Need to get a fairly cheap digital camera - opinions?

Which Camera?

  • Samsung

    Votes: 2 50.0%
  • Fujifilm

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • Praktica

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Kodak

    Votes: 1 25.0%

  • Total voters
    4

matt_taylor1985

Member
Original Poster
OK so perfect timing. My digital camera has finally packed in a week till we go on holiday to WDW. So I need to pick up a new one and I just need to ask, if you were getting a digital camera at entry level what would be your preference over experience.

I was looking at getting a Kodak, but hear quite often that they can be pretty poor.
 

matt_taylor1985

Member
Original Poster
This is the Samsung I quite fancied:

240x360prodtemplate


  • 12 mega pixels.
  • Samsung lens.
  • 3x zoom lens.
  • 35mm wide angle.
  • 3x optical zoom.
  • 5x digital zoom.
  • 2.5in LCD screen.
  • PictBridge compatible.
  • Digital anti blur.
  • Face detection - up to 10 faces.
  • Continuous shooting.
  • In-camera red eye fix.
  • SD card compatible.
  • Movie capture with sound.
  • Movie playback with sound.
  • Maximum ISO range 80-1600.
  • 12 scene modes.
  • Intelligent scene mode.
  • Smile shutter.
  • Self timer.
  • Built-in flash.
  • USB connection.
  • Accessories included: battery charger, software, cable.
  • Requires Li-ion battery (included).
  • Size (H)5.9, (W)9.4, (D when switched off) 2.1cm.
 

wdwmagic

Administrator
Moderator
Premium Member
Most of the compacts are much of a muchness nowadays. If you've got a good deal on something, may as well go for it. The difference isn't going to be that great amongst the brands at any given price point. When you get to the more expensive stuff it becomes an issue.
 

matt_taylor1985

Member
Original Poster
Most of the compacts are much of a muchness nowadays. If you've got a good deal on something, may as well go for it. The difference isn't going to be that great amongst the brands at any given price point. When you get to the more expensive stuff it becomes an issue.

Yeah totally. The cameras I've looked at are more or less spec for spec. If I had a tond of money I'd love an SLR - there's always the lottery! :shrug:
 

CAPTAIN HOOK

Well-Known Member
You say money is tight - but isn't the purchase of a cheap camera just false economy ? What happens when you get back and are wanting to replace your old camera with one of a similar spec - you're laying out two lots of cash for two cameras - one of which will be stuck in a drawer somewhere
 

BigRedDad

Well-Known Member
MP are meaningless. If you are looking for a cheap camera, buy any one in your price range. They are all going to perform mediocre at best. You can get them as cheap as $39 and all the way up to several $100. Try to determine how important those moments are to you and how much you are willing to spend on them. It is far too hard for anyone to recommend a camera on an extremely tight budget. The less you spend, the more you sacrifice in most cases.
 

matt_taylor1985

Member
Original Poster
MP are meaningless. If you are looking for a cheap camera, buy any one in your price range. They are all going to perform mediocre at best. You can get them as cheap as $39 and all the way up to several $100. Try to determine how important those moments are to you and how much you are willing to spend on them. It is far too hard for anyone to recommend a camera on an extremely tight budget. The less you spend, the more you sacrifice in most cases.

Whilst I get what you're saying, I think that's a bit unfair. It's kind of like saying obviously moments to me aren't as important as they are to someone who spends hundreds to thousands on SLR's.
 

wdwmagic

Administrator
Moderator
Premium Member
You can get some great photos with some of the compact point and shoots. You might not be able to print them at A3, but for online use, or for 6x4s, they can certainly deliver the goods.

Higher MPs can be very handy for making a crop.

Go for what you can get at a good price, and for something that handles the way you want it to.
 

WDWFigment

Well-Known Member
The difference in performance between 8 MP and 12 MP on an entry level digital camera is ziltch. There is not going to be a noticeable benefit from the standpoint of cropping because, by the time the difference became meaningful, you'd run into noise issues.

If it were me, I'd actually go for a 6 MP entry level P&S over a 12 MP just because the files will take up so much less space, and you don't get much of a benefit from 12 MP over 6.

My point--megapixels are largely a marketing gimmick...that has really worked for some reason!
 

matt_taylor1985

Member
Original Poster
Really, now I've ordered the 12MP Samsung I can just switch the setting down to about 8MP to save some space, but on the sbuject. Really what is the big difference in MP's? Do you actually notice anything different by using a higher spec of MP's. As I say I would love to get an SLR but this is really a 'in the mean time' camera.
 

matt_taylor1985

Member
Original Poster
Can of worms. This debate has been going on since digital cameras were invented. In the early days you could see the lack of definition say of a 0.3MP camera on a small print, the colours were bad as well. These days, on a small print of A4 or less you would find it hard to see the difference. Canon is expected to release the 1Ds MkIV soon with 32MP, so what's called the megapixel race isn't over yet. Nikon has a 24.5MP D3x which is seriously expensive. MP is a factor but it depends on other things as well, it's a long story.

Further reading; http://www.bythom.com/printsizes.htm

Cool, well I was happy with the photos I took on my old 8MP Samsung, so I'm sure I'll be fine with this one. I'm not a full blown photography enthusiast, but love to be in the future. I do like to play around though with angles and placement of images, so maybe in the future I can get an SLR.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom