Some Simple Tips for New Digital Camera Buyers [Archive] - Digital Camera Resource Page Forums

View Full Version : Some Simple Tips for New Digital Camera Buyers

Thon

01-08-2005, 06:21 PM

I'd say buying a digital camera is like buying a car.

Not every one would be able to afford a Ferrari or Lamborghini or Bentley and there would always be someone buying the New Mini or New Beetle just for the looks, most people will be happy with their Hondas, Toyotas,.... Engine size matters too. If you need more grunt the bigger the engine the better, but the Average Joes just need something that works WELL economically.

Now if we put this into the digital camera scene today, there will be all sorts of cameras available, but is the biggest and baddest one actually right for you????

Currently, I've had a few friends and colleagues trying to buy their digital cameras asking me for some advice, and the most frequent few questions that I ask them are:

1. What's your budget?
2. What do you want to do with the camera & photos?
3. What do you want to photograph more?
4. What is your camera size preference?

These 4 questions (very general questions) will help you get started to narrow down the list. Don't worry about brands or specific models first.

Just think of it like buying a car. You don't need everything but sometimes they are nice (and this means more $$$).

speaklightly

01-09-2005, 10:47 AM

Thon-

Many thanks for your post. If more of the folks posting on this section of the board would analyze their needs a bit more extensively in advance, we could be more precise and albeit, more helpful in our suggestions.

Well done!

Sarah Joyce

lorilu

01-12-2005, 09:38 PM

John_Reed

01-12-2005, 09:49 PM

Thon,
Your guidelines for things to consider before buying a new camera were very helpful to me. I am so glad I found this forum, because I realize after reading several messages that I am not alone in my confusion! That being said, what camera would you recommend for my situation based on:
1. a budget of $300 - $400
2. I am a "family" photograher and a scrapbooker
3. I want to take better sports photos. I have four kids who each play 3 sports. Guesss where I practically live?!?!
4. I have small hands and am looking to lessen the load of stuff I need to carry.

I have an Olympus c-700 w/2.1 MP. Nice camera 4 years ago, but I am ready to upgrade. It's a little bulky. I would hate to lose 10x zoom, which I have on C-700. I'd love to be in the 4-5 MP range.It seems like the Panasonic DMC-FZ3 would come closest to fitting your needs; it and the Canon Powershot S1 IS are two long-zoom cameras about in your price range, but both are "only" 3MP cameras. If you're still looking for long zooms, the Olympus C-765/C-770 offer it with enough megapixels (4MP) to fill that particular need, but without the image stabilizers of the other two I mentioned. But if you're taking photos generally in good light, these may well fill the bill. Last offering in your price range, but larger, is the Panasonic DMC-FZ15. Sarah Joyce may have something to say about the Kyocera Zoom as well?

lorilu

01-13-2005, 11:04 AM

Thanks, John. I will begin researching the qualities of the cameras you mentioned.

speaklightly

01-13-2005, 02:07 PM

Lorilu-

John Reed was correct. Yes, I do want to add a post. With a recent price reduction (internet price less than $300), the best long zoom digital camera within your budget would be the Olympus C-765. There is an excellent review of the Olympus C-765 (4.0mp) by Jeff Keller right on this nwebsite. You might want to take a look at it.

I own the Olympus C-765 and though unstabilized, it is an excellent long zoom digital camera. It is less expensive than the Kyocera long zoon and smaller in size which I believe is an advantage.

If you have any questions about the C-765, I would be happy to answer them.

Good Lucky in your search.

Sarah Joyce

Thon

01-13-2005, 03:45 PM

Another quick one.

If you decide to get either the Oly C765UZ or C770UZ, do get a couple of extra batteries and a good light-weight tripod. You won't regret it.

