What digital camera ?

phoeniXflame · 04-29-2003, 11:58 AM

I'd really like to buy a digital camera, but I'm pretty clueless with digital photography :| I have about £160 ish to spend, I was looking at this one http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...329470-8146005 but as I said, I dont really have much of a clue :| any recommendations ?

moses · 04-29-2003, 02:13 PM

I recommend buying a camera from an established camera manufacturer, one who knows about optics rather than a camera from an electronics company. (e.g., Nikon rather than Sony)
I REALLY like my Nikon CoolPix 995, but I think it would break your bank (I don't know what they're running for now).

mcleodnine · 04-29-2003, 03:57 PM

Yeah moses pretty much nailed it. I wanted the Nikon, but I wound up with the Sony. One good thing I can say about the Sony is that a) i like the memory sticks and b) it works great in Linux. Oh. That's two things.

MasterC · 04-29-2003, 07:16 PM

Rarely, but I disagree. I think Sony did/does a great job with their optics. They may be newer to the business, but that doesn't mean they are any less of a competitor. They have Vario Sonar, Carl Zeiss backing them (although I am an extreme amatuer I do believe those are good things

). As for whether it's as good as/better or worse than the Nikon I don't know; but I don't think they are exactly one to "rule out" simply based on a lack of Optical History...

Cool

darin3200 · 04-29-2003, 08:28 PM

I have had good expierence with fujifilm. I have a A200 finepix. Takes nice pics. Built strong to. I was looking at a picture I had just took and it fell out of my had and on to the cement sidewalk and memory card came out but I put it back in and it worked.

moses · 04-29-2003, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MasterC
Rarely, but I disagree. I think Sony did/does a great job with their optics. They may be newer to the business, but that doesn't mean they are any less of a competitor. They have Vario Sonar, Carl Zeiss backing them (although I am an extreme amatuer I do believe those are good things :D ). As for whether it's as good as/better or worse than the Nikon I don't know; but I don't think they are exactly one to "rule out" simply based on a lack of Optical History...

Cool

I eat crow. Sony was a bad electronics company to (ignorantly) use in my comparison. I didn't do my homework, and I was wrong not to.
Anyway, Sony has, indeed, bought the right to use a very well designed optics system for their digital cameras, but I believe my statement, in general, still stands. If you want good pictures, go with a decent optics system first.

Brain Drop · 04-30-2003, 12:25 AM

i have a medion 4.1 mega pixel, i dont know much about the company and they dont have much info on their web site, but it takes good pictures uses compact flash and i got it at a yard sale for $70. i havent tried it on linux yet but will soon. looks like it willl work i think. if you find one for that price i recomend it but sometimes(because of the website?) i feel like im the only person in the world who has this camera.

glyph · 04-30-2003, 02:02 AM

my sony mavica took really nice pictures in high light situations, but was always grainy for indoor photography.

i have a olympus that always seems to do the job.

the only thing i would want in a camera now is that it is small enough to carry around in your pocket. a screen is a necessary feature - so you can delete unwanted pics. AA batterys are a desirable feature also. usb drive so you don't have to worry about additional software or compatibility with linux.

moses · 04-30-2003, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by glyph
my sony mavica took really nice pictures in high light situations, but was always grainy for indoor photography.

i have a olympus that always seems to do the job.

the only thing i would want in a camera now is that it is small enough to carry around in your pocket. a screen is a necessary feature - so you can delete unwanted pics. AA batterys are a desirable feature also. usb drive so you don't have to worry about additional software or compatibility with linux.

I think litium-ion batteries are the way to go. They last much longer than AAs, and if you buy a second one, you don't have to fumble around with a package of batteries when you need a replacement, just pop the dead one out and put the new one in. When you get home, you can recharge them both. No mess, no fuss.

Genesee · 04-30-2003, 11:26 AM

Olympus makes excellent products - I recommend them highly.

mcleodnine · 04-30-2003, 11:49 AM

glyph - my brother is pretty happy with his Canon. I don't recall the model but it was shirt-pocket small. Heavy, too.

moses - yeah lithium batteries are a must, or at the very least NiMH rechargables. I plunked CDN$170 on a charger and infoLithium battery for my Sony last summer and it's already paid for itself.

glyph · 04-30-2003, 01:12 PM

glyph - my brother is pretty happy with his Canon. I don't recall the model but it was shirt-pocket small. Heavy, too.

i saw the new canons in the store......that's what i want. i have a elf 370z film camera and it takes nice pictures.

Whitehat · 04-30-2003, 03:22 PM

I think Kodak does a good job. I have a 1MP Kodak DC220 and it is real nice. It's about 2-3 years old, but I'd buy another Kodak for sure.

Peace...