|
Javid posted:I'm looking for a basic point-and-shoot for my mother, who is the worst photographer known to man. Ideally it would have one big TAKE PIXOR button and no settings readily available for her to break. The camera version of this thing, really: Canon Powershot N: http://www.canon.ca/inetCA/products?m=gp&pid=20575
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:To be fair the Pentax has an f/2.0 lens too. Welp I might be sold, critters are v. important to me 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
I'm going on holiday in a few months and I want a proper camera so I can bring back some nice snaps for once. What's about the best I can do for around £150 to £175. I could maybe stretch to £200. I don't really care how big or pretty or idiot proof or old it is, I just want whatever will take the best pictures for that kind of money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 02:25
|
|
|
A used Canon Rebel T2i would go a long way for you. Not a point and shoot, but you can run it on auto mode so it functions like one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
Hmmm, looking around on the internet it doesn't seem I'll be able to pick one of those up for much less than £300, which is going to be out of my budget.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 10:32
|
|
|
KidSamson posted:Hmmm, looking around on the internet it doesn't seem I'll be able to pick one of those up for much less than £300, which is going to be out of my budget. CEX have a used Powershot S100 for £175: http://uk.webuy.com/product.php?sku=SCAMCANS100B
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 10:45
|
|
|
That's pretty tempting. What do I have to do look out for in buying second hand?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 11:48
|
|
|
Oh, the pound to dollar exchange rate isn't as wacked out as it used to be. In that case, something like a Rebel XTi should be in the price range if you're looking for best image quality for the price since you'll be getting an APS-C sensor as opposed to a tiny P&S sensor. That S100 should be good too if you're looking for something more pocketable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
My dear grandmother needs a new camera. She'll be galavanting throughout Europe and is fed up with her current camera's sluggish responsiveness. I was looking through some stuff on B&H for her. It seemed like her main wants were responsiveness, decent telephoto, and a good battery. This Lumix looked decent; it lists 5 or 2 fps with AF tracking and a mechanical shutter and "light speed AF" whatever that means. It's also 24mm to 480mm 35mm equivalent. Are there better cameras at a similar price point? I'm thinking she'd like to stay around $250 or below. Something easy to use would be good too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
dakana posted:My dear grandmother needs a new camera. She'll be galavanting throughout Europe and is fed up with her current camera's sluggish responsiveness. I was looking through some stuff on B&H for her. It seemed like her main wants were responsiveness, decent telephoto, and a good battery. Give her your pro body 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 12:31
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Give her your pro body She actually first called to ask if I was selling any cameras. Technically, I was...
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
I needed a camera to replace our ancient Powershot A540, so I made the mistake of getting a A3400 IS. The whole reason I wanted a new camera is because the old one had a long delay between hitting the button and it taking the picture. Fire up new camera, hit the button... count to 3 before the drat thing takes a picture. I guess that's what I get for cheaping out. I'd love to get the S100/S110 that I've seen recommended a few times in this thread, but I really can't stomach the $300+ price tag. Anyone have a recommendation for a sub-$250 camera that actually takes a drat picture when you press the button instead of 4 seconds later.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
If you don't mind buying used, the S90 is still a fantastic camera.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
I have a fancy new P&S arriving today. Because I have absolutely no self-control.  and because I wanted something more pocketable than my G12oh who am I kidding i am way too pumped about it DJExile fucked around with this message at 15:38 on Apr 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
I'm looking for an extremely basic P&S - just enough to be slim/portable and take pretty pictures. Reasonably inexpensive would also be nice, since this is solely for "Wow, look at that mountain/thing at Disney/cool cosplay" shots. A couple years ago, I got what I've just learned is a "bridge" camera, but I was never really satisfied with it because of the size, despite the fact that it does seem to be a decent camera all around. Which, actually - if I was looking to offload that camera, does anyone have experience with stuff like that? It seems like a shame to just have it sitting around being relatively useless. I think I got it from Target, but like I mentioned it was a couple years ago and the receipt is long gone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 15:51