Feature-wise, the 2 are very similar with the exception of the dual tube flash, flash hotshoe and MPEG4 movie mode on the C770UZ. I got my C770UZ with an external case, extra battery & USB xD card reader for about $485 from Japan, through a friend. I believe you can get the C770 for about $400 and as Sarah mentioned the C765UZ for less than $300.

sarahb50

01-15-2005, 04:07 PM

[QUOTE=Thon]
Currently, I've had a few friends and colleagues trying to buy their digital cameras asking me for some advice, and the most frequent few questions that I ask them are:

1. What's your budget?
2. What do you want to do with the camera & photos?
3. What do you want to photograph more?
4. What is your camera size preference?

----------

Thanks for the list of questions. I've answered below and would love to hear any input.

1. I think I could handle $300-350.
2. I take photos socially only - I have no pretensions of being or plans to become professional - but I take many photos and value my photo collection highly. I find I take most photos either indoors in relatively dark places like bars or parties, or I take outdoor photos when on vacation, etc. I like to see faces in my photos, and I usually print only 4x6 prints, so I tend to fill the frame with my subjects (especially indoors) taking photos from the waist up about 50% of the time. I do miss having a zoom lens, which my current camera (Casio Exilim EX-S3 3.2mp) lacks. I find a zoom allows me to be a little more inconspicuous (farther away) in my photo taking, which means I can take better candid shots. I prefer taking photos of friends and family in action, and I don't like every photo in my album to look like I just said, "Hey, guys, look over here and smile!"
3. With the camera I have now, photos taken indoors with flash have very blue and gray tones, and photos taken indoors without flash end up orangey-yellow and blurry. Not good. Also, I tried to take photos at a graduation ceremony last year and at a relatively well-lit indoor band concert recently; in both cases, since I didn't have a zoom, I couldn't get in close enough to take good photos. I did take some beautifully clear and colorful photos recently of a sunny day in the mountains of Colorado - I would love to be able to take many more such photos. Maybe I'd even be inspired to make a few larger prints and frame them. Also, I kind of like the idea of a camera with more manual settings that I could learn to use since I do take so many photos, but I don't need to spend a million dollars.
4. My current camera is very small - small enough to fit in my back pocket even, and I'm a small person. While this feature is great (especially for parties when people ooo and ahhh at my cool tiny camera), I'd happily trade it in for a zoom lens and indoor photos that make my friends look like the normal people they are and not blue-skinned aliens.

Just as a side note, I recently used a Canon A70 and found it produced much better Christmas dinner images than my camera (with flash, my people looked slightly blue, the Canon images had people that had much more normal skin tone). I've thought about the Canon A95 since it's the latest and greatest in that family, but I'm open for any and all suggestions.

Thanks!

speaklightly

01-15-2005, 04:40 PM

Hi Sarahb50-

Here would be some potential choices for you:

Kodak DX-7440
Canon A-95
Canon A-85
Canon SD-200
Canon SD-300
Panasonic FX-7 (however, this camera has no optical viewfinder)
Sony P-120
Sony P-150

Keep in mind that the flash units on any of these digital cameras is small. Therefore, you need to be within 10 feet to get enough light for a good clear photo.

With the exception of the Kodak DX-7440 which is 4X optical zoom, all of the other cameras above have only 3X optical zoom. It sounds like you just might be looking for more zoom.

If that is the case, please look at these:

Panasonic FZ-3 (the best choice here)
Canon S-1 IS

Both of the last two camera have internal stabilization which is a huge advantage. Both are also 3mp cameras. However, the produce great images that can easily be enlarged to 8" X 10" if cropping is kept to a minimum.

So there are some digital cameras to look at initially. I am more than willing to work closely with you to narow the field down. Just give me some feed back on the cameras listed and we can come up with a process to cull the field. I have given you a price range of about $220 to $340, so we have stayed within your budget.

Good Luck!

Sarah Joyce

Diane

01-15-2005, 10:08 PM

1. What's your budget?
2. What do you want to do with the camera & photos?
3. What do you want to photograph more?
4. What is your camera size preference?

---------------
1. About $300 - $400
2. I plan on bringing this camera around wherever I go. Shopping, on the bus. It's basically for my own usage. I'd probably want to develop the photos I took to put inside my photo album. Since I have really shaky hands, maybe an image/optical stabilizer would be great. Optical zoom of at least 3X is good too.
3. The camera that I have now [Cannon Ixus 400] tend to be a little heavy and by the time I press the button, the shot is either gone, or my shaky hands made the photo blurry. When I use flash, the casing tend to overheat as well.
4. Since I'm looking for a camera to bring around, I was hoping for one that's not too bulky, and about medium in size. Oh, and not too heavy too.

Thanks for the questions, Thon!!

sarahb50

01-16-2005, 12:14 AM

Thanks for the suggestions, Sarah Joyce.

I love the idea of the two super-zoom cameras you suggested, although they may turn out to be a bit too large for me. Even though I don't need to fit the camera in my pocket, I do like to slip it into my purse when I'm going out. While the Canon A93 shouldn't prove too big for that, the two super zoom cameras might. I need to get to a camera store and test out some of these, hold them in my own hands, and then I'll write with more feedback.

Thanks again!

speaklightly

01-16-2005, 06:43 AM

speaklightly

01-16-2005, 06:50 AM

kazaan

01-16-2005, 01:01 PM

[QUOTE=Thon]

1. What's your budget?
2. What do you want to do with the camera & photos?
3. What do you want to photograph more?
4. What is your camera size preference?

These 4 questions (very general questions) will help you get started to narrow down the list. Don't worry about brands or specific models first.

Hi everyone,

I joined the site and found the reviews and messageboards very informative.
I am looking to buy my first ever :D digicam and its getting so :eek: scary.
Going by Thon's guidelines

1. 300-400$

2. 3. Camera for daily use n capturing any nice shot ..landscapes. And for lot of indoor use(scared of the red-eye ). Night photography is also high on usage. Photos shall be mostly on computer....and very few printed unless they are exceptional. Oh yeah...movie mode is very essential.

4. Ultra-compact preferred to make carrying easy.

Other: I havent been much of a photographer myself. So I am not sure how big of an advantage are the manual shutter speed n exposure controls like ones on Sony -P100.

Anyways...after extensive research for one week I came up with --->
1) Canon SD300
2) Nikon CoolPix 5200
3) Sony -P100
4) Sony Cybershot - W1

and after this I am stuck. It would be great if someone can help me in telling if the preset scene modes in these cameras really work for landscapes, indoor ( red-eye minimal?) and night photography. And if the manual controls on Sony are significant tools! Based on the usage profile, what can be the preferred sequence :confused:

Since I never owned any digicam, I am quiet lame when it comes to guessing the quality/service of the different vendors.

Any input will be appreciated :D

Thanks a lot !!
Kaz.

speaklightly

01-16-2005, 01:44 PM

Kazaan-

Thanks for your post. Personally I would look at these digital cameras:

Sony P-150
Sony P-100
Canon SD-300
Panasonic FX-7

The Sony P-150 costs just $70 (approx) more than the P-100 and gives you greater resolution and it represent a lot of improvement over the P-100, like absolutely no red eye, excellent low light level focusing, and improved flash photos through the use of an automatic ISO increase to as high as 250 ISO.

The Canon SD-300 has had great reviews, it is pleasantly small, and has a good video clip feature. However, there are some dark corners and soft focus at the edges.

The Panasonic has received a variety of reviews, however, most are quite positive. The FX-7 does have a 2.5 inch LCD, but no optical viewfinder, poor battery life, and a sub par video clip.

My personal first choice would be the Sony P-150.

Good luck in your search, I hope this gives you a good starting point with which to begin your search for YOUR ideal digital camera. Come back and let us help you more, if you like. We are always here.

Sarah Joyce

kazaan

01-16-2005, 07:54 PM

Hi Sarah

Thanks a lot for your detailed reply!

I went through users opinions on dpreview.com for the Sony-P150 series. I found some people had issues with lens being dirty or getting dirty easily. That sounded very scary to me...anything to do with lens :( ! I hope the Sony guys have a good reputation for servicing and quality checks!
Apart from that, it seems a really fantastic camera and I might end up going for it :D (hopefully will find good deals on it with memory and accessories). The movie mode for it also seems to be great.
Oh yeah...any idea about the Sony software for image editing?

