Cameras forum

General discussion

Is this true.......

by gamecockinnc / March 22, 2007 7:58 AM PDT

or is the salesman at Best Buy not being "straight" with me? I posted earlier that I am brand new to digital cameras...we actually have 2 that we never use and we need to get one now for our vacation. I can not put this off any longer.

I need a point and shoot and do not want to spend a lot of money $200 max $250 but considering I want s/t idiot proof for now with out a lot of gadgets and such.

My first post stated my research showed the Canon Power Shots were rated well A540 and A530. Best Buy actually had the A540 but when I was approached by the Sales Associate he started to talk to me about a new Kodack camera that just came on the market (it was priced around $199 and was white and re-charge batteries.....and was 8 megapixels.)

That was more pixels than the Canon but the prices are the same. I wish someone could post a response "Buying a Digital Camera for Idiots" (lol)....

I need s/t easy.....

thanks I am more confused now.

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Is this true.......
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Is this true.......
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
More MP, but do you need it?
by fionndruinne / March 22, 2007 11:33 AM PDT
In reply to: Is this true.......

Alright, more megapixels, but let me ask you this: are you planning on blowing up the images your take to large prints, say 13x19 or more? Because otherwise more megapixels will not do you a lick of good, and will be more of a hassle, as they take up more space on your camera and computer, and the transfer times will be longer.

Don't fall for the silly idea that more megapixels=better images. It's just not true, except at high print resolutions. And I don't think you're going to be making big prints from an "idiot-proof" point-and-shoot. You just want good snapshots, right?

Kodak also has an annoying software system, and won't allow you to download your pictures without using the software. This is idiotic; Kodak have become the USSR of the camera world.

Collapse -
No and I am....
by gamecockinnc / March 25, 2007 3:20 AM PDT

running out of time....I went to another Best Buy in a neighboring city and they suggested a totally different camera.

I have figured this out. I think re-chargeable batteries are the way to go.

Also, the feature that keeps the camera steady (stabilizer?)

A nice nice LCD screen.

A camera which will be easy to work in ALL ways.

I still am confused over the "low light" debate.

For example does a camera I am looking for adjust itself as a "film camera" to create another flash or light for say a evening picture on at WDW or a cruise or even my back yard.

I am no more ready to decide than I was Friday and I need to purchase a camera this week.

I picked up and handled the camera's as someone suggested and also decided that a smaller camera would be good for me. I think the Canon A540 may be a little large for the size I am looking for.

I saw a few Olympus and Nikon camera's that had several features that I am looking for.

The problem is I see a camera that I like the look of the feel of but it usually is not one I have researched so I am back to square one.

I am learning the difference between AA batteries and re-chargable.
It seems I will need an additional memory card no matter what.
The LCD size is important.
The size and feel of the camera is important but also if it is built sturdy and will work for me and my small hands and my husbands giant hands...


I do not plan on blowing any pictures up...if and if I want to do anything like that the Walgreen machines can do it for me (lol).

I need easy point and shoot.

Any suggestions of specific camera's would be appreciated bc I am back to square one.

I seems in my price range of $179-250 that all have sufficient mega pixels so this should not be an issue.

So what do you experts say?

Collapse -
Digital Cameras
by snapshot2 Forum moderator / March 25, 2007 5:49 AM PDT
In reply to: No and I am....

Regarding batteries.....
The Ultra Thin camera that are less than 1.1 inches thick do not have AA batteries. AA batteries are too big for the camera case.

Most cameras with AA batteries come with non-rechargeable alkaline AA batteries. These will not last very long. It is a good idea to buy rechargeable NiMH AA batteries for those cameras. The NiMH batteries will last much longer on a charge than the life of standard AA alkaline batteries. NiMH AA batteries cost about $20 for the batteries and a charger, and are available at any store that sells cameras.

All of the very small cameras and about half the other camera use rechargeable Lithium batteries. These work very well,seldom need replacing, but are not available at the drug store.

I have cameras with AA rechargeable batteries and cameras with Lithium rechargeable batteries and still have no preference.
They both work fine. It makes no difference to me.


Regarding Image Stabilization.
Image stabilization adds about $50 to the cost of a camera.
This may make it impossible to find a camera with that feature for less than $250.