|
|
|
What defines "reasonably inexpensive"? E: I ask because there's a pretty big range in P&S prices these days.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 15:57
|
|
|
What kind of a phone do you have now? Modern smartphones have capabilities that pretty much match low-end basic P&S cameras anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
DJExile posted:What defines "reasonably inexpensive"? Less than $300, ideally around $200, but I don't know how realistic that is. HPL posted:What kind of a phone do you have now? Modern smartphones have capabilities that pretty much match low-end basic P&S cameras anyway. iPhone 4S currently and possibly upgrading to 5(/5S?) in October, but that's after two of the three vacations I'm taking this year.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
Look for a used s95 or s100 maybe? You can find them for a bit over 200, or a bit over 300 brand new.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
My name is DJExile and I am a brand whore In my defense it wirelessly controls my DSLR flashes and it's a loving f/1.8-2.5.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
DJExile posted:My name is DJExile and I am a brand whore Edit: Before the weekend: Krakkles posted:From what I've read, the XZ-1 seems to have a larger but not necessarily better sensor, though I think a lot of the noise issues perhaps come from the NR done on JPEGs in camera. Since I only shoot RAW, I suspect this won't be an issue. Krakkles posted:Honestly, the shots I took the other night at ISO1000 in relatively low light were pure noisy garbage. I'm going to return this and cannot at all recommend it over an S95/100. Krakkles fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Apr 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Picked up a G15 today. Pretty pleased with the pictures. Just wanted something for running around with my kids to capture their dumb expressions instead of the dslr. Lightroom doesn't have a lens profile for it, so I think I'm going to have to bite the bullet and make one myself. Something about the background in some of these is throwing me off and even gives me vertigo the longer I stare at it. Maybe I'm just not used to the wide angle. This was at 6.1mm or whatever wacky length it is that equals to roughly 28mm on a 35mm.  20130424-IMG_0127 by LeeMHarp, on Flickr dont hate the playa fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Apr 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
S95's a drat good camera, no denying that, but the XZ-1 fits my hand a bit better, has a much better aperture on the long end (f/2.5 is only theoretically better than f/4.9?), has a better battery, dedicated video button, and will run my flashes through the hotshoe and wirelessly. Plus I like the goofy art filters and have enjoyed how Oly shots JPEGs because I'm lazy S95 is definitely more pocketable, and they have good IS, but I wanted a little more control over DOF and I don't do much low-light shooting anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 04:52
|
|
|
DJExile posted:S95's a drat good camera, no denying that, but the XZ-1 fits my hand a bit better, has a much better aperture on the long end (f/2.5 is only theoretically better than f/4.9?), has a better battery, dedicated video button, and will run my flashes through the hotshoe and wirelessly. Hey, if it makes you happy, cool. That sensor is garbage, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 05:09
|
|
|
Point and shoots are serious business.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 05:49
|
|
|
Krakkles posted:i said the glass is "theoretically great", not theoretically better / faster / anything comparative. Sweet straw man, though. The sensor is not garbage, if you compare it to other cameras from it's class/time. Like the S95. And to prove I'm not talking out of my rear end, look at the link here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusXZ1/9 Be sure to check out the RAW comparison (next page), where the XZ-1 beats the (doctored) S95 RAW so much in terms of clarity, color and detail that it just isn't funny. Heck it even stands on it's own against the newer S100, S110 iterations. I know this because I researched it, as I wanted one of these some time ago, but couldn't justify the cost/size factor as I was already owner of a Canon S90. Yes it has it quirks, but so do all compact P&S cameras. And of course it will lose out to the APS-C compact crowd, but different horses for courses and all that. If you are really serious about sensor size and noise / dynamic range, a compact isn't the way to go anyway - either at least full frame digital or film. Edit: Removed personal attack. Sorry, shouldn't do this. VomitOnLino fucked around with this message at 06:40 on Apr 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 06:35
