Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Digital Camera - What should i buy?

StokeLee

StokeLee

macrumors 6502
Original poster
May 30, 2005
413
0
Stoke-on-Trent. Midlands, UK
Im a mac newbie, eeek, you say, im getting better honestly,,
Anyway, i am going to buy a digital camera, Ive done a lot of looking arond and i can get anything from a 3mp to a 7.1 mp camera for between £200 to £300 pounds,, sorry im not sure what that is in $$$$ maybe i should download a convertor widget, lol, but what im looking for is some reviews of some folks who have got a digi cam and a mac, im loking for seamless compatibilty between the two, I think i kow that almost probably every cam works with a a mac, but id love some advice,

Thank you

Lee
 
I love my Canon Elph SD300. It's a 4 megapixel camera that's nice and compact, but takes great pictures with a multitude of settings. I believe they've upgraded their line, so if you're looking for a higher resolution camera, then the SD400 might be right for you. It's got the same features and is a 5 megapixel camera.

Canon-Digital-IXUS-50-3348.jpg
 
Just remember than more mega-pixels doesn't mean better quality pictures.

Oooo! A quick search of mine (Canon A510) turned up a UK store selling for £117. Check it out here. I love my camera. I got it about a month ago. It's got heaps of manual features as well as an automatic option if you want it.

Check out reviews on the net for it. It's 3.2 mega-pixels. The colours and detail is amazing. I was surprised.
 
...and my favorite: DCResource

I just bought a Canon ELPH SD300, and love it. Of course, it did have a stuck red pixel in the CCD, but it's currently being fixed under warranty.

I've actually heard bad things about the SD400, which you can find in the forums of DCResource. The problem is that while it has a higher resolution than the SD300, they both use the same size CCD. This means that the pixels are closer together, and can cause interference with other pixels ("noise"). While not noticable in daylight pictures, dark areas, even with the flash, can show noise. This is one of many examples why more megapixels isn't necessarily better. Of course, most people will never notice this. However, I'm interested in doing some afocal Astrophotography, so noise is Enemy #1.

The SD500 doesn't have this problem, since it has a different, bigger CCD.

Here is a list of cameras I've researched, and chose between to make my final choice.

Canon SD300, SD500
Canon A510/A520
Casio Z750
Kodak DX7440


BTW, 1 BP ~ 1.85USD
So 300BP = US$555
 
I have the Cannon PowerShot SD500. I've had it a month and really just started using it once my daughter was born, but I've captured many, many pictures and a number of movies with it and am extremely happy with it, given it's small size.

Picture quality is excellent, battery life is great, and the feature set is remarkable. Highly recommended. Canon's S/W has worked well with my Mac and Tiger, although one of the apps (I forget which) is occasionally a bit dicey.
 
The Canon SD series has the quickest start-up time and shortest shutter lag in their class at this time. They also sport an optical viewfinder that can be helpful on sunny days.

Best bang for the buck (at least here in the states) are the Nikon Coolpix series. They have some nifty features like software red-eye reduction in the camera, and the ability to pull more detail out of dark areas in an image.

A unique digicam is the Pentax Optio WP. It is waterproof to something like 5 feet!
 
StokeLee said:
Im a mac newbie, eeek, you say, im getting better honestly,,
Anyway, i am going to buy a digital camera, Ive done a lot of looking arond and i can get anything from a 3mp to a 7.1 mp camera for between £200 to £300 pounds,, sorry im not sure what that is in $$$$ maybe i should download a convertor widget, lol, but what im looking for is some reviews of some folks who have got a digi cam and a mac, im loking for seamless compatibilty between the two, I think i kow that almost probably every cam works with a a mac, but id love some advice,

Thank you
Lee
Click to expand...

