Digital Camera

richlevy · 05-05-2005, 07:33 PM

I might be able to shake loose some money and upgrade from my Canon Powershot 3.2 megapixel to something with more zoom and image stablization.

My one beef is that when I turn off my flash, I get blurry results. Some cameras have a 'best shot' feature where the camera automatically shoots multiple images and selects the best.

I am looking at image stablization, 8 megapixels, and a 7x or greater zoom.

At http://www.dpreview.com/, the finalists are the Minolta A2, the Minolta A200, and the Nikon 8800.

The A200 got slightly better reviews than the A2 at DPREVIEW, but CNET gave the A2 the edge.

I don't want a true SLR, but I do want the best resolution and a better zoom.

If I decide to do without the image stabilization, I could go with the Canon Powershot Pro, which would turn out to be more expensive than the Minoltas but would have the 'best shot' feature.

Does anyone own any of these cameras? Any opinions? I would like this to be the last digital camera I own for the next 10 years.

elSicomoro · 05-05-2005, 07:42 PM

I'm in the hunt for one myself, though I'm not going for anything as expensive as the above 3.

Skunks · 05-05-2005, 07:52 PM

I own an A1. It's a lot of fun; I've since <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/SLRs/at1/">upgraded</a> to a Canon AT-1.

I loved it: sensible user interface, complete control over everything you want to control (and the ability to not control anything, if you want), great results, etc. I imagine a newer model would only be better.

My only real beef, and the only reason I can think of to go to a true digital SLR, is that after a while you'll get sick of having to basically give up any influence on timing. Non-SLR digital cameras have a slow shutter response, whereas SLRs have a very satisfyingly mechanical one. (this might be something I care too much about; I also own a Zippo.)

I wouldn't worry about not having a 'best of' feature. You could reproduce it yourself by learning a little about how the photos suck/what would improve them, and then taking more shots with a range of relevant settings. I've never managed to even half fill the 2.2gb memory card I have, and you're paying pennies per photo (the cost of charging the battery.)

If you intend to make prints of your digital photos, you'd probably be best off with the A2's option for 3:2 aspect ratio. A lot of stores print digital photos fairly cheap (15-25cents for a 4x6), but they almost always do it at preset dimensions, and those dimensions are almost always 3:2. (Until you get up to 8x6, at least.)

Happy Monkey · 05-05-2005, 08:35 PM

Mine's column 4.

LCanal · 05-05-2005, 09:22 PM

What about PowerShot S-70? I'm an IXUS point and shoot guy.

jaguar · 05-06-2005, 04:44 AM

Quote:

My one beef is that when I turn off my flash, I get blurry results.

That's called physics. The only thing that would help that would be a more open lens. You're unlikely to find anything really open on a P&S. Why exactly is 8mpx a pirority? Unless you're printing about 12" there really isn't much point.

LCanal · 05-06-2005, 05:15 AM

Jag,

Enlighten me. If I'm only P&S and only print A4 usually for posters and other times only share on the Internet how many do I need. My current unit is an ancient 1meg first model Ixus

jaguar · 05-06-2005, 05:37 AM

depends on the printer largely. If your'e using a decent printer of glossy paper something about 4mpx is nice.

Happy Monkey · 05-06-2005, 05:48 AM

This is 5 megapixels (click):

<a href="http://photos7.flickr.com/10340564_0e37d64b04_o.jpg" title="Painted Desert"><img src="http://photos7.flickr.com/10340564_0e37d64b04_m.jpg" width="180" height="240" alt="Painted Desert" /></a>

Do you need more or less than that?

richlevy · 05-06-2005, 08:03 PM

Well I took a look at the Konica-Minolta Dimage Z5 , it's 5 megapixel with a 12x optical zoom and image stabilization.

The price is certainly better, more in the 'wow' range.

Quote:

Phil Davis: How much is "wow"?
Bob Wallace: It's right in between, uh, "ouch" and "boing".
Phil Davis: Wow!

I'm considering it.

Happy Monkey · 05-06-2005, 09:25 PM

Looks pretty cool. I'd pick up some rechargeable batteries, though.

richlevy · 05-06-2005, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Looks pretty cool. I'd pick up some rechargeable batteries, though.

That's one of the reason's I like this camera. I already use NIMH AA batteries for my Canon. I like being able to run into any store and pick up alkalines if I haven't charged my batteries.

I would have to buy extra lithium battery packs with some of these other cameras. I can get a 4-pack of NIMH AA batteries for about $10.

richlevy · 05-09-2005, 08:31 PM

Ok, I have narrowed it down. I can get the Konica Minolta Dimage Z5 or the Z20

The Dimage Z20 costs $260 street vs the Z5 $370 street.

Both cameras are 5 MP. The Z5 has 12x vs 8x optical zoom.
The Z5 has image stabilization.
The Z20 has a built-in flash but no external mount. The Z5 has both.
I have heard good reviews on both cameras, although I did here that the Z20 feels more plastic, and that the Z20 tripod threads are plastic, not metal.

The question is am I going to miss the extra zoom and image stabilization? Is it worth $100?

Happy Monkey · 05-09-2005, 08:56 PM

I'd like more zoom than I've got. There's always that bird that's just a bit too far. I don't know much about the stabilization, but it probably would come in handy with a lot of zoom.

Catwoman · 05-10-2005, 08:10 AM

Is it possible to get high quality pics with a cheap standard digi? I can't afford £3000 for the SLR I want so could I get a credit card sized japanese import for a fiver off ebay and still make them look good (when accompanied by a talented eye, naturally)?

