Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Digital Camera
- Thread starter themacman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Canon PowerShot SD550, without a doubt.
I have the SD450, and it rocks. Canon make superior cameras.
I have the SD450, and it rocks. Canon make superior cameras.
I second the Canon vote. I've a Canon Ixus 50(SD400 i think) and its great. It's small and very well built.
I have to third the suggestion of Canon. It's what I was going to suggest before even reading your post. They are really great cameras. I couldn't be happier with mine and I just picked one out for my girlfriend (PowerShort SD300). Good quality, good price. I like how they are metal, compared to cheap plastic crap like Kodak. Easy to use, great features... I think they are everything a camera should be to be honest. The quality is good because they are built very well. With a sony camera the quality control isn't really there. Some of the same models have differen't quality control... so sometimes you get a good one, others you don't. Canon is definitely your safest/best bet.
canon SD550 EXCELLENT recommendation. Huge LCD screen, 7.1MP, ridiculously small footprint... we carry them at the store that i work at and they were by far the hottest selling digtital camera this holiday season... followed by the SD450, only sold because we ultimately ran out of the SD550.
Yet another vote for the SD550. I was going to pick one up for xmas, to complement my S45, and G1 but my wife prioritzed other things.
Note, if you want a fully featured camera in a slightly larger footprint, the S70 or S80 seems like good choices. Personally, these cameras are the sweet spot for me in terms of portability vs. perfromance. The SD series wins when size is more important to you.
B
Note, if you want a fully featured camera in a slightly larger footprint, the S70 or S80 seems like good choices. Personally, these cameras are the sweet spot for me in terms of portability vs. perfromance. The SD series wins when size is more important to you.
B
I have a Canon SD300, and my roommate an SD500, and I would recommend either. Check out their reviews at http://www.dcresource.com
Keep in mind most thin cameras using lithium batteries usually last for ~150 pictures between charges. However, you can pick up a couple generic batteries at http://www.sterlingtek.com/cabach.html. A Canon branded battery, while it probably has a longer life, runs around $50. These generic batteries are around $15; I bought two, and never have to worry about running out of juice
Keep in mind most thin cameras using lithium batteries usually last for ~150 pictures between charges. However, you can pick up a couple generic batteries at http://www.sterlingtek.com/cabach.html. A Canon branded battery, while it probably has a longer life, runs around $50. These generic batteries are around $15; I bought two, and never have to worry about running out of juice
Canon
i have the latest canon compact ixus 55 and it really is a great camera.
in the same range they also have the ixus 750, (7mp) which i recommend you do take a look at.
but canon is definatly the way to go, they really are sleek and functional little cameras.
i have the latest canon compact ixus 55 and it really is a great camera.
in the same range they also have the ixus 750, (7mp) which i recommend you do take a look at.
but canon is definatly the way to go, they really are sleek and functional little cameras.
themacman said:
I'm not sure... but after all of the Canon recommendations why would you look at a Panasonic? If there is something about it that you want or need badly then sure but after all of the Canon votes I would go with Canon. Nothing beats 'em as far as I'm concerned.
The thing you really have to look at is what the pictures look like from a camera. The megapixels and other stats take such a far back seat to the actual quality of the photos that they're hardly worth even worrying about.
My first two digital cameras were Canon digital Elph's - the 2-megapixel S110 and the 4-megapixel S400. My S400 is on its last legs and I will probably move to the SD line, although I don't like having to switch from compact flash. I also have a Konica-Minolta A200 which I got for the high zoom and anti-shake, but the pictures just aren't as good as the ones I get with my Canon, even though it is 8 megapixels. (Though I do still like the camera.) Events I've gone to, you know where you all pull out your cameras and take the same group picture, and then later share - everyone knows which pictures I took, because they're generally the best, even though I'm not any better of a photographer than the next person. The Pentax and the Casio and the Sony's - they just aren't as real looking photos. There's no other way to describe it. I would say that the Nikons are similar in quality to the Canons, but everything else seems to lag behind.
