Opinions on decent "point & shoot" digital camera

markC · « **on:** 6 Dec 2007, 04:05 am »

Thinking of buying the Wife a digital camera for Christmas. Any opinions on an easy to use one with a decent pic quality and priced somewhere around $200-$300?
Been checking out the Sony dsc-w55 or 80, but don't really know what I'm looking at.
TIA for any help/opinions.

birdwizard · « **Reply #1 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 04:36 am »

I just went through the same search and ended up with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ3.

Its quite simply an excellent camera with fantastic zoom and wide angle capabilities and a very impressive video mode.

Btw, dont get to caught up in Megapixels. They are far less important than advertised.

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #2 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 07:42 am »

If good performance in low light would be handy, it would seem the Fuji F40fd is untouchable, except for the very-hard-to-find F31fd.
Ironically, as Fuji has apparently succumbed to marketing pressures and joined the pixel count race, low light performance has been going slowly down from the F31fd (released last October) to the F40fd (February), and finally the newly-released F50fd. At the same time the pixel count has gone way up on these - from 6.3 MP for the 31 to 8.3 MP on the 40 to 12 MP (!) on the F50fd.

I just bought an F40fd for my wife ($249 at London Drugs - Manitoba west, but they ship), since I could not find any source for the F31fd which is what I have (and which has actually gone up in value on the second hand market to well over original full list). This was about 4 days ago.

I think it is a very nice little camera and the slightly worse low light performance is probably discernible only under tightly controlled test conditions. It is different in many small ways. The zoom is on the front vs back; the battery is slightly smaller so now the life is about 350 pix vs 450; the memory can now be either the Fuji type or sd, which is a big bonus - I got a 1GB for $10.95 from Long and McQuade. 2GB was $20.95.

Since then I have learned from a friend of my wife's that she was able to find the 31fd in the States for quite a reasonable price. They originally sold for about $450, but I've seen used ones for as much as $733 through Amazon, or $460 "refurbished" (no, thank you!).

Compared to the Panasonic, the zoom range is only 3X vs 10X and the lens is not Leica, but I can say the performance is magic! Imperial might be able to back me up.

One thing to be aware of with Sony is the necessity of using the Sony memory stick, which is the latest in the on-going tactic by Sony of making a little extra money at the expense of the less-than-meticulous shopper who after purchase discovers that you need special Sony connecting cords with unique design connectors, memory sticks and the like. They even went so far as to buck the industry norm of positive center pin on their DC power inputs on their portable radios and such so you couldn't use any old power supply.

Sony always has beautiful physical design, though.

Philistine · « **Reply #3 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 01:10 pm »

I was looking for a point and shoot that was also slim and easy to carry, I used Cnet, amazon customer reviews and the following sites to narrow down the list:

http://www.cameras.co.uk/
http://dpreview.com

Also Consumer Reports did a recent camera test survey.

Took me about 6 months to make a decision and finished up with a Canon SD750, which is a brilliant camera and since buying it 3 friends have bought it also. Great for carrying around all the time. The SD750 has a large LCD only, if this is a problem the SD1000 is similar but has a smaller LCD and also a regular viewfinder.

If you want a slightly larger camera I also checked out the Fuji models, and they get great reviews.

jermmd · « **Reply #4 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 02:28 pm »

I like the Canon also. I have the SD800 and it is fantastic. It's small, sturdy (the kids and I have dropped it multiple times), it has a large screen and viewfinder, and the pictures are great. I almost always use the automatic mode because it's so accurate.

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #5 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 02:38 pm »

If not the additional pixels and LCD screen size....what more are you paying for in the latest crop of digital cameras? Lens quality - if so, what buzzwords differentiate one from another?

I'm a very casual picture-taker, tho I tend to take a lot of pics now of our products and many retailer floor setups, I've been wondering this question for a while, tho

I recently bought an Olympus FE-120...it's 6.0 megapixels (I think I've seen up to 10 megapixels now...or is it higher still?), a small-ish screen at only 1.8", but has 3x Optical zoom and even has movie mode. It comes with a newfangled XD card (many printers, PC's and laptops don't have a card slot built in for this new-ish type) and even came with batteries. All for the princely sum of $129.99 at Longs Drug Stores.

