Digital Camera

So what is the best digital camera for £200?

I am a point and shoot type of guy, so nothing that needs lots of knowledge about cameras but I do appreciate good quality images.

I thought the Kodak Z740 looked nice in Argos but its main feature seems to be a good zoom and I don't really need that. I do want a zoom, but I don't need to see the fleas on a dog 30miles away!

I will be doing a lot of indoor shots as well as outside so something that works well in lower lighting conditions as well would be nice.

Thanks for any advice!

 

For £200 Canon do some very nice cameras. I think Kodak are more of a gimicky brand than about raw quality. With cameras I think the same as HIFI applies, you want quality rather than features. A would much rather have a 3 megapixel camera with good lens than a 6 megapixel one with lens made by an unkown brand.

A lot of cheaper digital cameras are very poor at night and I am not sure how a £200 canon would perform under these conditions.

A classic example was Thursday night I was trying to capture pictures of the Thames skyline at night and it wasn't happening.

 

How about £200 second hand?

What do you use AT?

 

I have a Fuji A210, they would be about £70-£80 now for somthing of the same standard. For £200 you should be able to get somthing a lot better. I don't think second hand is worth while for digital cameras as technology is always moving on, battery consumption is getting lower and lower and the quality of CCDs is always increasing.

So unless you can pick up a £200 digital SLR I doubt its worth it.

Wait till after Christmas and you should be able to get a very nice 2005 model for £200 in the sales.

 

Okay then!

Brand/Model suggestions are welcome people!

 

Kodak use some cool OLED technology for the LCD screens, other than that I wouldn't bother.

Try to get one with a view finder and make sure the viewfinder can a. actually be used and b. is not itself a small LCD.

You really want to pick one up to check for shutter speed and start up time, do not concern youreslf with how many pixels, its a bit like Watts in the hifi world.

 

One thing about my camera is it does have a very good manual view finder, its very accurate as well. The LCD view finders use up too much battery power.

The worst thing about camera is probably a low shutter speed. Its 3.2 megapixels and that is more than enough.

 

Well one of things that has made decide I want to get a good camera is that I will be needing to take some photos of my products sooner or later and they may well end up in some magazines so I need it high enough resolution to be printed in a good mag. So I guess nothing less than 5MP but obviously the lens is the most important thing.

A friend of a friend has some sort of SLR digital camera but I thought I may as well get one myself as I have wanted a digital camera for a while.

I remember someone here posted a few pics.. one was of some castle thing outside and I remember thinking wow what good quality! Who was that and what camera was it?!

What do you think of something like this? A cheap SLR

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-MEGXON-C5...574587119QQcategoryZ97007QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Canon-EOS-D60...574786374QQcategoryZ30020QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Fuji-FinePix-...574167317QQcategoryZ31388QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Or this listed under point and shoot
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/FUJI-S5000-DI...574678630QQcategoryZ30012QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem


I am tempted to go for the Fuji FinePix S602. Its only got 2hours left so is this a good one? I can't see a lot about the type of lens on there. It says only 3.2MP but as you say, it is not really so important. I'll look up some reviews.

Thanks

 

Tenson if your intention is for stuff to be published you need a decent digital SLR anything else will look pathetic. And by Decent I am talking a Proper Back with decent lens up front, it is well out of your price range, not to speak of correct lighting and staging.

Usually you would hire someone professional to do this type of thing, a point and shoot will just not do, you will look like a rank amateur.

 

I rather thought that might be the case. Luckily I know two pro photographers very near me.

But.. I have been wanting a digital camera for a while and I thought I might as well give it a go. I have had some pretty damn good results with my Dads old Fujipix thing. About £300 back when he got it but its crap by today's standards. As all I would be taking pictures of is 'objects' I didn't really think it would need to much of a high end camera. Would not be surprised to be very wrong though!

I did some reading tonight and it looks to me like the Nikon D50 and the Sony DSC-F828 are the best in the 'prosumer' market. Both are a bit above my price range when new though and I don't see any s/h.

