aspose file tools*
The moose likes Meaningless Drivel and the fly likes Best Digital Camera? Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Other » Meaningless Drivel
Bookmark "Best Digital Camera?" Watch "Best Digital Camera?" New topic
Author

Best Digital Camera?

Unnsse Khan
Ranch Hand

Joined: Nov 12, 2001
Posts: 511
What is the best digital camera that has these features:

* Portability (Something that you can carry in your pocket, I know that I am sacraficing the Zoom feature, for this.

* Best Zoom for the portability.

* Can connect to both OSX & WinXP

I heard Canons were good... Also Sony & Nikon...

With thanks,
Joyce Lee
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 11, 2003
Posts: 1392
Hi Unnsse,

I'm also looking for a digital camera. The Ranchers provided some recommendations and tips in this thread.

Same here, I prefer a pocket-size camera. Basic features such as 3X optical zoom and 3 Megapixels are good enough for me.

I saw some 4MP ones quite nice. I wonder if I get a 4 Megapixels camera, can I configure to 3 Megapixels? More megapixels means more memory space. Or the memory space shouldn't be a concern at all?
[ November 03, 2004: Message edited by: Joyce Lee ]
Ray Marsh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jan 12, 2000
Posts: 458
I researched digital cameras a good deal before buying one. I ended up buying a Kodak LS443: 4 megapixel. We are fairly happy with it. The zoom is 4x optical. Don't even pay attention to the digital zoom number, they are meaningless. It is just expanding the picture and losing image density. You can do that in your picture software later and you'll have more picture to work with.

Its major weakness is low light situations. The flash is only good for close work (20 feet, maybe). You cannot zoom indoors, the picture is too dark. Other than that the pictures are very good and we are generally happy with it. It is basically a point and shoot camera.

There are other good ones out there. You want a minimum of 3 mp. You need to decide if you want point and shoot ($250-$400 US) or SLR type with changeable lens and flash ($1,000 US). I have not seen any good middle of the road cameras. There are some super fancy P&S cameras with 5+mp that are 6 or 7 hundred dollars, but I don't think you'll notice a difference from a 3-4mp camera for a lot less.
[ November 03, 2004: Message edited by: Ray Marsh ]

Anxiety does not empty tomorrow of its sorrows, but only empties today of its strength. – Charles Spurgeon
peter wooster
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 13, 2004
Posts: 1033
Originally posted by Ray Marsh:
I researched digital cameras a good deal before buying one. I ended up buying a Kodak LS443: 4 megapixel. We are fairly happy with it. The zoom is 4x optical. Don't even pay attention to the digital zoom number, they are meaningless. It is just expanding the picture and losing image density. You can do that in your picture software later and you'll have more picture to work with.

Its major weakness is low light situations. The flash is only good for close work (20 feet, maybe). You cannot zoom indoors, the picture is too dark. Other than that the pictures are very good and we are generally happy with it. It is basically a point and shoot camera.

There are other good ones out there. You want a minimum of 3 mp. You need to decide if you want point and shoot ($250-$400 US) or SLR type with changeable lens and flash ($1,000 US). I have not seen any good middle of the road cameras. There are some super fancy P&S cameras with 5+mp that are 6 or 7 hundred dollars, but I don't think you'll notice a difference from a 3-4mp camera for a lot less.

[ November 03, 2004: Message edited by: Ray Marsh ]


We're very happy with our year old 2MP Kodak with the 3x optical zoom. It's small enought to fit in a coat pocket or purse and it didn't cost very much. I still use a Nikon F80 film based SLR for serious use, its large, noisy and obtrusive, but takes great pictures.

My advice is to go for the low end with optical zoom, any digital camera will be obsolete in about a year.
Joyce Lee
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 11, 2003
Posts: 1392
Originally posted by Ray Marsh:
Its major weakness is low light situations. The flash is only good for close work (20 feet, maybe). You cannot zoom indoors, the picture is too dark. Other than that the pictures are very good and we are generally happy with it. It is basically a point and shoot camera.


Thanks for pointing out. I didn't consider the effect of the photos taken in poor light conditions.
Ray Marsh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jan 12, 2000
Posts: 458
Originally posted by peter wooster:
We're very happy with our year old 2MP Kodak with the 3x optical zoom. It's small enought to fit in a coat pocket or purse and it didn't cost very much. I still use a Nikon F80 film based SLR for serious use, its large, noisy and obtrusive, but takes great pictures.

My advice is to go for the low end with optical zoom, any digital camera will be obsolete in about a year.


2mb is not bad, unless you like to crop and enlarge a lot. Then you will get grainy pictures sooner than a higher density image will.

It really depends on what you intend to do. 2mb is fine for shooting pictures like a film camera. You still could crop a bit without image degredation. Good luck finding a 2mb new though! You could probably get a used one real cheap on eBay.

The 8mb are coming, maybe already here. The good news is that will make the lower mp cameras cheaper. Its like PCs. If you buy the hot product from last year you get a nice system for 1/2 to 2/3 the price of the cutting edge model.
peter wooster
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 13, 2004
Posts: 1033
Originally posted by Ray Marsh:

2mb is not bad, unless you like to crop and enlarge a lot. Then you will get grainy pictures sooner than a higher density image will.

It really depends on what you intend to do. 2mb is fine for shooting pictures like a film camera. You still could crop a bit without image degredation. Good luck finding a 2mb new though! You could probably get a used one real cheap on eBay.

The 8mb are coming, maybe already here. The good news is that will make the lower mp cameras cheaper. Its like PCs. If you buy the hot product from last year you get a nice system for 1/2 to 2/3 the price of the cutting edge model.


I think the digital horsepower war will continue until your camera can do what you can do with a good print from a film camera. I often scan in 4x5 prints at 600dpi. This gives me about 8MP which I then crop and adjust using PhotoShop. The Canon EOS-1D Mark II has a full sized 35mm CMOS sensor and is completely compatible with professional lenses. It has 16MP and a price of about $8000US. This is much better than its recent ancestor at 11MP and $10,000US. The Kodak DCS Pro also has a full 35mm sensor and takes Nikon F mount lenses, it has 14MP and costs about $5000US.

Most sources on resolution equivalence say that 10MP is about equivalent to a good 35mm film such as Velvia. Those cameras both exceed that and allow compatiblity with professional lenses.

Until that resolution becomes a commodity item, I'll continue to use a film based SLR and a low resolution digital.

For those with serious needs and unlimited resources, Phase 1 makes a back for your Hasselblad, it gives 22MP for only $35,000US.
Joyce Lee
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 11, 2003
Posts: 1392
It is common that proprietary batteries are used on utlra small and slim cameras like Canon Powershot SD300/200 instead of AA batteries. They're expensive and inconvenient to get. And if the battery is running out while outside, we cannot simply buy a set of AA batteries from any stores to get through the rest of the day. Meaning we need to buy an extra proprietary battery for backup.
Jeroen Wenting
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 12, 2000
Posts: 5093
For overall quality you can't go wrong with Nikon.
Myself I use a Coolpix 5000 which would meet your requirements but is no longer in production.
You would probably be served well with either a 5200 or 5400 (with the 5400 being a bit larger and heavier but also a lot sturdier with some more features).

Anything much smaller becomes uncomfortable to use.


42
 
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
 
subject: Best Digital Camera?