I see a 100$ difference between Sony P-150 and Sony DSC-W1. Apart from the 2Megepixel difference and a little bigger size, these cameras look functionally identical. Is the 100$ worth by going for P150?

Panasonic looks good but I would like to have optical viewfinder in the camera. It will be of great help if LCD is not clear sometime.

Does Canon-SD300 do well in indoor (with no red-eye).

I noticed that there was no mention about Nikon 5200. Are there any serious issues with the model?
It has a huge list of scene modes ( though no manual control but for white balance) and looks pretty good for anyone who doesnt want to meddle with any settings whatsoever.
But I would prefer some control, as I hopefully :) develop some photographic skills in due time.

Your reply was was very helpful indeed !! It seems I might be taking pictures within 2 weeks from now.

Thanks,
Kazaan.

speaklightly

01-16-2005, 08:20 PM

Kazaan-

Believe me, the extra $100 (actually it more like $75-85) is very well spent indeed, to go for the Sony P-150 rather than the Sony W-1, or the Sony P-100. The difference and the advances made in the P-150 are HUGE!

There are some real state of the art features in the Sony P-150, and you will not be disappointed.

Sarah Joyce

Thon

01-16-2005, 10:13 PM

I've not actually used the Sony P150 yet, but I've tried the P100, and it's a fast camera, much faster than my Oly C770 in everything, AF, shutter lag, write speed, etc.

I'd say, for the average P&S photographer, the Sony P-series will probably be some of the better choices for their ease of use and compactness. Photo quality wise, they are good too. But do bear in mind the cost of the MerorySticks are higher than CFs, SDs and even xDs.

Another excellent choice for beginners will be from the Canon A-series. And from this range, I'd recommend the A95/80 rather than the A85/75, due to the swivel LCD. This feature alone is worth that little extra that you pay.

I've seen the SD-series from Canon, and I'd only recommend them if the smaller size and movie mode is more important than the overall picture quality. Sarah pointed out the dark and soft corners problem faced by this camera, probably due to the design where the engineers need to maximize all the available space.

The will be many other excellent choices from other makers, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, KMinolta, Fuji, Panasonic, etc. Try as many as you can, read as many reviews as possible (Jeff has a very good review site here, not over technical and easy to understand).

We cannot claim to know everything about digital cameras, there are just too many of them today. The best that we can do is to offer tips and suggestions on different camera models/series that are popular, and what makes them popular. The consumer will have to decide how they balance out the quality, features, camera cost and operating costs.

kazaan

01-16-2005, 11:28 PM

Hi ,

After hearing Thon's opinion and talking to Sarah, I feel much more confident in buying Sony-P150 :D and turning SD300 down.

Olny thing worrying is (as i mentioned earlier) i read about poor quality control check on Sony and people had to return some. Is that common or just a few rare cases?

I also saw P200 model coming up! Is it worth wiating for? And if so, any idea how pricey it would be over P150.

Any words on Nikon 5200? Sounds good for people who dont want to play with any manual settings like my sister :) If its good maybe i can get that one for her.

Thanks everyone,
Kaz.

sarahb50

01-16-2005, 11:32 PM

Hi SarahB50-

Yes, it is an excellent idea to head for a camera store to get an idea of the real size and bulk of these digital cameras, especially, the long zoom cameras.

I don't carry a super large purse, and I have never had a problem with the FZ-3 or Canon S-1 IS. I think you might find them a bit smaller than you are envisioning.

Sarah Joyce

(I apologize in advance for what turned into a bit of a long message!)

Okay, Sarah Joyce, I did a little in store testing today and have some responses to the cameras you suggested. I've only written about the cameras I tried today - I didn't really spend enough time with the Canon Elphs, the Sonys or the smaller Panasonic to get any idea about them.

Kodak DX-7440 Seems like a quality, useful camera, although the Kodak interface is so excessively idiot-proof that I feel a bit like a five-year-old when using it. I also didn't get to explore it fully because this Kodak guy was in the store hovering over my shoulder and spouting statistics at me. I might need to take a little more time with this one.

