"Starter" digital camera?

[footlongish]

So your entire digital camera experience is based on using one (a P&S) on a vacation for a week ?

Was this a sub $200 camera like you are telling the OP to get ? If it was really a Nikon, I doubt it.

 

[glynndah]

My, oh, my! What a lively bunch you all are! It was rather like asking a crew of astrophysicists about "Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star". Way, way above my head. However, sometimes I caught a word or two I understood. (I feel so proud!)

Thanks to everyone who responded in such a timely and spirited fashion. I was a little bit worried that some of you would resort to violence to get your points across, but I trust that everyone has calmed down by now.

I think that I'll probably start asking friends about their cameras and maybe buy a really cheap model that I can consider as basically consider as disposable as a trainer one. *steps back and waits for the clash of the keyboards once again*

 

[Texguy84]

Thanks to everyone who responded in such a timely and spirited fashion. I was a little bit worried that some of you would resort to violence to get your points across, but I trust that everyone has calmed down by now.

*hiding the freshly-sharpened battle-axe behind his back*

What, us? Resort to violence? Heh-heh. Funny thought. *nervous cough*

 

[Texguy84]

So your entire digital camera experience is based on using one (a P&S) on a vacation for a week ?

Was this a sub $200 camera like you are telling the OP to get ? If it was really a Nikon, I doubt it.

*sigh*, Did I say that was my entire digital camera experience? No. You asked about the digital cameras that I have owned.

I've played with a variety of digital cameras, including both Canon and Nikon DSLRs (including the very nice and VERY expensive Canon 1D) and even some Medium format digital cameras (though I only got to play with those for a few seconds at a trade show). I'm known among my friends as being the sort of guy to borrow their digital camera and run around with it for several hours taking pictures like mad, messing with different settings, etc. And the P&S digital camera that I breifly owned was a Nikon Coolpix P2, which was on sale for $199 at the time, if that matters to you.

Mostly, the cameras I own right now (Two Asashi Pentax Spotmatics, a Pentax K-1000, a Canon Rebel SII, and a Fujifilm APS point-and-shoot) are all film cameras since the kind of digital camera I want to get (the Canon 20D) is still outside of my price range.

I also forgot to mention a couple of older, less capable cameras that I've owned or had oppertunity to borrow extensively. One shot in 640x480, the other in 1024x768 (interestingly enough, the first one was the better one, also including a flash and being less dependent on the camera being held totally still). These are so old and outdated as to not even be worth mentioning here. Similarly, my dad's Sony Mavica digital camera, a large greyish brick with a lens and a preview screen, using 3.5" floppies for storage media, is probably also not relevant to the discussion.

 

[Weird Harold]

...Similarly, my dad's Sony Mavica digital camera, a large greyish brick with a lens and a preview screen, using 3.5" floppies for storage media, is probably also not relevant to the discussion.

The Sony Mavica that used 3.5" floppies is relevant in that it illustrates my earlir point about cameras designed by engineers and programmers -- it didn't have a view-finder and epitomizes FL's point about the difficulty in taking a good picture when you have to hold the camera at arm's length.

I haven't seen many currently available cameras that don't have a view-finder but no view-finder is a serious defiency that should be avoided.

The SONY Mavica line moved on to using mini-CDRW disks instead of floppies and became more photographer-friendly, but I haven't seen one for about three years. The last Mavica I saw was my neighbor's and it was a fairly nice mid-range camera except for the mini-CD storage.

I think that I'll probably start asking friends about their cameras and maybe buy a really cheap model that I can consider as basically consider as disposable as a trainer one. *steps back and waits for the clash of the keyboards once again*

Asking friends is a good place to get the information that isn't given in the product specifications and documentation -- things like battery life, red-eye problems, ease of use, etc.

However, despite my insistance that you don't need to spend a month's rent -- or two or three months' rent -- on a camera, do NOT choose a camera on price alone. "Disposable" class cameras, like the $20 Vivatars I bought my granddaughters, are good cameras for kids but they're the functional equivalent of the disposable 35mm cameras sold in gift shops and convenience stores.