|
|
|
I've been enjoying my XZ-1, but I got it when Amazon was selling them for $200 last year and I'm not sure I could have got anything better for that price.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 14:51
|
|
|
wa27 posted:I've been enjoying my XZ-1, but I got it when Amazon was selling them for $200 last year and I'm not sure I could have got anything better for that price. Yeah I got mine refurbished for $215, so I really can't argue. Plus the XZ-2 is like twice that, if not more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:The sensor is not garbage, if you compare it to other cameras from it's class/time. Like the S95. I've found that most cameras, at ISO100, can produce images that look just fine. And yes, the XZ-1 may well be better at ISO100 in good lighting. However, by ISO 400 (based on my own experience AND that dpreview article), it produces considerably more noise than the S95, and it's a complete shitshow by ISO1000, whereas the S95 is still producing very usable images. So, by my standard (ability to capture images in less than perfect lighting conditions), the sensor is garbage. wa27 posted:I've been enjoying my XZ-1, but I got it when Amazon was selling them for $200 last year and I'm not sure I could have got anything better for that price.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
What is the current best high speed consumer camera for like 240fps+ shooting? I'm just looking to do some high speed stuff around the house, nothing for any sort of production/commercial stuff but just for fun. Nobody seems to pay any attention or even give good information on high speed FPS on some cameras. One camera advertises 1000fps then you find out it's at like 120x34 and not really useable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
The Go Pro HERO 3 Black Edition can do 120 fps at 720p, which is pretty great for $400, because you get good image quality too. Also you can try slowing things down further with software that interpolates between frames to create a smooth, fake slow motion. http://slowmovideo.granjow.net/index.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
My father wants to buy me a camera next time he passes through Heathrow, as it's cheaper than buying one in our home country. I have a budget of ~£160 but I'm not sure I'll be able to find a quality camera for that price. Dad suggested the Samsung WB150F but I'm skeptical re: image quality. I've seen mixed reviews. I used to have a Canon Powershot S1 which I loved until the sensor gave out, and I have a functioning Olympus FE-280 which I've never liked - the camera in my phone takes better-looking pictures most of the time. What I'm looking for is 5-10x optical zoom and a decent reaction time if at all possible. Are any quality cameras to be had at that price or should I wait a few years until I can afford an S100 (or whatever model will be the new S100 by then)?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 07:05
|
|
|
My camera history is getting progressively more hilarious. I've gone from a Rebel XT>7D>T2i>RX100 and now I sold the RX and picked up a S100. I really liked the RX100, but it was still too expensive, a hair too large and I found myself STILL babying it and not bringing it everywhere. The S100 is a thousand times more intuitive (maybe because I've had a lot of Canons, but whatever) and I'm much faster with it. $280 used off of Amazon and it looks brand new.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
I'm currently without a good point and shoot and I'm thinking about getting a Canon g1x. Since I've been serious about photography, my past P&Ss have been the Canon G9 and the S90. I liked the G9 a lot but I felt the sensor wasn't up to where I'd like it to be so I upgraded it to a s90. I really liked the S90 for what it was (pocketable) but I started to miss the real camera feel of the G9 and I decided that I don't really like composing shots off an LCD. The s90 ended up getting broke a couple years ago and I haven't had a chance to replace it. So now I'm in the market for a new point and shoot and I did a little soul searching. First off, I thought about why I need one. I need one for times when I'm out and about and my primary mission isn't photography. Carrying DSLR gear around isn't a big deal to me but I've been finding it becomes a liability when I'm out and about doing fun stuff with friends and family. I want good quality photos, a viewfinder/real camera feel, and I don't care about being able to shove the camera in my pocket. I got to thinking that the perfect camera would be a x100s {b]if[/b] it had a zoom lens. I like everything about the camera except for the fixed focal length. Ruling that out, there is the fuji x20 which I think is pretty cool. I think the manual control zoom is great, however, the small sensor is a deal killer for me. The Sony Rx100 seems great for what it is, but I really do want more physical buttons and a view finder. That leaves me with the g1x. The size is fine by me and I like the Canon layout. I think it'd be the perfect camera if it had the hybrid viewfinder of the x100s and the manual zoom of the x20.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 15:14