Except for slimmer shape, larger screen and more pixels (and higher capacity built-in cards)...I couldn't visualize the differences between it and those point and shoots (not the SLR's, I understand why they cost much more) selling for $300. The Olympus takes fine pictures, what else did I miss? This is my 3rd digi camera since 1998 or so, so I'm not a newbie to the game

, but this question remains (nobody at Best Buy sufficiently answered my questions over time on this, either)

Other than another 1 to 3 megapixels, another 0.7" of screen and a sexier shape and color.....what did I miss not getting a $299 camera? Seems to me it's a good bit of fatter profit margin as you pass the $150.00 barrier in dig cameras.

This sort of dovetails the OP's questions...so I thought I'd throw it in here for your experts to help me out.

I appreciate the input...I really have been straining with this question....it's much about value with me in most purchases as any.

(by the way, battery consumption is admirably low, it takes standard AA's, but it is dense plastic, not metal construction)

Thanks, John

TheChairGuy · « **Reply #6 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 02:54 pm »

Ha - I shoulda' just looked on the net previously about the Olympus

http://reviews.cnet.com/digital-cameras/olympus-fe-120/4505-6501_7-31503527.html

The shudder speed is slow, the LCD does wash out in bright light and no auto-focus assist lamp (primary reason it's slow, I suppose).

So, now I know, I think it is mostly fatter profit margins...but there's a few features that you buy as you move up the scale.

I'm strictly the simplest set & point-and-shoot picture taker...my prior cameras were the simple Kodak's, so this Olympus appealed to me because of it's straightforwardness and reasonable price. Pictures are nice....but they are not materially different than those taken outside with my 5mp Kodak (which cost $149 a couple years ago)

Srajan Ebaen · « **Reply #7 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 03:01 pm »

The big Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ50 with 24mm wide angle add-on lens is what I use for my site and the tiny Lumix TZ-3 for travel/show reports. The TZ-3 is cool because it's 28mm instead of 35mm and the Leica optics and image stabilizer software work real well. Add a 4GB card, two spare batteries and you're all set for serious pointy shooting. and the TZ-3 is very small - fits into a shirt pocket. The FZ50 is big and heavy and wouldn't suit your purposes - tho it's a great camera...

Rasta · « **Reply #8 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 03:50 pm »

Just my two cents:

I bought the Canon SD1000 less than two months ago and really like it. I wanted a small camera for traveling and something I could carry around in my pocket. What surprised me the most, is the quality of the pictures and ease of use. It is really well designed.

R_burke · « **Reply #9 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 03:52 pm »

I just bought two after doing my research on C/Net and the various store sites that post reviews by users (circuit City, Best Buy, etc.)

I ended up buying the Sony DSC-W55 for my daughter (it's pink) and the Canon SD1000 for my wife. Both would meet most peoples point and shoot needs. I was thinking about the Fuji Finepix but they got bad reviews for battery life, which was important to me.

TONEPUB · « **Reply #10 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 03:58 pm »

If you can stretch to 450, the new Canon G9 has the best performance and versatility
of any of the other compacts we've tested...

DaveC113 · « **Reply #11 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 04:25 pm »

I'll 2nd the Fujis... I bought a f20 a yr ago for $150 w/ a 1 gig card, its been great. My previous camera was an older Canon A series, the Fuji's performance in low light is really nice. I also like that it doesn't process the images too much, they come out pretty neutral unless you use the Fujichrome setting, then it looks pretty close to a Canon.

The downside for me is I wish it had a better continuous shooting mode. You can only take 3 pics in quick succession... but the new models are probably different.

There's a lot of good cameras, it just depends on what features are important to you.

Dave

giantsteps · « **Reply #12 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 05:06 pm »

One more vote for the Panasonic TZ3. The 28mm equiv. wide angle lens is one of its strong selling points.

Frank

JeffB · « **Reply #13 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 07:20 pm »

The conclusion part of the dpreview of the Canon G9 is quite interesting.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/page20.asp

It basically says that the feature set and usability of the G9 is the best they have tested for a compact camera.
However, since the sensor sizes of all compacts are similar, and tiny compared to SLRs, that the image quality alone does not justify the price.
Basically since all compacts have similar, but tiny sensors, they all produce roughly the same quality pictures.
So whether the G9 is worth it depends upon how much you value full manual control, raw mode, ergonomics, etc.
Plus, once you get to G9 price territory an SLR with a much bigger sensor is not much more money.
Of course with SLRs, the portability is not as nice and you lose video mode.