 

[Texguy84]

The Sony Mavica that used 3.5" floppies is relevant in that it illustrates my earlir point about cameras designed by engineers and programmers -- it didn't have a view-finder and epitomizes FL's point about the difficulty in taking a good picture when you have to hold the camera at arm's length.

Actually, I rather like my dad's Mavica, takes decently good pictures, and since it uses floppies, my mom doesn't need much help in figuring out how to get the pictures onto her computer.

However, despite my insistance that you don't need to spend a month's rent -- or two or three months' rent -- on a camera, do NOT choose a camera on price alone. "Disposable" class cameras, like the $20 Vivatars I bought my granddaughters, are good cameras for kids but they're the functional equivalent of the disposable 35mm cameras sold in gift shops and convenience stores.

Yeah, as has been said before, you get what you pay for, most times. In general, I'd avoid Vivitar digital cameras. That company has made some good stuff in the past (including the Vivitar 283, one of the most highly regarded hotshoe camera flashes I've heard of), and it has made a lot of lemons too. Just get something you can afford that is from a respectable camera company (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Konica Minolta, Kodak, etc.) Kodak particularly has a reputation for capable, very easy to use digital cameras.

 

[glynndah]

But I've gotten some great pictures from those cheap disposable cameras! Okay, okay. I'll stop whining now and let the Clash of the Keyboard continue.
Nice battle-axe, by the way.

 

[Texguy84]

Nice battle-axe, by the way.

Thankee, I polish it three times a day.

Er..

Wait, we aren't using metaphors or innuendos or anything, are we?

 

[footlongish]

to borrow their digital camera and run around with it for several hours taking pictures like mad

Hilarious ! This makes you knowledgeable, suitable to give advice to a novice about what camera to buy ?

What you really need to do to fully understand this situation is buy a crappy camera and use it for a few years and then buy a good camera and come to the realization "Why the hell didn't I guy a good camera in the first place !" Trust me, I've been there.

I had 3 and 5 MP cameras that probably kick the $200 camera you seem to want to recommend. And now I look back at the pictures taken with those POS cameras and say, if only I would have had a good camera ! Fortunately I had a film SLR too and I've got some shots with it, so not all is wasted.

You know the saying about how it doesn't pay to buy poor shoes ? Well it goes doubly or triply for cameras ! Buy a decent camera ! Save $200 or $400 some other place in your life !

You've been warned.

Last night my friend send me a great picture of her 3 girls on a background of golden leaves. Her youngest is 3. Taken with a Canon 2IS, that she bought when it first came on the market. Smart woman ! Nice camera. She doesn't use all the features, but that camera has a good sensor, a good lens, decent noise for a non DSLR, good focus and good build quality which SHE USES FOR EVERY SHOT SHE TAKES ! That is what you get when you pay more for a camera ! Her youngest daughter will only be 3 years old in the fall leaves once !

And in case you think I am trumpetting Canon cameras, I shoot with Nikon cameras !

 

[footlongish]

This is what happens when you use a decent camera.

Yesterday we were out at the Dog park shooting some pics and my wife looked at me and stated that she loved my camera! Infact she loves it so much she stated she wanted to keep it and me purchase something else for myself since she is scrapbooking.

Notice the wife isn't complaining about not being able to see the subject. Because good cameras have good viewfinders.

Notice she isn't complaining about not being able to fire the shots with the dogs in the frame. Because good cameras are responsive.

Notice she didn't change her mind when she got home. Good cameras have good image quality.

Notice the batteries didn't go dead. Because good cameras have good battery life.

Notice she wants to use the camera to do some scrapbooking. She isn't a photographer. She just wants memories of her life.

She isn't complaining the camera is too complicated. Nobody says you have to use all the features. The dogs won't tell if you don't ! Just turn it on and press the shutter.

I don't know how to explain the situation any clearer than that. When you buy a shit camera, that is what you get. And its totally false economy to think you saved money or "got a deal".

