Best kind of digital camera to bring?

[MichelleMaBelle]

Im getting a summer job, and I want to save up for a really good camera for my next Disney family vacation. I like taking really detailed pictures and lots of them. I dont know what model or brand I should get... can anyone help me out? Any recommendations?

 

[MissM]

This is too broad of a question without knowing more about what you want, need, usage, and experience. Try reading some reviews - for example: of http://pcworld.com/resource/infocenter/0,ctrid,4,ic,DigitalCameras,00.asp PC World offers a top ten ten point-and-shoot as well as more advanced and SLR reviews.

More entry level cameras will be cheaper but have less manual controls. Still take good photos suitable for printing, but limited in advanced functionality. Advanced cameras give you control but more cost and more complication of usage. SLR's offer you the mose professional results but with skill level and price to go with it.

It really depends on what you really want and are going to use out of a camera.
-m

 

[Kadee]

I think there was a thread devoted to digital cameras. There are A LOT of great ones. Here are my suggestions for choosing one:

1. SIZE: Yes! It does matter!!! The smaller, the better when in the parks. I HATE carrying around stuff.
2. MEGAPIXELS: Some will tell you that MP's don't matter....Yes they do! The higher the mp's the more you can crop on the computer. I have a Sony that is 7.2 mp's.
3. EASE OF USE: Mine is VERY easy to use. But they ALL take some getting used to. Get it a few weeks before your trip and use the crap out of it! Use it so much that you don't have to "think" about how to use it.
4. BRAND: Not THAT much of a deal, but I would definitely stick to the major brands like Sony, Olympus, Nikon, etc. I would, however, skip Kodak. They are probably the easiest, but the qualitly is no where near the other brands. Canon is good, but I like the three brands above much better.

I hope this helps you pick the one that is right for you. I just LOVE my Sony. I spent a couple of months researching point-n-shoot digitals before making up my mind. ....One more point: Don't even look at "digital zoom"... actually, TURN IT OFF when you get your camera. It is the optical zoom that counts.

 

[Sloan]

details about details

I've recently added a new digital to my options (another Nikon, this one quite small) and am very happy with it, but a word of 'warning' about your desire for detail. When you get in to the high-resolution (high megapixel) cameras, your files (for each photo) are going to be very large - requiring more memory card capacity, and typically, more processing power and storage space on your home machine. Editing these large files on anything other than a relatively modern/fast machine with lots of memory and hard-drive space can be a frustrating experience, as things can tend to really slow down. Also, if you tend to e-mail your photos a lot, whether for sharing or printing, keep in mind that transmission times, even on DSL or cable, can be significant when dealing with the really big files.

I'm not suggesting getting or using a 'low resolution' camera (of course, you can always reduce the image capture size, even on a high-megapixel capable model) just that you keep in mind the requirements for dealing with the really big files.

 

[durangojim]

If you want detailed pics and a camera that can serve you well for years, get a digital slr. However if you want an easy to carry, pocketable camera, check out the Sony DSC-T9 or DSC-T30, these are both ultraslim point and shoots with optical image stabilization. I have a T9 along with the waterproof housing and find it a nice alternative to my EOS 5D when I don't want to lug around a DSLR. If you want to go the SLR route which will give you the ability to shoot in more types of environment than a point and shoot (not necessarily better pics, that depends on the photographer) check out the Canon Digital Rebel XT or the EOS 20D or 30D with a good lens. I prefer Canon DSLRs over Nikon because of the excellent high ISO/low light image quality. Nikon's tend to have more noise. I don't find taking a SLR around Disney is cumbersome, but it definately allows me to get some shots that my p&s would never be able to do. Check out www.dpreview.com for some excellent reviews of many
cameras. Good luck in your purchase. Also if you have a Costco, their return policy is second to none -- if you don't like your digital camera, return it for a full refund. No questions asked. Feel free to email or pm me if you have any questions or want some high res image samples.

 

[ONUpolarbears]

I agree this is a very broad question but I can put down what I use etc.

#1. While I agree megapixels are important. It depends what you want to do with the picture. As the poster above stated, more pixels mean you can crop the picture later to "zoom in on things" or "blow them up" but this will reduce resolution. Now, if you have a 10MP camera, and you crop it down to 5MP, you won't notice, but if you have a 3MP camera and crop it to 1MP....good lord it's going to look bad.

I also agree with the other poster who said getting the most megapixels isn't necessarilly good. As he/she said, the more megapixels, the more space they take up and the bigger/more memory cards you will need.

