| cycler15 |
I currently have the Sony DSC-T1 5MP digital camera. I love the ultra compact size, it's slim enough to fit in my front pant pocket and barely know it's there. But I'm really disappointed with the flash... any night pictures where the subject is more than 5-6 feet away come out fuzzy.
So I'm looking for a new digital camera. Here are my requirements:
- Must be slim and ultra compact
- At least 5megapixels
- Good flash for night pics
- A 2" LCD screen or greater
- High picture quality is obviously a must!
I've looked at the Canon SD450... but I think it might be a tad too thick for what I want. Does anyone have this camera? Thoughts on it?
Any recommendations? |
|
|
| mdxx3 |
| My wife has a Canon SD600. It is slightly smaller than the SD550. There are other brands/models out there that's even smaller but I wanted something from a camera maker like Canon, Nikon, or Minolta. Someone here recommended Canon... so that made picking the brand easy for me. The SD600 works great. And after that her sister bought a similar Canon too. :hmmm: |
|
|
| cycler15 |
quote:
Originally posted by mdxx3
My wife has a Canon SD600. It is slightly smaller than the SD550. There are other brands/models out there that's even smaller but I wanted something from a camera maker like Canon, Nikon, or Minolta. Someone here recommended Canon... so that made picking the brand easy for me. The SD600 works great. And after that her sister bought a similar Canon too. :hmmm:
How do you like the SD600? Dell has it for $280 after their 25% off discount. How are night pictures? |
|
|
| desertbriez |
i just bought a kodak v530 to take on my bike with me... it's compact (although the casio is a bit thinner) and so far it's taken great pics... while in motion! it's 5 megapixels.... uses sd cards... also takes video!
i have a cannon... uhm... 620 or something like that... 7 megapixels... but it's fatter... not an ultracompact... i like that camera too... but it was too big to take on the bike (bicycle) |
|
|
| mdxx3 |
quote:
Originally posted by cycler15
How do you like the SD600? Dell has it for $280 after their 25% off discount. How are night pictures?
It's nice. I like it. Wife likes it more than I do since it's hers. There are two types of night pictures. One is the "long" exposure, usually scenery or fireworks outdoor (no flash).... have not tried it with this camera yet but did many with my older Nikon before this. The other night picture is the indoor type - already done plenty with this SD600. It can focus pretty well since it has an infrared/LED assist. Not too grainy either. The flash can't go very far - similar to the other cams with built-in flash but is already further than my older Nikon. There's an external/optional larger Canon flash with a bracket if we need it to flash even further away. The color quality (day and night shots) is simply awesome - this is something the Canon processor/chipset must be good for (don't have to do any color correction by software) plus their glass/optics is pretty decent too.
Hmm... did you say 550 or 450 earlier? The 600 is the same size as the 450 but smaller than the 550 model. Anyways they're all nice cameras. And that looks like a pretty good price. |
|
|
| DaleB |
I would like to add this one, another excellent site.
www.dpreview.com
I would value this one or 'Steves' before CNET reviews. |
|
|
| mdxx3 |
| I think some Olympus cameras use xD card too. Also I think some cameras are moving from CF to SD format with newer releases. Personally I think CF is good because the electrical connections/pins are not exposed... don't have to worry about ESD and zapping those pixels/bytes. The bad part is a CF card is kinda "huge" (probably ok for a larger camera anyways). |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by phins2rt
Don't most (it not all) Fuji's use xD cards?
Yes, but there are other sellers besides Fuji. I bought the Sandisk brand for an uncle a few months ago. They are apparently much cheaper in the U.S. than in the U.K.
I am partial to Sony. They all work the same and have nice displays although my 3.2 is starting to show signs of age. I originally liked them about 3 years ago when most other cameras had lots of shutter lag. There has been improvement across the board with that.
So, I recommend the 5.1 (P100, possibly discontinued) or 7.2 (P150, might be discontinued but still sold), both of which use the original size memory stick. Both have almost instant power-up, are simple to use and are a nice size. Both seem to have good battery life from the included rechargeable info-lithium or whatever it is. They don't give you a lot of options for playing with the exposure but they take fairly good pics and video with sound.
We bought the 5.1 for my wife's parents a couple of years ago. They absolutely love it and are able to use it easily. Since they had just purchased a Sony laptop, they think it's the neatest thing to plug the memory stick into the side of the machine and have been showing all their friends. :D |
|
|
| crmsnidol |
quote:
Originally posted by phins2rt
Don't most (it not all) Fuji's use xD cards? That would be a concern of mine. It seems the standards are moving towards CF and SD. YMMV.
Those xD cards are really tiny!:D
Not sure. I was more concerned with the image quality and ISO settings when I bought mine a few years back. I have the F601Z that actually uses SmartMedia. Cheap but not as fast as the newer formats.
FWIW - I would also recommend to anyone looking for a camera to not get caught up in the megapixel race. Unless you are a professional photog whose output goes to glossy magazine covers you don't need more than 2 or 3 MP. Output to your TV won't look any different at 2 vs 3 MP and the same is true if you print your own 4x6 photos or send to an online processor. For larger formats 8x10 or above, the extra data in the image WILL translate into a better picture when printed. Mine is a 3MP that I limit to 1MP since I output almost exclusively to DVD slideshows displayed on my TV or 4x6 photos for family. |
|
|
| carguy1234 |
quote:
Originally posted by cycler15
I currently have the Sony DSC-T1 5MP digital camera. I love the ultra compact size, it's slim enough to fit in my front pant pocket and barely know it's there. But I'm really disappointed with the flash... any night pictures where the subject is more than 5-6 feet away come out fuzzy.