I have the 4 MP Canon Elph and I add my voice to the chorus to say "I love it" - got it two years ago. I did a good deal of research on which cameras were producing the best looking shots (color, focus, redeye, etc.). The canon in its newer higher MP versions seems to continue to be a critical faviorite. About three months ago, I got an error where the lense wouldn't retract - E18 - I had seen all sorts of sights about the $hundreds to fix and some where folks would take apart the camera. I risked it and just forced the lens back in - that cleared the catch 22 of the error (won't start up if the lense is out, can't put the lens in if the camera is off) and it's worked perfectly again since. I've taken about 4000 shots with it to date - great camera!
 
Forget about Point-to-shoot digital cameras, unless you absolutely need the pocket size of them. Time to go with Digital SLR. There was a saying "Once you go DSLR, you never go back"

Hopefully this article will help you make a better decision. Recommend Nikon D50, or D70, D70S and Canon Digital Rebel XT (350D)
A pro camera that amateurs can afford (NYC Times)
 
papersushi said:
Forget about Point-to-shoot digital cameras, unless you absolutely need the pocket size of them. Time to go with Digital SLR. There was a saying "Once you go DSLR, you never go back"

Hopefully this article will help you make a better decision. Recommend Nikon D50, or D70, D70S and Canon Digital Rebel XT (350D)
A pro camera that amateurs can afford (NYC Times)
Click to expand...
I totally agree to this!

I have D70 and when people see the pictures from it, they just say WOW! (I also use good lenses)
 
One misunderstanding of DSLR camera is that "Its for professional to use, its complicated to operate".

Its true that you can manually adjust pretty much every setting on DSLR just like the pro does on National Geographic, but there is always "AUTOMATIC" mode. A lot of people just use DSLR as an automatic point-to-shoot camera, except you get absolutely stunning pictures out of it and your friends will call you "Pro".
 
i agree with papersushi and willy s that digital slr is the way to go...but, even though they are relatively cheap, after lenses you'll still be paying well over a thousand bucks. i have a d70 and love it very much. but i still use my canon a80 for a lot of things...for its class, i think the canon a70-a95 series is awesome. manual settings galore and a P mode. for most purposes and at a cheap price, a point and shoot is more than adequate...but if you're interested in photographing sports or even your kids, the instantaneous start-up and quick shutter lag is imperative.
 
papersushi said:
Forget about Point-to-shoot digital cameras, unless you absolutely need the pocket size of them. Time to go with Digital SLR. There was a saying "Once you go DSLR, you never go back"

Hopefully this article will help you make a better decision. Recommend Nikon D50, or D70, D70S and Canon Digital Rebel XT (350D)
A pro camera that amateurs can afford (NYC Times)
Click to expand...


Don't sell short the prosumer cameras like the Olympus C-8080, Nikon CP8400, CP8700 & CP8800, and the Canon Pro1. While not true SLR's, they have most everything that 80% of the market needs. Yes, for the serious photographer a DSLR may be the best choice.

Keep in mind these prosumer units I mentioned are not banned by places like the MCI Cneter as "pro cameras" (their definition of a pro camera is one that has interchangeable lenses).
 
Guys, he's a noob and doesn't want to spend a thousand dollars on a digital camera+lenses solution.

I'd recommend anything from Panasonic right now in the P&S catagory.
LZ2 for <$300 http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasoniclz2/
FZ5 for $414 (Abe's of Maine is a reputable place) http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz5/
FZ20 for <$500 http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz20/

and the compact FX7 for $320 (Abe's again) http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfx7/

All of these cameras have good features including nice lenses with image stabilization (better hand held images). When reading reviews I would skip to the "Photographic tests" or "Compared to" and read the conclusion. If you don't have aspirations on turning into an uber photographer, don't get a DSLR, the kit lenses will leave you dissapointed when you find you need to spend another $200 to get a decent lens. And to get a decent tele-zoom like the FZ5 and FZ20 you'll need to spend several hundred more.