The best advice I can give when researching cameras is to see what your friends'/family's/colleague's photos look like. Some of this, naturally, will depend on the quality of the photographer, but some of it will also be the camera.
Good luck.
Dave
My first two digital cameras were Canon digital Elph's - the 2-megapixel S110 and the 4-megapixel S400. My S400 is on its last legs and I will probably move to the SD line, although I don't like having to switch from compact flash. I also have a Konica-Minolta A200 which I got for the high zoom and anti-shake, but the pictures just aren't as good as the ones I get with my Canon, even though it is 8 megapixels. (Though I do still like the camera.) Events I've gone to, you know where you all pull out your cameras and take the same group picture, and then later share - everyone knows which pictures I took, because they're generally the best, even though I'm not any better of a photographer than the next person. The Pentax and the Casio and the Sony's - they just aren't as real looking photos. There's no other way to describe it. I would say that the Nikons are similar in quality to the Canons, but everything else seems to lag behind.
The best advice I can give when researching cameras is to see what your friends'/family's/colleague's photos look like. Some of this, naturally, will depend on the quality of the photographer, but some of it will also be the camera.
Good luck.
Dave
Another piece of advice, also make sure you check how the camera feels in your hands and how easy the controls are to run in person before you buy.Dave00 said:
The Lumix (Panasonic/Leica) has plenty of features that differentiate it from the SD550. Note however that it is only 8 MP in the 16:9 widescreen format. if you take lots of 4:3 or 3:2 portrait shots, you will not take full advantage of the camera's CCD. [!&*%@$ now I have to go check this one out in person to see if I like it better than the SD550 even if it is almost 50% more expensive.]
B
Don't the Panasonics also have the optical image stabilisation feature built-in?
Makes a major difference when trying to take pictures in lower light situations.
I've got a Fuji F10 - not the smallest of the small but hardly a monster. Great pictures, especially in low natural light, and a good price.
Makes a major difference when trying to take pictures in lower light situations.
I've got a Fuji F10 - not the smallest of the small but hardly a monster. Great pictures, especially in low natural light, and a good price.
so i went to bestbuy to play with the sd 550 and i liked it. NOw they were selling it for 490 which is outrageoius, but bh photo only has the gold one. I want the silver one and only want to pay like 380-390 does anyone know where i can buy this camera online.
You basically have 2 options:
1-point and shoot.
2-SLR.
I'd definitely go with the second option. If you have some extra money: Canon 350 D (Rebel XT) or you can go with the cheaper but also VERY good: 300 D.
Even if you are not a photographer expert you'd be coming to a totally different world buying a SLR....Don't be scared! Go for it! But It's up to you...
1-point and shoot.
2-SLR.
I'd definitely go with the second option. If you have some extra money: Canon 350 D (Rebel XT) or you can go with the cheaper but also VERY good: 300 D.
Even if you are not a photographer expert you'd be coming to a totally different world buying a SLR....Don't be scared! Go for it! But It's up to you...
rjphoto said:
My brother's got one, although it might be the model before as it's only 5 MP. Anyway, it's a really nice little camera. Takes good looking shots, and it really is waterproof like that (he's used it snorkeling on several occasions). The lens is scratch proof.
Applespider said:
I have the F10 also. True, it's not the sexiest camera, but it does take great pictures and lasts a long time between charges. Its low light performance is awesome! And its pretty cheap. Can be had easily for $280ish now i think. (6.3 MP's.)
DanielNTX said:I recommend the Pentax Optio WPi:
I've heard that the optics on that thing are pretty bad. Also, I don't think the OP should bother paying extra for a waterproof camera.
themacman said:
newegg has it for $395:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16830120173
i've ordered a ton of stuff from newegg, never had a problem. The only bad thing about newegg is that they wont "cross ship" That is, if you get the camera and it's DOA, you'll have to send it back, wait for them to recieve it, then they'll send you a new one out. I've order a few thousand $ from them (I build computers for friends) and have only had 1 DOA item - so it doesn't seem to be a big deal. Good luck.