The video quality of some new cameras is improving if that is important to you. There is a new Kodak that does 720p, 30fps, but I here the audio is not good.

dpreview typically gives Canon compact's the best reviews. I here dpreview might be biased towards Canon due to advertising dollars though.

You need to figure out which of the following features are important to you.
image quality, wide angle, zoom, video mode, manual control, raw capture.
Trying to extend the norm in any one of these categories narrows your choices considerably.

For image quality you want the best ratio of image sensor size to megapixels. The Fuji's have slightly larger sensors than some compacts say (1/1.6) vs (1/2.5). But SLRs are more like (1.6/1) However, with 12 megapixels now they offer no advantage. Not enough light per pixel.

Many people think that wide angles are more useful for the type of shots most people take. There are a few 28mm models, but not many.

If all you want is to point and shoot then I suspect any of the current crop of cameras will prove to be fine.
I am sure dpreview will point you to a Canon or maybe a Panasonic.

As a disclaimer I don't own a digital camera, but I have been looking for a while now.

mjosef · « **Reply #14 on:** 6 Dec 2007, 09:58 pm »

I love the natural color my Fuji S6000fd produces...it has 10x optical zoom, which is plenty for most casual shooting. 6.3MP...I see now they have a newer model the S700 for around 175$...(vs. 250$ on the S6000) with basically similar features...
Almost feels and looks like an SLR but much lighter.

TomS · « **Reply #15 on:** 7 Dec 2007, 02:28 am »

I have the Canon with IS and 28mm which is really nice. My wife and kids especially love it for trips. It's really difficult to take any bad pictures, even on the move. Of course, they all want their own now.

Danberg · « **Reply #16 on:** 7 Dec 2007, 03:13 am »

Many years ago I was a professional photographer by trade. Now I am just a point and shooter like everyone else.

Cannon makes excellent cameras, they are quite respected in the industry. They have the background & expertise to build cameras additionally with excellent lenses.

I have been looking for something small also.

The IS (image stabilization) feature is very helpful on the smaller cameras, as they easily can be moved when taking pictures (hence, possible blurry photos). I'd personally and strongly consider that, if looking for a "compact" camera (pocket camera).

Additionally, I also strongly agree that the 28mm lens (wide angle) is very important in a point and shoot camera. Allows you to be closer to your subjects, giving a wider field of view. Think of group shots in a room or restaurant where you won't need to get back as far (or can't get back as far due to walls, other people around, etc.) from the subjet, to get that group shot. The other advantage is that the smaller cameras flashes aren't effective very far (maximum 12' typically) and being closer to your subject assures that there will be enough brightness with the flash to get a good looking photo. I have found using others digital compact cameras, the typical 35mm lens restricts the opportunities to take group photos, due to the additional distance from the subjects that you need to be.

The web site I have found that gives the most effective, useful & concise information, samples of actual photos that the different cameras have taken, and accurate reviews is: Digital Camera Resource Page.

Good luck with your search. I'd go with some sort of Canon if it were me. They most consistently get the best overall ratings, features / cost ratio.

markC · « **Reply #17 on:** 7 Dec 2007, 03:19 am »

Thank-you all for the input. I have some more research to do now, and not a whole lot of time in which to do it.

DaveC113 · « **Reply #18 on:** 7 Dec 2007, 03:33 am »

Image stabilization is a great feature, but it won't freeze action like higher shutter speeds. A lot of people are confused about this, thinking it will help blurring in all circumstances, so I though I'd point that out. I think the Fujis have a huge advantage in low light and action shots because of the bigger CCD, but if thats not important to you the Canon SD w/IS would be my choice, they have some nice features and take pics that look great without post-processing.

BradJudy · « **Reply #19 on:** 7 Dec 2007, 04:36 am »

I have a Canon A630 that does quite well, although it lacks the IS that some of the other models have. I ran ~1000 shots through it on a trip to China earlier in the year. It isn't as small as the sub-compacts (my prior camera was an S400), but I like it.

The A560 is enough for most people and is under $150. The A720 gives you more zoom and IS for $200. Hmmm...looks like they have an A570 that includes IS for $160.

Canon has a new SX series out now that has good price/features, but I haven't read any reviews yet, so I don't know much about them.

I saw dpreview linked to here - it's a great resource for in-depth reviews of many (but not all) cameras.