Low Light
Very few small cameras work well in low light, without using flash.
The Fujifilm F30, F31fd, F20, F40fd perform the best of the small cameras. Large and more expensive cameras (over $600) work well in low light.

Flash
Digital cameras will let you use the flash in Auto mode (it does all the thinking for you).
You can also choose to turn-off the flash or to force it to flash every time.

LCD size:
LCD screens larger than 2.5 inches add about $30 to the cost of a camera and when used on a small camera will not leave enough room for a viewfinder.


Recommendations:

Between $179 and $250

Canon SD600
Canon SD630 (this has a 3 inch screen) but may exceed your budget.
Fujifilm F20
Sony W55

None have Image Stabilization

Here is a link to a comparison of specifications:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_sd600%2Ccanon_sd630%2Cfuji_finepixf20%2Csony_dscw55&show=all

...
..
.

Collapse -
Low light is a lost cause.
by fionndruinne / March 25, 2007 8:34 AM PDT
In reply to: No and I am....

As far as I know, no camera within your stated price range is going to function very well in low-light situations. Compact and consumer digitals just don't have the quality and sensitivity needed in their small sensors. There is of course discussion to be had on which cameras will perform least badly for low-light, but I'll leave that to those who know more than I do about current trends in the compact market.

When you mentioned nice LCD, I thought of the Sony H5, which is a more complicated full-feature compact, not easy to use I'd say, but capable of some nice stuff, and with a truly nice 3.0 inch LCD. It still falls far short of any SLR in the noise department, which is most apparent in low-light. It also costs about $375.

Collapse -
I made a mistake.....
by gamecockinnc / March 27, 2007 3:07 AM PDT

I do not know what in the world I meant about low light...Ignore that please.

I do not my concerns are.
Easy to use (in every way)
Nice quality pictures
decent size camera as I have small hands but durable
I thought I would want a stabilizer but now am not sure what exactly that is I assume it means the pictures are not forgive my stupidity....blurry/shakey (not a word) Happy
decent battery use (still not sure which way to go)


The only things I do know is that a need 5-7 mega pixels
I will need to buy an additional memory card
I do not want Kodack
I thought I Wanted the Canon Power Shot A540 but in person at the store it was a little large for what I want.
I do not require a super fast shutter speed or time between shots. I am more of the pose type of picture taker. You know "stand by Mickey and smile"....

Budget up to $250 if need be.

I have to purchase this camera this week..... but low lighting is not something I am concerned with.

If you all and others with this revised info want to suggest some specific brand and model to me I would be thrilled. I need that jumping off point.

I have gone to the review page (a lot) and there are so many options and I do not know if someone's rating of a 6.6 is good for me or not.

I do know that the Canon Power Shot A540 seemed like a great choice. Reviews were good, recommended etc. But I want to look at something of that calibur but smaller as a comparision.

Thanks!
GNC

Collapse -
Digital Cameras
by snapshot2 Forum moderator / March 27, 2007 6:49 AM PDT
In reply to: I made a mistake.....

With a budget of $250 and needing a smaller camera, narrows things down a good bit.

Smaller cameras tend to cost more.

But there are a few winners out there in that price range
They all take great photos.

Canon SD600 (the 7 megapixel version is called the SD1000)

Sony W30 & W50 (the 7 megapixel version is called the W35 & W55)

Here is a comparison:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_sd600%2Ccanon_sd1000%2Csony_dscw30%2Csony_dscw35%2Csony_dscw50%2Csony_dscw55&show=all

And they all have optical viewfinders too.
The chart shows that the SD1000 does not have an optical viewfinder but the chart is wrong.

...
..
.

Collapse -
Ah, the reviews page...
by fionndruinne / March 27, 2007 8:06 AM PDT
In reply to: I made a mistake.....

One thing, let me point out that camera reviews on cnet aren't exactly the best - they're reviewed often more in terms of the features they possess (helpful, yes) than their real-world performance, since the reviewers don't tend to be photographers per se.

I haven't purchased a compact camera in years, but in my experience many of the ones turned out today have pretty severe issues with blooming and fringing. Samsung in particular turned me off. But I'm sure there are good ones out there.

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

CNET FORUMS TOP DISCUSSION

Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?