Source of the quote is here.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=20376004

Its for a Nikon product, but Canon, Pentax, Olympus and Sony all make good cameras.

 

[Texguy84]

I had 3 and 5 MP cameras that probably kick the $200 camera you seem to want to recommend.

Kick it.. where? I'm just confused now. You might want to calm down and take a few moments to re-read your posts before hitting the submit key, makes it easier for people to follow what you're talking about.

 

[footlongish]

kick their ass. Figure it out.

 

[Texguy84]

kick their ass. Figure it out.

Ahh. OK, I understand that part now, thankee!

 

[5pintshefound]

This is what happens when you use a decent camera.



Notice the wife isn't complaining about not being able to see the subject. Because good cameras have good viewfinders.

Notice she isn't complaining about not being able to fire the shots with the dogs in the frame. Because good cameras are responsive.

Notice she didn't change her mind when she got home. Good cameras have good image quality.

Notice the batteries didn't go dead. Because good cameras have good battery life.

Notice she wants to use the camera to do some scrapbooking. She isn't a photographer. She just wants memories of her life.

She isn't complaining the camera is too complicated. Nobody says you have to use all the features. The dogs won't tell if you don't ! Just turn it on and press the shutter.

I don't know how to explain the situation any clearer than that. When you buy a shit camera, that is what you get. And its totally false economy to think you saved money or "got a deal".

Source of the quote is here.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=20376004

Its for a Nikon product, but Canon, Pentax, Olympus and Sony all make good cameras.

baby, you seriously need to step down, and take a prozac..

ur gettin pissy over something that you have no choice.. u gave your opinion. repeatedly. infact, i dare say that horse is dead because u beat it to death with ur dslr.

Glynndah-- IMHO, {this coming from me-- a semi-pro photographer} look for a digi that feels good, has at least 4 mp {i suggest the canon a610-a620 series} mayhaps a digi zoom on it. unless u want to start learning photography hardcore. I personally own a Canon digital rebel xt, and i LOVE my camera. I want to start my own photog business also. I love my camera. I love the special features that it has that a PnS doesnt have. But! WierdHarold {hey there!} has made an excellent point about the size.. my camera bag is larger than a backpack, and in it, i have my xt, 4 lenses, and various filters, batteries, a reflector,& my laptop. sometimes- its a pain in teh ass to carry around... there are times that i wished i had something smaller-- just for ease of carrying. also, the a610 & a620 have some artistic selectiosn on it, such as macro, action, etc.. theyre well worth the money...

i got my camera set a year ago, and i spent $1300 on it.. that was for cam, 2 lens, 1 set of filters, 1 gig cf card, and a bag so it IS a healthy investment. and me personally??i bought the extended warranty.. I live in Cuba. i dont get to the states very often... and my warranty that i got {its a MACK warranty} covers everything except saltwater damage.... In april i sent my camera off to mack only to realize, doh! the canon warranty hadnt ended yet {mack started up the day canons ended} and, it cost me $200 to get the cam fixed... because it was impact damage, wasnt covered under the canon warranty. if it had been after the canon warranty expired, mack would have covered it-- every penny except $20 for shipping...


there is a lot of great information on here, and if you can read past the ugliness, most everyone seems to say the same thing... the one piece of advice i think is the most important??

buy the most camera that you can afford. Its great having a higher end cam, but if it puts a strain on ur finances, is it really worth it? having a digital is awesome, because theres no or minor developing fees, and you can see what you have immediately. just remember, there will ALWAYS be a bigger badder model out there.. thats just the nature of the beast.

~5PHF
{ps, if you are interested in seeing shots of cuba, PM me, }

 

[TheCurious]

After the first dozen responses it all turned into a bunch of blah blah blah techno nonsense which I get more than enough of on the occasional photography forum I bother to read.

If you'd like an SLR camera I'll give you some frank advice.

Pick up a Nikon D50. It'll shoot more than you'll ever need and everything you -do- need. For around $500 you'll get a durable, quick shooting, versatile camera that you can purchase additional lenses for and upgrade in the future.