I think I will leave it for now and see what happens after the new year.

Oh.. what about a real film camera? Are they out-done by a digital camera these days or is there a considerable advantage in picture quality for the same money?

Man, every time I think I found a good camera, I find a few more to look up!

 

Well, if you are not locked into going digital then there are some fantastic bargains in the film world. Have a look on ebay and suchlike for 35mm SLR cameras. Obviously the running costs are a bit higher as you will have to pay for processing and printing, unless you want to learn how to DIY. Remember that you don't have to print every image, just ask the lab to develop the film and do a couple of proof sheets for you. You can then determine from the proofs if you actually want to have one or two of the images printed.

If you would like to learn about photography and aspire to a decent digital camera in the future, starting with a cheap used 35mm SLR can be a good start point and you will be able to re-use the lenses from your film SLR on a digital body when you take thet step later. For example, I've just upgraded to a Pentax *ist DS digital SLR. My old Richo 35mm camera uses the Pentax K lens mount so I'm able to use my old lenses and filters on the new digital body.

The prices that decent 35mm SLRs are going for these days is, in some cases, not too far off loose change. Take your time to research the major brands, choose which system you are happy to buy into and go for it.

Merry Christmas,

Stuart.

 

Stuart although you make a great argument the counter could be that as he wants to go digital, digital is where he should go.

Messing with a trad camera is not going to teach him anything he cannot learn on a digital.

 

True Gary - it's simply a question of budget and intent at this point.

I reckon you learn more on a basic camera that doesn't have all the wizz-bangery of modern cameras. I'm still a bit uncomfortable with all the options on the new camera and actually prefer using an old manual lense as I get the hang of the body. My old one was fully manual, the only electrics being the exposure meter.

I'm off work for a couple of weeks so intend to get out and about with the camera to get back into the swing of things. Been a long time since I last used a camera in anger

Stuart.

 

I got my Olympus 8080 used for $380 on eBay, and it takes incredible 8Mb piccies. Very sturdy, easy to use. It's a *little* slow at focusing in low light, but it's very workable.

 

Messing with a trad camera is not going to teach him anything he cannot learn on a digital.

not quite,learning about light requires a manual aperture,but I doubt many users of digital cameras really care,and don't need to tbh,about learning about the relationship between aperture and shutter speed.I still think its essential though,even with a digital camera,the auto modes don't work all the time.

 

Saab I agree that if you want to become competent you need to learn the basics, however the very first thing to learn is what is a good shot.

You could do that with a picture frame, for someone starting out on this journey today in this century needs to start with Digital camera. Film although superior is all but dead now for the average Joe.

If Tension had the money I would say a digital SLR from the outset, at least he has P mode to start with then once he becomes competent everything else he could want from a camera. But there is not enough money right now.

 

I recently bought a Fuji F10 from Amazon for £189...
It's 6.3Mpixels, very fast to shoot (i.e. very little lag), and most importantly has a 1600ASA equivalent, so it's most excellent in low light.
The only very minor downside is no optical viewfinder, but it does have a 2.5" LCD one, and is easily small pocket sized, but with a chunky feel...
Highly recommended.
And don't forget to buy a spare batttery as they take ~4 hours to charge, and at least 256MB of extra XD card..

 

I think I will leave the pro stuff to the pro’s for now and a little later on get a nice point and shoot for my personal use.

I thought the F10 looked good but I am also taken by the Olympus sp-350. Also has anyone tried one of these Lumicron things?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-8X-OPTICA...75402482QQcategoryZ117091QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

BTW Garyi, my username is Tenson not Tension. Not that I really mind beng called either, but I notice you have called me that a few times! Tenson is a Japanese word meaning 'descendant of God', which I think is a little more flattering than Tension

 

Not if you're a Satanist..
Or an atheist..

 

Well I obviously didn't mean anything as far down the evolutionary scale as a human!