You could also consider the new Canon S2 IS, http://dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_s2-review/index.shtml , but its gonna cost you $500, and I wouldn't say its any better than the FZ20 http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fz20-review/index.shtml
 
On Amazon last week (and maybe this week) the Fuji Finepix E550 was only £169 inc.

SuperCCD, 6MP, 4x Optical, Good reviews everywhere.

Also has an option to attach other Fuji lenses, which should allow you to get up to 10x Optical zoom when in 12MP interpolated mode (because the SuperCCD uses an octagonal arrangement, digital zoom actually works to some extent beyond what Photoshop could do with a basic 6MP image). Otherwise without a lens you can get around 5.6x Optical zoom because of the 12MP interpolated mode, or around 7-8MP of real resolution.
 
kugino said:
i agree with papersushi and willy s that digital slr is the way to go...but, even though they are relatively cheap, after lenses you'll still be paying well over a thousand bucks. i have a d70 and love it very much. but i still use my canon a80 for a lot of things...for its class, i think the canon a70-a95 series is awesome. manual settings galore and a P mode. for most purposes and at a cheap price, a point and shoot is more than adequate...but if you're interested in photographing sports or even your kids, the instantaneous start-up and quick shutter lag is imperative.
Click to expand...

And for what it's worth, I would recommend the FZ3 over a canon A95 any day of the week. Put the night shot ISO tests side by side to see why.
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fz3-review/index.shtml
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_a95-review/

Not to mention the 12x image stabalized zoom over the canon's 3x non IS zoom lens.
 
Hattig said:
On Amazon last week (and maybe this week) the Fuji Finepix E550 was only £169 inc.

SuperCCD, 6MP, 4x Optical, Good reviews everywhere.

Also has an option to attach other Fuji lenses, which should allow you to get up to 10x Optical zoom when in 12MP interpolated mode (because the SuperCCD uses an octagonal arrangement, digital zoom actually works to some extent beyond what Photoshop could do with a basic 6MP image). Otherwise without a lens you can get around 5.6x Optical zoom because of the 12MP interpolated mode, or around 7-8MP of real resolution.
Click to expand...
The older SuperCCD wasn't anywhere near as effective as it is now. If you're thinking about a fuji step up to the F10, AMAZING low noise high ISO little camera. Can be had for ~$300
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fuji/finepix_f10-review/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf10zoom/
 
And as an addition to my previous posts, I'd get a FZ3 over an LZ2, but the LZ2 is more compact, which is important to some.
 
I might as well also echo the sentiments of the many people who wrote before me...

I just bought a Cannon SD400 (5.0mp, 3.0x optical zoom) and I can't say how much I love it. It's small, fast, and takes lovely pictures! The SD500 I felt was too large (relatively speaking) so I opted for sd400. The lithium ion battery seems to last forever and the camera has some very cool modes that you might find useful depending on your tastes.

I paid 294 (US$) via dell (with the right series of coupon codes) and there are still places charging more than 350, so I got a pretty good deal for such a lovely camera!

Anyway , enough rambling.

Cheers,
justin
 
justinshiding said:
I might as well also echo the sentiments of the many people who wrote before me...

I just bought a Cannon SD400 (5.0mp, 3.0x optical zoom) and I can't say how much I love it. It's small, fast, and takes lovely pictures! The SD500 I felt was too large (relatively speaking) so I opted for sd400. The lithium ion battery seems to last forever and the camera has some very cool modes that you might find useful depending on your tastes.

I paid 294 (US$) via dell (with the right series of coupon codes) and there are still places charging more than 350, so I got a pretty good deal for such a lovely camera!

Anyway , enough rambling.

Cheers,
justin
Click to expand...

Interesting you said that, because I just noticed what camera was being compared to the Fuji F10, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf10zoom/page7.asp

And again with the LZ2 from panasonic (panasonic has the IS, none on canon). http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasoniclz2/page7.asp

I think Canon has strayed pretty far in the P&S sector. There is nothing they can do that other brands don't do better for the same price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back