the mere size of the DSLRs would work against the spontaneity of a shot (not the most convenient camera to throw in a pocket or diaper bag). May also hang tight for the new Canon A610 coming out. Seems like a camera that would be a great compact P&S with some speed but give me some room to grow if needed without overspending. I dunno. Now I'm really conflicted. LOL. Anyway, thank you all so much for your help!

[ReF]

By the way, there was a tag on your reply that said to treat others with respect on this forum. Was that just a tag you put on all your posts or did I say something disrespectful? I'm sorry if I did. Anyway, thanks for your reply, it was very helpful!



oh, no that's always there. on many of the other digital camera discussion sites there is A LOT of name calling, angry words, extremely childish back-and-forth, etc. this is one of the better discussion boards with more mature posts, so i really hate it when someone comes here and starts acting like an imbacile. no it has nothing to do with being new to cameras, it's disrespect that i have a problem with.

a dslr might be a bit big to carry around sometimes, but around the house it should be much less of a problem. i just keep mine nearby on a table or something. it definately will give you a much better chance of getting a good shot or two before the moment is over. if you toss it in one of your bags (without external flash for outdoor trips) with the other baby/toddler stuff that you probably have to carry anyways then the size/weight might seem less of an issue. actually, external flashes don't always start up right away so that can cause a few missed shots. one way around this is to cut up a paper cup (particularly the bottom), line the inside with foil, pop up the built in D-slr flash (and keep it up) and then attach the cup onto the flash with a strong rubberband, in a way so that the light from the flash will be channeled up at the ceiling. the flash should also be set at max power. since the built in flash on d-slrs generally powers up a lot faster(sometimes instantly) than external ones, you'll get more of those spontaneous shots and also save on the cost of a flash if money is tight. you can just use foil without a cup but that gets smushed easily. obviously you should take that ugly contraption off when you go on trips where it's not needed :D

[rallison]

ReF
Thanks again for the tips. Also, I've never actually used a forum but have read many of them and you're right. Sometimes people can get out of hand. I generally ignore whatever is said even if it has something to do with my my topic of interest. I think I saw a different forum for "help on camera decisions." I'll probably post something there as I've narrowed my search to a couple of Point & Shoots and would like to get some feedback from other folks' experience with each. It's been great speaking with you. Catch you in the other forum! :)