|
|
|
I've had a Canon G something or other and it felt loving great in hand but I hated the camera overall. It just never felt responsive enough and the viewfinder, which I also wanted, was a pile of turds. I believe I had a G10 and obviously the G1x will have plenty of advantages over it. On the other hand, the RX100 feels extremely responsive and has been the perfect always on me camera thanks to its combination of high iso performance, responsiveness, and sheer tiny-ness. Super fast autofocus, 10 fps burst mode, etc. I didn't care for composing with the LCD either, but I've found camera responsiveness makes a pretty big difference in how annoying it is to use an LCD instead of a viewfinder. Have you thought about a sony NEX-6 or something similar with an EVF? powderific fucked around with this message at 17:34 on May 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 17:03
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I'm currently without a good point and shoot and I'm thinking about getting a Canon g1x. Since I've been serious about photography, my past P&Ss have been the Canon G9 and the S90. I liked the G9 a lot but I felt the sensor wasn't up to where I'd like it to be so I upgraded it to a s90. I really liked the S90 for what it was (pocketable) but I started to miss the real camera feel of the G9 and I decided that I don't really like composing shots off an LCD. The s90 ended up getting broke a couple years ago and I haven't had a chance to replace it. I have a G12 I've been looking to sell if you're interested.  I needed something more pocketable but it always shot well for me and the battery life is amazing. Granted, the battery itself is massive for a P&S.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
^^^ Thanks but I'm swinging to the larger sensor P&Sspowderific posted:I've had a Canon G something or other and it felt loving great in hand but I hated the camera overall. It just never felt responsive enough and the viewfinder, which I also wanted, was a pile of turds. I believe I had a G10 and obviously the G1x will have plenty of advantages over it. On the other hand, the RX100 feels extremely responsive and has been the perfect always on me camera thanks to its combination of high iso performance, responsiveness, and sheer tiny-ness. Super fast autofocus, 10 fps burst mode, etc. I didn't care for composing with the LCD either, but I've found camera responsiveness makes a pretty big difference in how annoying it is to use an LCD instead of a viewfinder. The responsiveness of my old G9 never bothered me, but you're kinda right about the view finder. I think it will probably be useless unless it's really bright out or I want a lot of stability (leaning against my face). I don't think I've ruled out the x100 yet. As for the NEX, I don't want anything with interchangeable lenses so I'm gonna rule that out.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 21:13
|
|
|
Haggins posted:As for the NEX, I don't want anything with interchangeable lenses so I'm gonna rule that out. There's no rule that says you have to buy more lenses. Personally, being used to DSLRs, I despise the tiny, dark, information-less viewfinders on the Canon G series, and would rather just view the lcd screen. The NEX-6 has a fantastic electronic viewfinder, and as you'll see from this picture, actually a bit smaller and lighter (NEX-6 weighs 471 grams with the kit lens, vs. 534 grams for G1X) despite the full APS-C sensor. The only disadvantage is that the NEX-6 kit lens is not quite as good optically as the built-in lens on the G1X, but it's fairly negligible. And the NEX-6 has room to grow if you decide you want the best optics possible, unlike the G1X. But if you actually like the viewfinders on the Canon G series, then the G1X is probably a good choice for you. Although you might want to try out a NEX-6 and see what you're missing. Size comparison:
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
My used S90 should arrive today or tomorrow. I'm super excited. We decided we should probably have pictures of our children that weren't taken on iPhones, but I have basically no idea how to make good things happen. About to backwards delve into the thread and hope to learn something!
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
The S90 is a great camera to learn with. Read Understanding Exposure, get lightroom, and shoot RAW. If you're taking pictures of fast-moving children you'll want to learn to use Tv (shutter-priorty) or Manual mode so you can guarantee a fast shutter speed. In Program or Av (aperture-priority) I find my S90 tends to pick a value that doesn't freeze action well. Shoot RAW or RAW+JPEG from day one because storage is cheap and once you learn to correct white balance, fine-tune exposure, and crop/straighten in Lightroom you'll be able to turn a lot of once-mediocre snapshots into great keepers.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2013 19:01
|
|