If you want a pocket camera I've got no advice I shoot event, portrait, and weddings and I haven't owned a "stuff in the pocket" camera in years.

 

[footlongish]

But! WierdHarold {hey there!} has made an excellent point about the size.. my camera bag is larger than a backpack, and in it, i have my xt, 4 lenses, and various filters, batteries, a reflector,& my laptop. sometimes- its a pain in teh ass to carry around... there are times that i wished i had something smaller-- just for ease of carrying.

Sheesh ! Care to brag about all the equipment you own ?

Before you CONFUSE everyone with how big a DSLR and its equipment is, try comparing apples to apples. Most consumer cameras in the price range they are talking about are 3x ish zoom. No primes, no teles, no external flash, no extra batteries, no reflector and no laptop. A plain Rebel and ONE lens isn't that much larger than a 3IS and it does one hell of a lot more. And most DSLRs have better battery life than a consumer camera. Just saying.

If you really want to make this a fair comparison, you should mention that the lens on the Rebel will kick the 3IS, not to mention what they might buy for $200. And the flash on the Rebel will kill the 3IS as well. Not to mention you can't even put an external flash on a 3IS.

I really like the idea of buying a D50. If you are budget conscious buy a used one. Put it in Auto and fire away. The first digital Rebels are inexpensive used and fine cameras to boot.

I guarantee you that you will want to replace your $200 camera in a year and it will be worthless then.

Good Luck

 

[Texguy84]

Well, the Canon PowerShot S3 IS (which is the closest thing to a Canon 3IS I could find using Google, a Ouiji Board, and a hunting dog) is a beast among point-and-shoot digitals. That's kinda like saying "Well, a Chevy Tahoe isn't THAT much bigger than a Cadilac Deville." You can get a MUCH smaller camera for $300, if size is that important to you.

That said, looking at the manual for my Canon Rebel, an old film SLR, if you use flash for every picture, the battery life is only something like 12 rolls of film. Unless battery technology has improved a lot since then, I can't see a Digital SLR being THAT much better (then again, for all I know, the film winder could have been what was eating the batteries this whole time). You can't save battery life by using an external flash unless you buy an external flash, and those things can often cost as much as a point-and-shoot digital camera anyways.

As for comperative lens performance, I haven't seen how the Canon kit lens (what do they include with a Rebel nowadays, an 18-55 lens?) compares to the lens in a S3, but I do know that the kit lens for my own Canon (an older 35-85) is loud when autofocusing, and feels very cheaply made, at least compared to the 75-300 USM lens that I have (but that's probably apples and oranges again, since the USM lenses are Canon's higher-end line of zooms).

As for buying a Canon Rebel or a Nikon D50 or a Hasselblad H1, I think it should really depend on the OP's needs and budget. If she has $800 lying around, and if she thinks she might enjoy photography as a serious hobby, then by all means she should pick up a Rebel or a D50 and a nice hotshoe bounce flash to go with it. If she can't spend more than $2-300 in a single splurge, then she might be better off getting a point-and-shoot.

Of course, if she DOES decide to buy the Rebel, I'd suggest she wait a bit until the 10MP Rebel XTi hits the market, then she can pick up one of the older 6MP XTs online for less once the prices drop.

 

[footlongish]

Well, the Canon PowerShot S3 IS (which is the closest thing to a Canon 3IS I could find using Google, a Ouiji Board, and a hunting dog) is a beast among point-and-shoot digitals. That's kinda like saying "Well, a Chevy Tahoe isn't THAT much bigger than a Cadilac Deville." You can get a MUCH smaller camera for $300, if size is that important to you.

Yeah, its a beast. It weighs 410g or a little under 1 pound ! Better hit the gym ! Its also got a decent lens and a good sensor and its large enough to be comfortable to use !

That said, looking at the manual for my Canon Rebel, an old film SLR, if you use flash for every picture, the battery life is only something like 12 rolls of film. Unless battery technology has improved a lot since then, I can't see a Digital SLR being THAT much better (then again, for all I know, the film winder could have been what was eating the batteries this whole time). You can't save battery life by using an external flash unless you buy an external flash, and those things can often cost as much as a point-and-shoot digital camera anyways.

