What Camera is right for me?

[Mawg]

I’m looking at buying a new camera and don’t really know what’s appropriate. I currently have an Old Sony Cybershot 8 MP. It has served its purpose over the years but my wife and I want to take a step up even if it’s a little bulkier. What we don’t like about it anymore: We can’t get pictures off fast enough, it takes too long to focus, Pictures in low to no light are a challenge. Basically, we want to capture the moment quickly and in low light without thinking about what settings we should use. Perhaps a camera we can play around with and experiment with different settings would be nice like trying to capture some fireworks or moving water would be nice but not as important as being super-fast, reliable and work inside and in low light well. We are not trying to start a new hobby as we do not have time in our lives to become any type of amateur photographers. The last requisite is we want to stay under $500. Any suggestions out there?

 

[fractal]

decent place to start...btw, pictures in low to no light are a challenge no matter what camera you buy.

http://www.reviewgist.com/best-digital-cameras?Price=Under+$500

 

[wiigirl]

decent place to start...btw, pictures in low to no light are a challenge no matter what camera you buy.

http://www.reviewgist.com/best-digital-cameras?Price=Under $500

Thats an awesome site! Thanks!

 

[thomas998]

First question you need to ask yourself is whether you want the hassle of a DSLR camera or if you are dead set on a point and shoot all in one camera. This will dictate your choice quite a bit, and know up front that your quest for low light and no light photos is the biggest problem with your budget.

The taking photos of fireworks and running water isn't really anything to worry about because nearly any camera with even the most primitive manual controls can do those things it is a matter of knowing what setting to use.

As for taking fast photos, many can take very fast photos when you don't need a flash... but if you are talking about fast photos in low light then you are also talking about needing an add on flash. I have yet to see a point and shoot with a flash that cycles quickly enough for anyone to think it was fast or even adequate.

Also think about the sensor size the larger the sensor size even in a point and shoot the better the photos are likely to be, and I don't mean the number of pixels. Look for the actual size of the sensor. In point and shoots it can range from 1/2.5 inches to 1/1.7 inches... those might not seem like very big differences, but when it comes to the quality of the photo it matters... The closer you get to 1/1.7 the better the photo will be... the smaller sensors will have more grain and generally perform much worse in low light.

 

[KeithVH]

The things you want are what everyone else wants too. But remember this. Even paying a lot more than $500 might not even get you all the requirements on your list.

First off, realize that there will be trade-offs. You may want to rank what is most important to you. You might find a camera that does everything you need but takes 20 seconds to write one shot to the card. Is that worth it? And so on.

Secondly, <$500 is still pretty much considered consumer goods. If it fails (not saying it will) it'll be cheaper to replace it than to fix it. So don't stress too much on perfection. Panasonic will get you the most bang for your buck, feature-wise; Canon and Nikon are pretty much the standard in overall quality. I would focus on no more than those three brands as you're probably looking at a good 50+ models anyway. Just do some reading and research. For example, if you just HAVE to have a good flash, you go with Nikon - their exposure algorithms for flash are pretty much the gold standard. For image quality, from a sensor standpoint, Canon seems to have an edge. It goes on and on.

And unless you really feel you need an SLR, stick with the smaller cams. It's amazing how heavy those things get, how bulky they become, and how uncomfortable they can be by the third day of 90+ degree weather. Especially during the typical afternoon 15 minute downpour.

Once you have the camera, take the time to learn how it does what it does and what you want. See what the various settings do just around the house. You'll feel more comfortale changing settings when on the go in the parks then. And regardless of any basic mode, you WILL change settings. I'd also suggest a basic photography book, especially the National Geographic series. Even a little knowledge can be the difference between a keeper and a missed shot.

 

[Mawg]

Thank you all, I found all of your responses very beneficial. I'm looking at a Canon Powershot SX50 HS it seems like it will meet most of my needs. I'm not opposed to an SLR but are cheaper SLR's less than $500 better than a top of the line point and shoot? I also don't see myself caring around additional lenses so I would probably just use a universal 15-85mm lens all the time with an SLR. Any opinions out there on the Canon Powershot SX50 HS, Do you think there is a better camera I should research in the same ballpark?

 

[KeithVH]

If you could go a little more, as a comparison I would say the Panasonic FZ200. Check out both at DPReview.com. They have a detailed review and the site does a good job of being fair.

Pricier, yes. But it has a GREAT lens, especially for low light and action shots. It doesn't zoom as much as the Canon. But I'm not sure how useful that Canon zoom is. At the long end, the IS needs to be EXCEPTIONAL to compensate for movement that gets magnified when zoomed so much.

Don't get me wrong, most of my equipement is currently Canon. But I can recognize other companies do good too.

My best suggestion would be to buy from B&H in newYork. Unless you can get them both local. Try them both in your hands. That may make a difference, especially button layout and such. If not loca, then deifnitely B&H. Great return policy. You may get one, shoot for two days and then decide to exchange for the other. B&H will accommodate you.

