which best digital camera does everyone use?
 

Just curious seeing all the nice clear shots people post in this site just what cameras are being used. I am looking for a 2Mpixel digital camera for Christmas tha's easy to use and easy to download the great results for porsche parts and book reproductions. Also It should be a great value (<$200) and be compact and light weight (RS mentality!).

Suggestions are invited!:)

Canon S230or S200 or Nikon 775

I use a CanonG1 (3.3MP)... check out the web site below... it provides very thorough reviews of digital cameras.

http://www.dpreview.net/

My office uses a Canon Powershot 330 for field work as it is very robust and takes good pictures.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canondigitalixus330/default.asp

I use an Olympus C-920 zoom (1.3 megapixels) which I have had for 2 1/2 yeras. It's very easy to use, gives superb results but is a little bulky.

This image was taken at standard quality, the lowest of 3, with the built-in flash

http://www.nicholas-moss.co.uk/asset...Wing-lhf-3.JPG

I have a Nikon 775, Nikon 885 and Cannon PS G2. The 775 is tiny, easy to use and takes great day shots. It's not great for night and low light conditions. The 885 is also very compact, takes great pics and has some really good features but is slow to recycle when using flash. The Cannon is an awesome camera and can do anything you ask of it but is on the pricey side. Look at Steve's Digicams for great and objective reviews.
Cheers
Mark

The Canon S230 (3 mp) is great but still costs more than $300. The S200 may be in your price range though.

I use a Canon S30 (3 mp) and highly recommend it, but it's still about $400.

I use an Olympus Camedia 4.1 with a 64mb Card. Get some rechargable batteries and your ready to go. Any of you CA guys recognize this location?http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads/P1010207.JPG http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads/PC030607.JPG

Before this goes to OT
 

It took me 6 months to decide upon and purchase a digital camera. I purchased a used Kodak DC-4800 off E-bay in April for half of the new price and could not be happier. Its a 3.1 MP camera with lots of options for custom settings and has a very easy to navigate UI which is great for my wife who hates complex electronics. Heck even my 5 year old son has taken a few good pictures with this camera. I added a 128 MB memory card from Fry's Electronics for $35.00 and can take 120 high resolution pictures or something like 300 low res. Good luck.

Not that I am the "Off Topic Police", but I think this is one of them posts...I know I have made a few myself.:rolleyes:

Nick-Moss....that is a good photo, very good quality results from that camera. And the painted wheel wells look good also...how long do you think they will stay that way?

I like the Sony Mavica, because you don't have to deal with cables and d/l software. I dump my pix to an HP-UX box if the mood suits me. I have an FD-90. It's 2 years old, and doesn't have all the whiz-bang features and tera-pixel resolution of current cameras, but it works great for what I do,which is taking pix of projects I'm working on, and grabbing pix of buses as I drive around.

I have a Canon S10 which I used to recommend but after living with it for 2 years I'm looking for something else. The shutter response is just too damn slow. It feels like an hour elapses between hitting the button and the photo being taken.

Nikon N80 35mm and a $80 Microtek scanner from CompUSA. I can scan negatives, but scanning prints seems to provide better color.

http://members.cox.net/rs911t/images/rs911t-home.jpg

For posts here, just about anything will do. Everything on the market will take pictures with more color depth and/or size, than this site will support.

That said, I would choose one of the Canon products. They make the small form factor you're after, AND, Canon bundles some nice software for tweaking the images to fit on this board.

EDIT: Canon also uses CF-cards (CF=CompactFlash=good) for memory (digital film)
If you think back to the VHS vs Beta wars; CF is like VHS . . it seems to emerging as the standard. Sony, again, has their propriatary versions, as do others.

The deal on the very small (if not the smallest) Canon Elph is HERE @ ~$225

As a professional photographer, I currently use the Fuji S1 Pro @ 6.1million pixels and a 1 Gig Smart Card. Interchange SLR Nikon lenes; 17-35, 35-70, 70-300mm Max res is 3200 X 2300 pixels, each image 18 Megs.
There is now an Fuji S2 Pro with body street priced at about $2300. Clients have made blow ups (on cloth) as large as 5 ft X 10 ft. Film is soon to be history IMO.

