Want a new digital camera good for concerts

None of those cameras will zoom very close, but if you bought a compact superzoom then you'll run into problems of a small aperture lens, which will also cause problems in concerts.

Thanks, I like that the sony has the touch screen on the back too. It's a little pricey, but I want something that will do the things I use it for, so that is okay. I don't want any of the bigger cameras, because obviously going to a concert they won't let you use those, as well as they are inconvenient.

Thanks for the info.

>"I don't want any of the bigger cameras, because obviously going to a concert they won't let you use those, as well as they are inconvenient."

If that's the only reason, I would strongly recommend a Panasonic GF1 (and 20mm f1.7 "pancake" lens) over any of the cameras listed in your original post. The GF1 has much better low-light performance, and I've taken my GH1 (which is a bit bigger than the GF1) into several shows without a problem.

The catch would be that, with the 20mm lens (40mm 35mm equiv.), you'll want to be in the first few rows.

And there's no touchscreen - Mark

I don't see the OP spending 3x the amount of the highest priced camera on his list. The GF1, at Amazon.com, is $1150. That's a big jump from his highest priced camera being $380.

Yeah, I really only want to spend around $300 at the most, and I rarely get first few row seats at concerts. I currently have a Canon Power Shot SD750, I am looking for something better, but not $1000 worth. I go to concerts for fun, and want good pictures, but don't need anything really fancy. So the cameras I listed were the ones that had good zoom numbers or or other things listed that sounded like they'd be good for the uses I have for a camera. So, the Sony Cybershot says it only has a 2x zoom, not sure that's really what I want. Oh well, I'll keep looking I guess.

That's cool. I just wanted to make sure since it was not mentioned until now.

Mark

I recently received Samsung ST1000 (CL65) compact camera.
Its main features are GPS, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth.
It is fun and amazing 'cause I could directly upload the pictures I took to my Picasa webalbum through wirless internet at home.

Some images are uploaded to my Picasa webalbum below.

http://picasaweb.google.com/ShootBluesky/Backyard#
http://picasaweb.google.com/ShootBluesky/Album01#

But is this camera good for shooting at concerts? That's my concern, for zooming in on distant, moving subjects in low light conditions.

The Samsung is not good for low light photography. That guy posts about every Samsung product in all the different forums and posts positive reviews for everything Samsung.

kalel33!

I think your comment seems to be too malicious.
Is there anyting wrong with posting what I consider?

As I am an ordinary camera user and have Samsung digital camera, "Yes" I did post some positive reviews about Samsung digital camera because I was fond of new features and technologies such as GPS, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Dual LCD...
However the judgement is upto the users whether it is good or not. That's why I posted images and even positive reviews for reference.

If I had a camera with innovative features for other brands like Canon, Sony, Nikon,... I would have done the same thing.

I just want to share information with you guys. That is all I want.

From your reviews, you reviewed 6 different MP3 players in the last 2 years and all were best MP3 players and all were Samsung. Did you own 6 MP3 players in less than a year and a half and all Samsung? All your comments are about Samsung video cameras being great, and all your forum posts are pushing Samsung cameras, even the not yet released DSLR.

I can recommend other brands other than my own and do on many occasions. Out of 26 total postings on Cnet about video cameras, digital cameras, and MP3 players you rave ony about Samsung. I would think your being paid by them, especially when you recommend cameras that are horrible for intended use of the original posters. Low light ability has been an Achille's heel for Samsung for awhile. Except for a couple from a couple of years ago, Samsung has been behind in image quality too. Their cameras are feature packed, but are usually behind other in image quality.

My apologies if you aren't paid or work for Samsung.

I am not 100% employeed and get paid by Samsung by posting what I wanted.
I wish I get paid or work for Samsung.
It would be great if you could introduce me to Samsung to pay me some extra money ^.^

I was an engineer who was in charge of developing mp3 players. That's why I had so many different mp3 players inluding iPod, Cowon, LG,...

Now, I am no longer interested in mp3 players. I am interested in digital camers and started to like them.

One of the cameras I had was Sony T70 few years ago which was finally broken. Sony T70 was not good at low lights. It disappointed me as an ordinary camera user. As being a noraml guy, I think many compact cameras are poor under low light conditions.

I will shoot additional images or videos with Samsung ST1000 at night and post them soon. You may provide your opinion how you think based on the contents.


BTW, as you mentioned "Low light ability has been an Achille's heel for Samsung for awhile. Except for a couple from a couple of years ago, Samsung has been behind in image quality too", what are the coupule of the cameras that are exceptional? I am just curious.

The Samsung NV7 and NV8 were fine cameras as long as you didn't expect them to be speedy or take them anywhere but base ISO. They had a nice Schneider-Krueznach lens on them. They also had a great build quality and nice features. In regards to an overall camera, they lagged behind but I didn't mind putting it in as a camera to consider to those buying them.

Otherwise, every Samsung point and shoot has been pretty much panned for their image quality. They are always well featured but lacking in the sensor and lens. They're kind of like a top of the line luxury car, decked out, and have a small 4 cylinder in them. They might be built and feel nice, but have no performance to write home about.

You can read the current and historical reviews on the Samsung cameras here. You will see that each review hammered their image quality and speed.

http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/reviews/default.asp?brandID=275227&productFamilyID=0

It forgot to say that the cameras this year have shown decent image quality, as long as you stay at base ISO. They are seem to be really fun to use and decent image quality. The problem with them is that they still can't do any type of low light and there are much better cameras out there for image quality and performance. The thing you get with the Samsung is all the cool features that you won't find on other cameras.

Sorry, I am not sure. I did not have a chance to go to a concert. However, I took a short video on a street at night to see if it looked OK.
Here is the link to the sample video which was taken at the full HD quality but low graded when it was uploaded to Youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVBI9LLevac

I also posted some still images at http://picasaweb.google.com/ShootBluesky/Scenery01#

Only problem with videos at concerts is that is usually not allowed. Not that I don't sneak a few minutes of video when I can, but I want good pictures. Or at least better than I have been getting.

Does anyone know anything about the Samsung DualView TL225? It looks kind of cool too.

There are some reviews online about that camera. It's pretty much fun to use and intuitive, but lags behind in image quality and battery life. It also only uses micro-SD cards.

I agree with Kalel33 about the fact that TL225 is fun to use and has intuitive features.

But I am not sure whether TL225 lags behind in image quality.

However, the battery life is fine to me. It is not too long but not too short.