There is a way around this, that is to get a camera with a good OPTICAL zoom. I personally use the Olympus c-770..which they don't make anymore, but you can get their newer "ultra zoom" cameras. My camera has a 10X zoom (once you've had an ultra zoom you'll never go back) Now, they're small but they're not like the kind you stuff in your pocked, just slightly bigger. It has 4MP. Now the good thing about a camera like this "Good megapixels/high zoom" is if you can zoom in on stuff from a far distance, the less you'll need to crop the picture later. Also, 4MP gives you good resolution.

Now, where megapixels really matter is when you want to print your digital images out to photo paper 4"x6" or 8"x10". If you're planning on printing 4x6's, 3MP is more than enough. I've printed 4"x6"s with a 2.1MP camera and they looked just fine. Now, if you want to print 8x10's (my personal favorite) you really should have at least a 3MP or higher (2MP tends to look fuzzy). You'll be also happy to know I've used my 4MP camera to print poster sized prints that look gorgeous.

I know this is a lot of info but it's just some of the things I look for off the top of my head. A good place to go for camera review is http://www.dcresource.com/
they have all kinds of reviews of digital cameras along with sample images and videos. I find them very helpful.

In the end it's a very broad question. As people have stated earlier, it depends what you want to do. If you want to just take portrait shots and things that you can get up close to, there's really no need for any zoom. But if you want to use the camera for far away things, say, the castle taken from the train station or....non disney related...say you're at a sporting event up in the bleachers and want to zoom in on one specific player....these are good reasons to get an ultra zoom camera. If I had the money, I'd like to have a super small camera and the one I have now since they both have their place If you have any more questions I'd be glad to try to help you out. Just drop me a private message!:wave:

Camera Nut,
Jim

 

[RonAnnArbor]

I second the www.dpreview.com link -- the site does a remarkable job of reviewing digital cameras and comparing one to the other in similar categories.

Also do a search and read the other threads on this in the forum. You will find lots of opinions and thoughts on this. This has been discussed and discussed in this forum.

If money is not an issue, I recommend the new image stabilized ultra portables -- for example, the photos from the Canon sd700 are stunning, and in focus, expecially good for a theme park and the inherent motion therein. The detail and color are stunning.

There is a current trend toward image stabilized cameras ( called IS in digital camera lingo) and megapixels in the 6.1 range -- for a while Megapixels went up and up -- they have returned to the 6 range for the most part - because they offer the best comprimise between excellent photo quality (up to 10 x 15) and savings in memory card.

 

[MichelleMaBelle]

Wow thanks, you all put in alot of info I can use. I know very little about cameras, but everything you said is going to help me find one I need.

Thanks again!

 

[Videoteck]

No offensive people but digitals not all that great, its more lazy than anything ive ever seen, if you really want good pictures you should prolly go with a 12mm FILM camera. As long as you actually know what your doing you should be fine, the pictures so much more crisp, even if you got some black and white film it would look really good.

 

[samshem]

No offensive people but digitals not all that great, its more lazy than anything ive ever seen, if you really want good pictures you should prolly go with a 12mm FILM camera. As long as you actually know what your doing you should be fine, the pictures so much more crisp, even if you got some black and white film it would look really good.

No offense, but might you have a suggestion as to where to get this "12mm" film camera from? I am not an expert in the field of photography, but I have never seen or heard of a 12mm film camera. As for a digital not being all that great, there are plenty of digitals that can hold their own against a film camera and most have the ability to do B&W shots as well. As for a recommendation, like others have said, it all depends on what you are looking for. I personally use a Canon PRO 1 and SD600 and have been very happy with both, but they are two different animals. Once is very compact and the other is quite a bit more bulky with more zoom. As mentioned, dpreview.com is a very good source of info for cameras as is steves-digicams.com. I am not sure what it is you are looking for, but the Canon S3 IS is a camera worth looking into in my opinion. Good luck in your search.

 

[RonAnnArbor]

Hey Samshem! I just upgraded from my Canon Pro 1 to a Digital SLR, but loved the Pro 1....I just bought a Canon s3 is for my partner -- it is a sweet camera - lots of functions of the high-end digitals, in a smaller compact package. But that is exactly the combo I have -- the larger DSLR for closeups and more professional photography, and the canon sd700 to slip into my pocket to take along on a day at the theme parks, etc. (also upgraded from the sd450 which I had for years).