So I'm looking for a new digital camera. Here are my requirements:
- Must be slim and ultra compact
- At least 5megapixels
- Good flash for night pics
- A 2" LCD screen or greater
- High picture quality is obviously a must!
I've looked at the Canon SD450... but I think it might be a tad too thick for what I want. Does anyone have this camera? Thoughts on it?
Any recommendations?
The newer T series cameras have image stabalization and much better low light performance than the T1 did. Our T9 always gives good pics. The new T30 is spec'ed even better. |
|
|
| kflint |
quote:
Originally posted by cycler15
Here are my requirements:
- Must be slim and ultra compact
- At least 5megapixels
- Good flash for night pics
- A 2" LCD screen or greater
- High picture quality is obviously a must!
cycler15,
You are going to run into an inherent conflict with your requirements. None of the ultra compact digital cameras are going to have much of a flash.
For example, Canon's marketing materials says the flash on the Canon SD600 has an effective range of 1.6 to 12 feet in wide angle, and 1.6 to 6.6 feet in telephoto (with ISO set to auto.) Similarly, Sony claims the flash on the DCS-T30 has a working range of 4 inches to 11.1 feet at wide-angle and 0.8 to 8.8 feet at telephoto (again with ISO set to auto). I find the useful range usually is less than claimed by the manufacturer. Note that the auto ISO setting on these cameras will automatically select a high ISO to maximize the power of the flash, which will result in a photo with more digital noise.
The bottom line: I think you won't get useful flash beyond about 6-8 feet in any ultra compact camera. You certainly won't get anywhere near what you can with a DSLR and good hot-shoe-mounted flash. I have a Canon 20D (DSLR) with a Canon 580EX flash and fast f/2.8 lenses, and even then the effective flash range isn't all that far.
As to which compact camera, I like Canon's digital elph series. I have one of the "older" SD500 cameras, and my wife and kids use it a lot. (Old in the digital camera world is about six months!) If you plan to do any cropping when you print or to make print larger than 2.6, I suggest looking at cameras with 5-6 megapixels.
Take a look at the various sites web sites listed in the other postings. I suggest paying particular attention to what the reviewers say about digital noise (and what the posted photos show). If you can, go to a store and try out the cameras. The biggest difference is in look and feel - how the camera operates, where the buttons are, how complex or easy the menus are to use, etc.
Good luck!
Kelly |
|
|
| cycler15 |
quote:
Originally posted by carguy1234
The newer T series cameras have image stabalization and much better low light performance than the T1 did. Our T9 always gives good pics. The new T30 is spec'ed even better.
2+ years ago I was willing to pay a premium for the T1 because it was really the first real slim ultra-compact. Now others have come close in slimness factor and Sony is still charging a $100+ premium on their cameras.
Right now I'm debating on the Canon SD450 and the SD600. |
|
|
| G. COLTON |
If you want to take many pictures using a flash then you need a camera that has a "hot shoe." They are not many in the small category that have this feature. In fact the only one I have seen is an Olympus. Don't know the number since I just saw it once. Olympus also makes a small flash that they rate it at Guide number 20 (out to 65ft). I have one and feel it is good out to 35 or 40ft.
The Olympus C770 that I have would be too big for you since it also has a 10X optical lens. The FL-20 is a small compact flash that would work with any camera. It can be bought for only about $120.00 on AMazon.com.
I agree that big mega pixels is not required for most of our photography. The 770 is only 4Meg and I frequently print 8x11 pictures. Also get good 8x11 with my wife's little compact Nikon. Just do not try to blow up and then crop before printing.
G |
|
|
| cycler15 |
After much research, I've narrowed it down to 2 choices...
- Canon Powershot SD630
- Sony DSC-T9
I previously had 2 Canon digital cameras and was very happy with them. I like the fact that the Canon has a huge 3" LCD screen. I don't really care for the optical viewfinder since my current Sony DSC-T1 doesn't have one.
The one advantage of the Sony DSC-T9 is that it has image stabilization.
I guess I'll wait until I can find a good online deal on either one of them. |
|
|
| nightguy |
Is image stabilization that beneficial if you have a fairly steady hand ? I think you want the Canon, but like me, you can't pull the trigger until you're sure it's something you don't want.
I like the displays on the T-body Sony's but don't like the way they feel in my hand. I noticed the Sony P150 is $199 at Sears. I think I'm going to pick one up. |
|
|
| SRSEN1999 |
quote:
Originally posted by cycler15
After much research, I've narrowed it down to 2 choices...
- Canon Powershot SD630
- Sony DSC-T9
I previously had 2 Canon digital cameras and was very happy with them. I like the fact that the Canon has a huge 3" LCD screen. I don't really care for the optical viewfinder since my current Sony DSC-T1 doesn't have one.
The one advantage of the Sony DSC-T9 is that it has image stabilization.
I guess I'll wait until I can find a good online deal on either one of them.
What's your budget? |
|
|
| cycler15 |
quote:
Originally posted by SRSEN1999
What's your budget?
Around $325-350. |
|
|
|