So many things wrong in that statement, I don't know where to start !

a) digital SLRs use a different, larger, higher capacity battery than does a film SLR. They have a processor and LCD and imager to power.

b) the battery life of cameras varies a lot, but the good ones will take hundreds of pictures with the flash before needing a recharge. Some of the DSLRs can take over a thousand pictures without the flash before needing a recharge.

c) the S3IS happens to use 4 AA batteries and is rated for 560 shots using a combination of camera settings, including image stabilization. Not many days you'll be shooting more than 500 shots a day.

d) 90% of most point and shoot cameras can't take an external flash because they don't have a flash hotshoe. Which is one reason I think they are terrible for indoor photos, but that is another story.

As for comperative lens performance, I haven't seen how the Canon kit lens (what do they include with a Rebel nowadays, an 18-55 lens?) compares to the lens in a S3, but I do know that the kit lens for my own Canon (an older 35-85) is loud when autofocusing, and feels very cheaply made, at least compared to the 75-300 USM lens that I have (but that's probably apples and oranges again, since the USM lenses are Canon's higher-end line of zooms).

Just had to brag about your lens, didn't you ?

Modern (D)SLR lenses are virtually silent. Some kit lenses might feel a bit cheap but they work well.

Of course, if she DOES decide to buy the Rebel, I'd suggest she wait a bit until the 10MP Rebel XTi hits the market, then she can pick up one of the older 6MP XTs online for less once the prices drop.

The XTi has been on the market for a few weeks. The XT was an 8MP camera, also called the 350D. There was no 6MP XT. The original Rebel was called the 300D. It is a 6MP camera. Being 2 generations old, it is available used for a bargain and its a good beginners camera.

 

[SweetErika]

Sheesh ! Care to brag about all the equipment you own ?

Before you CONFUSE everyone with how big a DSLR and its equipment is, try comparing apples to apples. Most consumer cameras in the price range they are talking about are 3x ish zoom. No primes, no teles, no external flash, no extra batteries, no reflector and no laptop. A plain Rebel and ONE lens isn't that much larger than a 3IS and it does one hell of a lot more. And most DSLRs have better battery life than a consumer camera. Just saying.

Why would you assume 5Pints is bragging? I've read 5P's posts since she came here, and while they're not always a shining example of clarity, neither she nor her husband are braggarts. My impression is she just tries to explain as much as possible so people know what they're dealing with, and sometimes that means the appearance of superflous details.

Your hostility is unnecessary, and really a displeasure (for I'm sure many/most in here) to read. As you continue in this thread, you're painting yourself as a pompous, angry, argumentative bastard. That's fine on the GB, but don't expect to get far with it here. It seems like you really want people to listen to you, so you'd be wise to try a style of communication that's easier on the ears and more effective than your current one. Gottman's basic principles are applicable to ALL relationships, you know - some practice here may even lead to more success at home. Trying to practice what you preach won't do you any harm.

 

[5pintshefound]

Why would you assume 5Pints is bragging? I've read 5P's posts since she came here, and while they're not always a shining example of clarity, neither she nor her husband are braggarts. My impression is she just tries to explain as much as possible so people know what they're dealing with, and sometimes that means the appearance of superflous details.

.

LOL!!! my dear, youve captured us perfectly... i needed a laugh after all that mess.. thanks so much for giving it to me! lol, L5P came in from the other room to find out why i was laughing so much!

~5PHF

 

[SweetErika]

LOL!!! my dear, youve captured us perfectly... i needed a laugh after all that mess.. thanks so much for giving it to me! lol, L5P came in from the other room to find out why i was laughing so much!

~5PHF

I'm glad you took it as intended, with good humor... I think I only thought of it because you've said as much in the past, and you may have noticed I'm hardly succinct myself.

 

[Texguy84]

a) digital SLRs use a different, larger, higher capacity battery than does a film SLR. They have a processor and LCD and imager to power.