 

[samshem]

Hey Samshem! I just upgraded from my Canon Pro 1 to a Digital SLR, but loved the Pro 1....I just bought a Canon s3 is for my partner -- it is a sweet camera - lots of functions of the high-end digitals, in a smaller compact package. But that is exactly the combo I have -- the larger DSLR for closeups and more professional photography, and the canon sd700 to slip into my pocket to take along on a day at the theme parks, etc. (also upgraded from the sd450 which I had for years).

I am very happy with the Pro 1, but every now and then wish I had a DSLR. At this point I can't justify getting one so I will wait for now. I like the sd700 as well, but if I recall, it is a tad bigger than the sd600 and I was looking for the smallest camera that was still decent. I do like the specs of the sd700 better however.

 

[spectro0294]

i haven't read what others have replied with but personally I like Canon and Nikon. I just bought a Nikon coolpics L3 digital camera, just under $200. I'm planning on getting a Nikon SLR Digital pretty soon. These are bigger and can use a variety of different lenses on them but take very good pictures. It runs around $700. Hope that was some help.

 

[Dukeblue1016]

Let me make it simple but honest...

last summer I bought a cannon powershoot SD400... its unbelievable... I cannot get over how amazing it is!!! I read a few bad reviews online because the LCD screen cracked, but... if you buy this, just buy the $20 leather case to go with it (fits the camera perfect) so that you could keep it in your purse, pocket, or bag and it won't see any affects, slides out very very easily for use

the pictures are BEAUTIFUL, and its one of the smallest cameras on the market... they are expensive though, very expensive... like $400-$500... I'd get a SD400 if you're worried about price

I know a lot of people with the Cannon Powershots... NO ONE is dissappointed


DO IT... DO IT...

 

[lamarvenoy]

I have had 3 different Sony's and my current one is the W1. I'll throw a couple of features to you that make Sony my choice of camera. They are moderately priced and accessories in general are universal for multiple models. The memory cards are readily available and moderately priced and available in large sizes (I currently have a 2GB and can take hundreds or even thousands of very high resolution pics and tons of video) they are pretty durable and the BEST feature by far is its batteries. They come with rechargeable AA batteries and charger. The beauty of this system is when or if your batteries die you can simply use regular AA batteries. This has saved me several times at Disney and even at a wedding when I accidently left the video on and drained the batteries.

 

[Nut4Disney]

I concur. I have a Sony Cybershot and I love it. Very easy to use.

 

[bgraham34]

I had a high end camera that was huge. It took unreal pictures but i just could not keep carrying it around. So i sold it and got a pocket camera with 7.1 mp. I like it. The picture quality is not as good as the other one.

 

[Kadee]

I concur. I have a Sony Cybershot and I love it. Very easy to use.

I have a Sony Cybershot, also....the P200. It is very small and just really easy. The clarity on the photos is incredible. It is 7.2 megapixel, but can be set for 5, 3, or even 1. I usually keep it on 5 for normal shots, but for ones that I know I'm going to crop and zoom in using the computer, I set it on 7. I have a 1Gig memory stick and it holds roughly 275 at 7 mp and about 400 at 5 mp

 

[HauntedPirate]

We used a Canon Digital Rebel XT on our recent trip (a friend loaned it to us). While a bit heavy, it wasn't a burden to carry around. It could take about 3 shots per second, which was awesome for things like LMA, or fireworks (when we could get it to work for fireworks!! :fork: ) It was apparently on the Medium quality setting, and we got about 250-270 pictures per 1GB memory card. It's ready to take pictures within about 2 seconds on being turned on, so it was almost literally point-and-shoot.

We liked it, which means my wife wants something similar, or even the same camera, which runs about $600-700.... (grabs wallet... ouch!) Although I heard about a Canon D3 or something like that, which can take about 7 pictures per second and runs about $1200-1500. Way out of our price range.

 

[nicholas]

We used a Canon Digital Rebel XT on our recent trip (a friend loaned it to us). While a bit heavy, it wasn't a burden to carry around. It could take about 3 shots per second, which was awesome for things like LMA, or fireworks (when we could get it to work for fireworks!! :fork: ) It was apparently on the Medium quality setting, and we got about 250-270 pictures per 1GB memory card. It's ready to take pictures within about 2 seconds on being turned on, so it was almost literally point-and-shoot.

We liked it, which means my wife wants something similar, or even the same camera, which runs about $600-700.... (grabs wallet... ouch!) Although I heard about a Canon D3 or something like that, which can take about 7 pictures per second and runs about $1200-1500. Way out of our price range.

Where did you find a Rebel for so cheap? I was looking into them back when I got a new camera and only found them much closer to a grand or more. Ended up going with the Canon S2 IS, which I am very happy with, but a Rebel would've been nice!