For casual personal use, I would urge cranking the budget up to at least $400 or you will be disappointed primarily because of crapola lens quality in cheapie cameras. Good shopping site is bandhphoto.com.
Cheers
Ted in So Fla
86 Carrera

I'm also using the Fuji S1 because I can use my existing lenses from my 35mm Nikon setup. I've also got an old beatup Sony Mavica with floppy disk storage for quick shots - it's cheap, easy and works great for low resolution stuff! I used to have a Sony DSC-770 SLR (similar to today's Olympus E10/20) and that was a nice camera as well - although only 1.5 Mpixel. The 'Rennsport' photos on my website were all taken with the Sony. -- Curt

I'll second the Kodac 4800. We bought ours 2 years ago and really love it. Here is a picture of our car on a "shakedown cruise" up Pacific Coast Highway shortly after buying it. It was set on average resolution.

I just bought the Fujifilm 3650 (2.1 mega pixel). It was $199 at Ritz camera and came with a "gift set". A pair of binoculars and a 35 mm camera. It also came with a $10 rebate. So $189 total....

So far I'm very pleased with the camera. But then again....I don't know much about them. All the reviews I found indicated it was a decent entry level camera. I'm amazed at the quality and depth of some of the pictures. It's also pretty tough too. I ran over it with my Pathfinder :o and the damn thing still works...could'nt believe it!

It comes with the new xD memory card. Very small, uses less power, writes and downloads from the card quickly, and will last pretty much forever (bunch of sales propaganda). On the downside, there's not much support out there for this type of media...yet.

If I had to do it over again, I'd probably would have bought a 3 meg camera that can record sound with the video. And I also wouldn't have run over the camera with my car.

tshih,

I use an Olympus D-100. It is a 1.3 mega piel and is more than adequate for snapshots and web postings. I paid $99 for the unit and added a 265k flashcard that hold ~500 pictures.

Bear in mind that the pictures on a computer monitor are about 90 dpi. Any detail above hat is wasted (and vastly increases the download time) if all you are going to do is post them. Prints are another story. A minimum requirement for a decent print is 300 dpi for casual snapshots and 600+ for really good phots.

If I make 300 dpi prints from my Olympus, they are about 3" x 5".

I agree w/ Ted on this one. I use an Olympus 2500, but when it goes will get a Nikon 995. A great digital camera that deals with light very very well.

I went all out and got a Nikon coolpix5000. 5 mega pixel, all the adjustments you could want, 3 program memories, writes to a compact flash card or dumps to a usb port. With XP, don't even need any software. Even has a hotshoe for using a real flash.

Picked it up off the web from a NY camera store for 699.

I'll say, just because a lens is small, does NOT mean it's crapola. In the 35mm world, this may be true; but not for digi cams. Digi's get the image of a CCD. The CCD has a much smaller exposer-plane than the 35mm. As the CCD size goes up (dimensionally) so too should the the size/brightness of the lens(es).

Check out the specs on some of these tiny cams. They have Aspherical elements and great f-stops.

That said, I just purchased a Minolta DiMage 7i. . .with a big ol' bright zoom lens.:D

Question for the camera buff’s out there. With digital, how long should it take from the time you ‘press the button’ until the picture is taken? With my Sony, it takes something like a second. (Eternity) Is this normal? Something I should be able to change? The camera?

The wealth of knowledge on the board is amazing…
TTFN…

The 'record time' varies greatly and is usually proportional to the price of the camera! Of course, the amount of digital information being recorded also has an affect. Some of the high-end cameras have a virtual motordrive that allows rapid shooting similar to film cameras. They allow another shot to be taken while the first one is still being recorded.