Canon A95 I like the camera size and feel in my hand pretty well, and all the settings seem relatively user friendly. While taking pictures in the store, however, the camera seemed to take forever before it would let me take another shot. The LCD image froze on the shot for a good couple seconds and then finally let me take a picture again. Did this happen because there was no memory card in the camera? Or is this a setting I can change? Or is this really the fastest the camera can take pictures? If this problem was just me not knowing how to use the camera, I'll go back and try again. But if that's as fast as the camera can take photos, I'm quite disappointed and not sure how to justify spending that much money on such a slow camera!

Canon A85 I honestly didn't see much notable difference between this camera and the A95, other than the megapixels and the LCD size. Seemed to have the same lag between pictures problem.

Panazonic FZ-3 I have to say, just about everything I read about this camera sounded pretty amazing, and actually using it felt pretty cool too. A few features didn't seem to work in the store simply because the camera was too busy telling me there was no memory card in the slot. Otherwise, all the settings and features seemed very easy and self-explanatory. I could see myself quickly learning to use some pretty involved manual settings with the camera and still not taking six hours to take a photo, which excites me because I've always wanted to learn more but felt intimidated by the overwhelming amount of information. I loved the big zoom. I also found the "burst" button very cool, even though I couldn't see the series of photos I had taken. I tried the three IS settings on a full zoom photo just holding the camera in my hands and was pretty impressed with the image stabilization. I have one question/reservation about this camera, though - you can't manual focus. Granted, I've never owned a camera with manual focus before, so why should I miss it, right? But if this camera inspires me to start taking more control of my photos, as I imagine it might, will I wish I owned a camera with manual focus? Can you tell me what I may or may not miss out on here?

Canon S1 IS I have only held this camera and have not taken any photos yet - I could not get it to turn on in the store. The controls seem very similar to the other two Canons, though, and the Canon controls seem very simple and user friendly. I have read reviews of this camera though that complain about the slow lag between photos, so I wonder if it has some of the same problem I experienced with the other two Canons. I need to take photos with this one to really try it out, but I'm still interested in hearing about the lag problem.

Also, in the reviews I've read about the Fz-3 versus the S1 IS, the Canon has that purple problem whereas the Panasonic has the darker corners problem (I know, not terribly technical language here - I hope you know what I mean). In all honesty, in the test photos in these reviews I can see the purple stuff and it's annoying, whereas the darker coners really don't bother me. So I feel like the between the two negatives I would choose the FZ-3 over the Canon. Any thoughts?

I'm also looking for your ideas on how I might better test cameras. I went to Best Buy and Circuit City because I thought they would have the largest selection, which they did. Unfortunately, that means every photo I take is with a camera tethered to a very short cord in an extremely brightly lit electronics store. Do smaller camera stores sometimes let you try out cameras untethered or even stand out on the street in front to snap a few shots? I'd love to try some of these cameras somewhere that I'm not standing in some weird posture just so the camera doesn't spring out of my hands and snap back into place on the display counter.

Sorry I've rambled on for so long, but I hope I've provided some info to let you know what I think of these choices. I'd love to hear your thoughts and responses.

Thanks again!

kazaan

01-16-2005, 11:39 PM

I've not actually used the Sony P150 yet, but I've tried the P100, and it's a fast camera, much faster than my Oly C770 in everything, AF, shutter lag, write speed, etc.

I've seen the SD-series from Canon, and I'd only recommend them if the smaller size and movie mode is more important than the overall picture quality. Sarah pointed out the dark and soft corners problem faced by this camera, probably due to the design where the engineers need to maximize all the available space.

features, camera cost and operating costs.

Hi Thon,

Thanks for sharing your experience here!
You mentioned movie mode from SD-series Canon being superior. How does it compare to the Sony P100 you have?

I am looking for a good movie mode too in the camera. So this piece of information will be useful for me. If anyone (maybe sarah again :D ) knows about the movie mode in Sony-P150 too it will be useful !