05-05-2005, 07:33 PM	#1
richlevy King Of Wishful Thinking Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Philadelphia Suburbs Posts: 6,669	Digital Camera I might be able to shake loose some money and upgrade from my Canon Powershot 3.2 megapixel to something with more zoom and image stablization. My one beef is that when I turn off my flash, I get blurry results. Some cameras have a 'best shot' feature where the camera automatically shoots multiple images and selects the best. I am looking at image stablization, 8 megapixels, and a 7x or greater zoom. At http://www.dpreview.com/, the finalists are the Minolta A2, the Minolta A200, and the Nikon 8800. The A200 got slightly better reviews than the A2 at DPREVIEW, but CNET gave the A2 the edge. I don't want a true SLR, but I do want the best resolution and a better zoom. If I decide to do without the image stabilization, I could go with the Canon Powershot Pro, which would turn out to be more expensive than the Minoltas but would have the 'best shot' feature. Does anyone own any of these cameras? Any opinions? I would like this to be the last digital camera I own for the next 10 years. __________________ Exercise your rights and remember your obligations - VOTE! I have always believed that hope is that stubborn thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us so long as we have the courage to keep reaching, to keep working, to keep fighting. -- Barack Hussein Obama

05-05-2005, 08:35 PM	#4
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Mine's column 4. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

05-05-2005, 09:22 PM	#5
LCanal I hope to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Sumatra Posts: 257	What about PowerShot S-70? I'm an IXUS point and shoot guy. __________________ "Happiness is like sex. In order to get any good out of it, you have to give it to someone else."

05-06-2005, 05:15 AM	#7
LCanal I hope to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Sumatra Posts: 257	Jag, Enlighten me. If I'm only P&S and only print A4 usually for posters and other times only share on the Internet how many do I need. My current unit is an ancient 1meg first model Ixus __________________ "Happiness is like sex. In order to get any good out of it, you have to give it to someone else."

05-06-2005, 05:37 AM	#8
jaguar whig Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 5,075	depends on the printer largely. If your'e using a decent printer of glossy paper something about 4mpx is nice. __________________ Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain

05-05-2005, 07:42 PM	#2
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	I'm in the hunt for one myself, though I'm not going for anything as expensive as the above 3.

05-05-2005, 07:52 PM	#3
Skunks I thought I changed this. Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: western nowhere, ny Posts: 412	I own an A1. It's a lot of fun; I've since <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/SLRs/at1/">upgraded</a> to a Canon AT-1. I loved it: sensible user interface, complete control over everything you want to control (and the ability to not control anything, if you want), great results, etc. I imagine a newer model would only be better. My only real beef, and the only reason I can think of to go to a true digital SLR, is that after a while you'll get sick of having to basically give up any influence on timing. Non-SLR digital cameras have a slow shutter response, whereas SLRs have a very satisfyingly mechanical one. (this might be something I care too much about; I also own a Zippo.) I wouldn't worry about not having a 'best of' feature. You could reproduce it yourself by learning a little about how the photos suck/what would improve them, and then taking more shots with a range of relevant settings. I've never managed to even half fill the 2.2gb memory card I have, and you're paying pennies per photo (the cost of charging the battery.) If you intend to make prints of your digital photos, you'd probably be best off with the A2's option for 3:2 aspect ratio. A lot of stores print digital photos fairly cheap (15-25cents for a 4x6), but they almost always do it at preset dimensions, and those dimensions are almost always 3:2. (Until you get up to 8x6, at least.)

05-06-2005, 05:48 AM	#9
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	This is 5 megapixels (click): <a href="http://photos7.flickr.com/10340564_0e37d64b04_o.jpg" title="Painted Desert"><img src="http://photos7.flickr.com/10340564_0e37d64b04_m.jpg" width="180" height="240" alt="Painted Desert" /></a> Do you need more or less than that? __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

05-06-2005, 09:25 PM	#11
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Looks pretty cool. I'd pick up some rechargeable batteries, though. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

05-09-2005, 08:31 PM	#13
richlevy King Of Wishful Thinking Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Philadelphia Suburbs Posts: 6,669	Ok, I have narrowed it down. I can get the Konica Minolta Dimage Z5 or the Z20 The Dimage Z20 costs $260 street vs the Z5 $370 street. Both cameras are 5 MP. The Z5 has 12x vs 8x optical zoom. The Z5 has image stabilization. The Z20 has a built-in flash but no external mount. The Z5 has both. I have heard good reviews on both cameras, although I did here that the Z20 feels more plastic, and that the Z20 tripod threads are plastic, not metal. The question is am I going to miss the extra zoom and image stabilization? Is it worth $100? __________________ Exercise your rights and remember your obligations - VOTE! I have always believed that hope is that stubborn thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us so long as we have the courage to keep reaching, to keep working, to keep fighting. -- Barack Hussein Obama

05-09-2005, 08:56 PM	#14
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	I'd like more zoom than I've got. There's always that bird that's just a bit too far. I don't know much about the stabilization, but it probably would come in handy with a lot of zoom. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

05-10-2005, 08:10 AM	#15
Catwoman stalking a Tom Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: on the edge of the english channel Posts: 1,000	Is it possible to get high quality pics with a cheap standard digi? I can't afford £3000 for the SLR I want so could I get a credit card sized japanese import for a fiver off ebay and still make them look good (when accompanied by a talented eye, naturally)? __________________ I've decided I'm not going to have a signature anymore.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)