 

[ddbowdoin]

 

[Mawg]

Wow, it's even a 2 pack!

 

[Mawg]

If you could go a little more, as a comparison I would say the Panasonic FZ200. Check out both at DPReview.com. They have a detailed review and the site does a good job of being fair.

Pricier, yes. But it has a GREAT lens, especially for low light and action shots. It doesn't zoom as much as the Canon. But I'm not sure how useful that Canon zoom is. At the long end, the IS needs to be EXCEPTIONAL to compensate for movement that gets magnified when zoomed so much.

Don't get me wrong, most of my equipement is currently Canon. But I can recognize other companies do good too.

My best suggestion would be to buy from B&H in newYork. Unless you can get them both local. Try them both in your hands. That may make a difference, especially button layout and such. If not loca, then deifnitely B&H. Great return policy. You may get one, shoot for two days and then decide to exchange for the other. B&H will accommodate you.

Thank you, the Panasonic FZ200 looks very nice. I would like to hold them both before purchase, so I'll look around at the local camera shops as the Panasonic seems harder to find. Thanks again!

 

[CP_alum08]

Everything you want can be found on most current P&S's. Check out the Canon G15 or the Sony rx100 if you can find it on sale. Both are excellent small cameras that offer manual controls.

 

[whitethunder]

KenRockwell.com This is where I started...

Read some of his how-to's among other things. He really just lays it out there. I use to think I needed the most expensive, biggest, baddest camera out there. Then I found I can take great photos with my phone. I only upgraded when I realized why it was time to upgrade.

 

[ddbowdoin]

KenRockwell.com This is where I started...

Read some of his how-to's among other things. He really just lays it out there. I use to think I needed the most expensive, biggest, baddest camera out there. Then I found I can take great photos with my phone. I only upgraded when I realized why it was time to upgrade.

kenrockwell is a joke... simply search his name on Google and alas, he speaks well from the rear

 

[whitethunder]

kenrockwell is a joke... simply search his name on Google and alas, he speaks well from the rear

Hmm its appears you are right. Although I enjoy many of his photo's, it seems the photography community is not his biggest fan. I probably should of caught on sooner, a lot of the other sites I view are because he links to them. Maybe I should of realized something was up now that I notice no one links back him....

I feel lame....

 

[ddbowdoin]

Hmm its appears you are right. Although I enjoy many of his photo's, it seems the photography community is not his biggest fan. I probably should of caught on sooner, a lot of the other sites I view are because he links to them. Maybe I should of realized something was up now that I notice no one links back him....

I feel lame....

no, it's ok... he appeals to a lot people when they're first starting off. If you read his reviews on bodies... he seems to always start them off with "now with the release of ____ this is Nikons best camera, producing images even as sharp as _____"

 

[CP_alum08]

Hmm its appears you are right. Although I enjoy many of his photo's, it seems the photography community is not his biggest fan. I probably should of caught on sooner, a lot of the other sites I view are because he links to them. Maybe I should of realized something was up now that I notice no one links back him....

I feel lame....

Don't feel bad I started with him too. Eventually you just realize that he's more interested in making a profit from his sponsors and that every camera he tests is god's gift to man. I remember reading somewhere that one of his favorite lenses was an 18-55 and he compared it to Nikon's holy trinity and Canon L's...I think that's when I started losing faith

if you're just looking for reviews, www.dpreview.com is pretty knowledgeable and unbiased.

 

[whitethunder]

Don't feel bad I started with him too. Eventually you just realize that he's more interested in making a profit from his sponsors and that every camera he tests is god's gift to man. I remember reading somewhere that one of his favorite lenses was an 18-55 and he compared it to Nikon's holy trinity and Canon L's...I think that's when I started losing faith

if you're just looking for reviews, www.dpreview.com is pretty knowledgeable and unbiased.

I've got my camera, and I know the lenses I want to invest in based on what I find myself shooting the most. Really I just try and look for people whose photographs I enjoy, and I try to recreate there looks or feel. His site gave me the added bonus of "teaching" me how to do what he was doing. I've found (in my brief experience) that listening to what several people have to say (setting settings, composing a shoot, etc) gives me a vast arsenal when it comes to getting the shot I see in my head.

So removing one reference I use won't kill me

 

[aw14]

does anyone here just use their phone for a camera? I have the iphone 5 and will be heading to WDW on the 28th. My intention was that my phone is truly all I would need

 

[whitethunder]

does anyone here just use their phone for a camera? I have the iphone 5 and will be heading to WDW on the 28th. My intention was that my phone is truly all I would need

Actually while I was trying to figure out what camera I was going to buy, I exclusively used my wife's iPhone 4s around the parks and got some really awesome pics.

 

[ddbowdoin]

does anyone here just use their phone for a camera? I have the iphone 5 and will be heading to WDW on the 28th. My intention was that my phone is truly all I would need

if your pure intention is to only use the images on facebook / instagram then yes.... but if you care about quality and printing work, then no