<i>"Even has a hotshoe for using a real flash. "</i>

The built-in flash is the weak link in most digital cameras (and point-and-shoot film cameras for that matter). Most have a maximum flash distance of only 10-12 feet! And they are small lights with little manual override control. If you want to take decent photos in low light, a hot-shoe and quality flash are ESSENTIAL. For comparison, my Nikon Speedlight has a range of 60 feet. Digital cameras with hotshoes are few and far between. -- Curt

Curt, I think it's less 'record time' and more 'auto focus time'. Thanks for the input...

Annoying, isn't it.
These things are really computers with a CCD as and input device.

The CCD is picking up the image. Then there's the cmptr processing time.

Most digi's have a 2 position point&click button. The first part, (pressed 1/2 way down)the camera figures exposure and focus. The second (pressed fully down) tells the camera to capture the pic. Most have a bit of a delay there too. But still, you can mitagate the whole delay by holding the button halfway down, to let the camera figure out the focus and exposure.

The whole delay issue is the biggest reason I bought another Digi-cam. Now I can do 7 shot in one second, when needed. W'hoo!


EDIT: Sam - eeww!

Island, 7 FPS is cool, $1,100 is not so cool... Thats a little more than 2x what my Sony was, and it was more than I needed...
I am adjusting to the point, push 1/2 way, and shoot.

psssst. . .don't tell anybody . . .7i for $510

I love price wars!

I'll let you know. . .when it gets here. ;)

The price dropped last Friday; thats when my order went in. I believe they said three days was the max time before shipping.

A&M has been around forever, selling from the big ad's in fine print, found in the photo mag's. I'm not too concerned . . .do you think I should be?

<i>"I think it's less 'record time' and more 'auto focus time'."</i>

The autofocus is instantaneous on my Fuji S1, just as quick as my 35mm Nikon N-90s. The processing, or record time, is another matter. When set on TIFF mode (+20 megs per photo!!), the record time is quite long! My cheapo Sony Mavica does hunt around a bit before locking focus and is slow to process as well.

Another huge issue with digitals is batteries. Many companies are making big improvements with their latest offerings. But I think the Sony InfoLithium's are still KING on this issue. My S1 with Speedlight takes 8 AA batteries, 2 Lithium CR123A's and 1 button cell! I typically need to install all new batteries (except the button cell) every week. I do use it professionally on a daily basis though. -- Curt

I haven't yet ventured into the Dig camera market arena.
Reading some of these posts reminds me of when I last went to buy a new camera.
It was I think a Minolta 3xi or 5xi, it was one of those things where a lot of the "action" 'was in the lens, extra lens were as much as the body.
I used it for one roll of film, it was really good for "still life", then I tried to take a picture of one of dogs running. I panned with the dog, the lens could not make up its mind as I "gave up" it took the picture!
Will I have this problem with a digital ($300 -$400)
Slow decision making.

(Yes I know I had the camera on one of the auto settings, that's what I was testing))

Jeff

Jeff, Digi's have even more variable than the 35mm world. The guy who has sorted out a whole lot of this is HERE.


Sam, thanks for the info. I figured these all had 100% mark-up for retail . ..making the, almost half retail, price do-able. They do tout themselves as big movers with big buying power; FWIW.

I also noticed their prices for add-ons was very high. Looking like a "fries & cola" profit scheme.

Like I said, I'll let you know what happens.

Who's A&M? I've bought LOTS of photo equipment over the years via mailorder. Many bad experiences! B&H is about the only one I trust these days.

I wonder if that camera is 'gray market' to account for the incredible price? -- Curt

FWIW, they are listed with a handful of other vendors on a list of Popular Photography's Checkrated Stores

I hope it doesn't "get interesting" . . . we'll see.

I don't want to throw cold water on your deal, but most of the mailorder stores I've had bad experiences with are on that list!! And have been for years. I vaguely remember an article exposing the Popular Photography ratings as a sham - i.e. how else are they going to rate their own advertisers, but "recommended", right?!

There's a photo BBS somewhere (I'll try to find it) that has actual user ratings (with details of deals gone bad) of these places. There's only 3 or 4 that seem to get any kind of consistant high ratings. In any case, hopefully your deal with go smoothly. -- Curt

Here's some mail order info, conveniently categorized as "I want it cheap and fast", "I want to get screwed", etc.:

http://www.photo.net/equipment/where-to-buy


Here's the user feedback info:

http://www.photo.net/neighbor/one-subcategory?id=2

Getting out of hand here!!
 

OK Thanks Guys (and frustrated Ansel Adams/Pelicanheads),

I really didn't need to see the zits on that tattoo!
So all those bigger 3+Megapixel cameras are not on my list to consider even though there is a place for them for those needing to do advanced photography and special effects.

I appreciate the first few leads for shopping online and comparing several ($200 or less) candidates. I went to some stores to see and handle (test drive) those in the metal/plastic and have decided to order a Canon A20 for $200.

This should do for my needs which are simple.

Cheers for the Holidays:)

tshih - sorry to hi-jack your thread. . . it seemed your questions were answered. The A20 is a good choice, BTW.

Curt, Sam; thanks for the links. I had found those on my own yesterday. This "internet" thing sure does shrink the world. ;)

Well it's done. I just got off the phone with their sales rep. (Patrick)

A very polite guy. Talented too. He said "Hold, I'll be right with you" in under half a second!
. . . It took him about 600 seconds to get back to me. Though, the hold music wasn't too bad.

The "special deal" for me was $30 off the $110 battery charger.

Feeling rather special and honored to be presented with such a deal; :rolleyes: I told him Minolta's website says, for this model, the batteries and charger are included.

His reply, this is a non-US model. . . but for $799 I could get the US model. "your choice!" (there he goes again, making me feel all "special" again :rolleyes: ) heh, heh.

But wait, there's more. I was also offered the special "Minolta approved" 5 year warrenty! (dang he can talk fast)

I got to say I was holding back the chuckles; as I picture this guy wearing a McDonalds cap, asking "would you like some FRIES with your LARGE ORANGE DRINK?"

Anyway, I just cancelled the order.
Now I'm a satisfied non-customer :D

"Curiosity killed the cat . . . .satisfaction brought him back"

Hmmm. From my perspective, this still doesn't fall in to the "too good to be true" category. It's a strong buyers market for this type of stuff. I did figured they had some sort of angle, and was very curious to find out for myself. It's fascinating to me to see these guys playing a very old, well known game, on people whom are savvy enough to figure out such a high-tech product. It would be like selling oil-filter magnets to 911 owners. ;)

Anyway, I certainly could have picked up the camera alone for the $510, added missing bits, and had the package I wanted at a price I was willing to pay. But, when it comes right down to it, I didn't want to do business with such a place.

FWIW, I did check with the credit card co. .. . no charges entered.

Final Outcome to my Quest-Canon A40
 

I finally got the camera I wanted.

Lucky for me the lowest price was offered at Beach Camera about 5 miles away from my place of employment in NJ ($229). I went to check it out and tried to minimize my costs by buying the 128MB Compact Flash card and NiMH AA batteries and charger (total $80 free shipping !! from Amazon.com). The stupid UV filter which costs $29 and still requires an adapter (how stupid is that!!!) and which in my opinion makes the whole camera less portable (defeats the purpose) was not purchased as well as the 5-year warranty (the camera will be obsolete as far as performance/costs like most high technology items today). The salesman was not pleased to have someone come in to buy just the camera without any accessories.

Used it and it was great. Have pictures of the air flow sensor for all to see here. It came from my 1993 RSA and was opened up to inspect for defect. None obvious.

Tom :)

Congrads Tom! Good choice, too.

If anyone is interested in finding out the skinny on merchants for tech gear, this "reseller ratings" site is excellent.

Type in the "find a product" and you get price with the merchants rating. . .w/ comments from previous buyers.http://forums.pelicanparts.com/ultim...ons/icon14.gif