Thanks,
Kaz.

Thon

01-17-2005, 12:19 AM

Kazaan,

I can't tell you for sure which one would have the better movie mode. As far as i know the Sony P100 has a pretty decent movie mode (not video camera quality yet though). Canon SD200/300 has been promoted agressively on the smaller size and unlimited movies, but to be honest, I'm not too much of a fan of the tiny ultracompacts (I've got a Olympus Stylus 400 as a gift (and this is a bigger camera), a great compact camera for outdoors but too limited for indoor use).

If I were to recommend a good compact camera, I'd personally say the Canon A-series, G-series (a different class altogether), Panasonic FZs & Olympus C7xxUZs would be the most pleasurable ones to use. But that's a personal preference.

speaklightly

01-17-2005, 12:22 AM

Well, Sarah-

It sounds like it was an exciting day for you. Yes, when you are attempting to handle and use tethered cameras it does become frustrating. The big stores use tethering, and some smaller stores will untether it and encourage you to move outside for a more realistic experience.

Based on our initial exchange, I thought that you would find more expression and creativity in the longer zoom didital cameras, so I am glad that sort of happened for you, though tethering does degrade the experience somewhat.

Yes, I surely agree that the slightly darkened corners of the FZ-3 are much easier to deal with, rather than the purple fringing. Because automatic focusing works so very well, and is so very fast, it gives you better shot to shot times and enhanced creativity. In the end most folks appreciate the auto focus, rather than missing the manual focusing.

Sleep on it. Think about it. Then let's discuss it some more. These are big decisions that you have to make. Initially, the exercise was to expose you to a variety of digital cameras so you had some hands-on experience and got the feeling of each camera in hand for a variety of cameras. Now you can hone in more on your particular interests.

Thanks for posting.

Sarah Joyce

Thon

01-17-2005, 12:28 AM

SarahB50,

I cannot say for sure which is the better camera. Different users will have different needs and preferences.

Based on your comments, I'd say it's either the Kodak (if you don't mind the "excessive idiot-proofing"), Canon A95/85, or the Panasonic FZ3 (for the zoom).

To help you further, browse for photos by other users on sites like www.pbase.com (not on review sites as Jeff and the others are pros and will maximize the cameras' capabilities, sorry Jeff ;) ).

sarahb50

01-19-2005, 12:34 PM

Well, my wallet is a bit lighter today, but I'm certainly smiling.

I went out and purchased the Panasonic FZ3 yesterday. I found a store that let me play with a few more of the cameras I hadn't gotten my hands on yet (including the Canon S1 IS) and I still felt most comfortable handling the Panasonic.

Also, I just felt like the pictures looked better. I went to the website Thon suggested - http://www.pbase.com - and cheched out some of the photos there. I much preferred the look of the FZ3 photos to some of the S1 IS photos, especially those that looked like they were taken by an "average Joe photographer" at a party or something.

In any event, so far (24 hours later) I'm very happy with my purchase and enjoying learning how to use all the different settings. I've compared a few photos with pictures I took on my old camera, and I'm thrilled with the difference. I'm sure I'll come back to this site with more camera questions in the future.

Thanks, Sarah and Thon, for all your help!

speaklightly

01-19-2005, 01:22 PM

Congratulations, Sarah!

I am pleased that you had both the opportunity to compare and handle both the FZ-3 and the Canon S-1 IS, and then to also compare the photo out put from the two digital cameras on www.pbase.com. That is excellent.

Enjoy you new FZ-3. It is a great digital camera and I am sure it will serve you well.

Sarah Joyce

Diane

01-20-2005, 11:17 PM

Diane-

Although it does not have an optical viewfinder, and you must depend on the LCD screen, the Panasonic FX-7 might be just perfect for you as it does have image stabilization. Please take a look at it, won't you.

I am sure we can help you find the right digital camera for uses.

Sarah Joyce
That's a pretty camera. Is this the one where there are other colors like blue? If it is, then I think it's the camera my dad just bought the other day!