Fair enough, so that files under "improvement of battery technology". In this case, making the battery bigger.

b) the battery life of cameras varies a lot, but the good ones will take hundreds of pictures with the flash before needing a recharge. Some of the DSLRs can take over a thousand pictures without the flash before needing a recharge.

That's all well and good, but in my experience, you generally need to use flash for most indoor photos, unless you have a very fast, very nice lens, such as my Super Multi-Coated Takumar 50mm 1/1.4 Automatic Screwmount Lens (that WAS me bragging about my equipment. Wooo, I can knock skyscrapers down with THIS photography penis!)

d) 90% of most point and shoot cameras can't take an external flash because they don't have a flash hotshoe. Which is one reason I think they are terrible for indoor photos, but that is another story.

Simple solution for that, actually. Just get a slave adaptor for the hotshoe flash. Here is one from Vivitar, that website has a bunch of other brands available, but they all go for around $30 it seems. Basically, when your on-camera flash goes off, the little light sensor on the adaptor detects it and triggers the flash it's attached to. Play with the flash and the manual settings on the camera to figure out how you need it set up to work.

Most point-and-shoot cameras I've seen include a standard tripod mount on the bottom (the little screw hole), so you can set up the flash on a special bracket that screws into the tripod mount for those times when you need the flash attached to the camera. It's a bit of fuss, but it works pretty well once you set it up. Here is a good example of one on eBay, for about $25 with shipping and handling.

Modern (D)SLR lenses are virtually silent. Some kit lenses might feel a bit cheap but they work well.

Modern DSLRs sound like a chimpanzee beating an intern with a frying pan once you compare them to a digital point-and-shoot or a Rangefinder camera (of course, good Rangefinders, such as the Leica M6, are ridiculously expensive, but they're so quiet, you can barely hear the shutter go off while holding the camera to take the picture.)

The XTi has been on the market for a few weeks. The XT was an 8MP camera, also called the 350D. There was no 6MP XT. The original Rebel was called the 300D. It is a 6MP camera. Being 2 generations old, it is available used for a bargain and its a good beginners camera.

Ahh, that's good to know. Wonder when Canon will come out with the Prosumer and Professional equivilants of it.

 

[glynndah]

SweetErika, please step back a bit. I know you mean well but I think you're right in the path of the swinging weaponry. Those battle axes have a wicked trajectory. I'm trying to just let them all fight it out now. I'll come back later and sweep up, if necessary.

 

[Texguy84]

SweetErika, please step back a bit. I know you mean well but I think you're right in the path of the swinging weaponry. Those battle axes have a wicked trajectory. I'm trying to just let them all fight it out now. I'll come back later and sweep up, if necessary.

Well, if you pick through the carnage, there really is some good advice on both sides being bandied about.

An addendum on my advice for the flash bracket: This might be of limited use for taking pictures up close, where the camera's built in flash would be lighting up the scene anyways, but would be handy for longer-distance shots (the more powerful hotshoe flashes have better range), and if you have a flash with an adjustable bounce head, you can bounce the flash off the ceiling or walls to try and minimize the really dark shadows that can form behind people with built-in flashes. You could also set up the flash off to the side (on a special stand or with someone holding it) to get whatever lighting you want. I've known folks who set up a second flash just to highlight someone's hair, or to shine on the background behind them to keep shadows from showing up in the picture.

Really, whatever you get, have fun with it, and see what you can do.

 

[lost5pints]

I've read 5P's posts since she came here, and while they're not always a shining example of clarity, neither she nor her husband are braggarts.

LOL.....Its wonderfull that it was not me posting.....my posts have the consistency of a pre school full of ADHD children that have been fed a constant diet of Jolt Cola, powdered donuts and candy corn.....really just collections of random thoughts most of the time.....

Seriosly Glynndah.....go shopping.......pick up and feel how the various cameras of whatever type you are interested in.......find the one that feels good.....than go back to the house...and find the best price you can online for what you liked.....and enjoy......because it is YOUR camera and thats what matters more than any technical jargon.....good luck


L5P's