Slashdot Mirror

I'm surprised that this question came up on Slashdot, but I regularly see and answer this question in other photography communities.

Use these two links to determine which camera to buy:
Snapsort
DPReview

There are a few things you need to decide:

• budget: DSLRs and lenses are a huge money sink.
• portability: Are you OK with carrying a bag of lenses? Do you want something to throw into your backpack / purse?
• subject material: People? Sports? Landscapes? Events? Macro?
• movie mode: 1080p @ 30fps a must?
• durability: Do you plan on shooting in the rain? In sandy conditions?

My question: what camera would you recommend for getting into basic photography? I don't mean that in the sense of photography as a hobby or a profession, but simply as a method for taking images — of friends, family, and projects — that actually look good. That's a subjective question, I know . . . I figure a decent camera will run me a few hundred dollars, which is fine.

(emphasis mine)

You state that you don't want to get into photography as a hobby or profession, but you just want to take good family portraits? Good portrait photography is not really that subjective and is a combination of good lighting, subject isolation, and timing (for non-posed shots). A camera is just a tool, you have to gain some basic mastery of the tool in order to use it well. Dropping a few hundred dollars on a camera and leaving it in Auto / Program mode will not get you the photographs you're looking for.

Without more information, these are the suggestions I'd offer:

Non-DSLR, non-superzoom route:
- Canon S100 or S95
- Panasonic LX-5 or LX-3

Canon if you want more zoom range, Panasonic if you want better low light capabilities.

DSLR route:
- used Canon Ti1 or Ti2
- used Nikon D90

Pick up a 50mm f1/.8 when you feel limited with the kit lens.

If you don't think you will get really serious about photography, then skip the DSLRs.

Once DLSRs are out of the picture you have to decide what kind of optical zoom you are looking for. Up to about 10x optical zoom can be had on a reasonably compact camera, anyting over that you are likely getting into the mega-zoom class of cameras that are quite deep because of the monster lenses on them. I have a Panasonic Lumix FZ-18 with a 18x optical zoom and find that the camera really is just a bit too big to carry around all the time.

If you want some of the more custom controls, such as manual focus, you will be looking at the higher end of the Nikon Coolpix range, or the Canon PowerShots. I personally have been looking at the Nikon Coolpix P7100, and while it is not a small camera, it is also not a huge camera, but it has a great feature set and a slightly larger sensor than the pocket sized cameras.

All of that to say that you really need to decide what features you are interested in first, then you can start doing full research. I found Digital Photography Review to be a good reference.

http://dpreview.com/news/1109/11090205toshibawificard.asp
Its a first as in "fully comply with the SD standard" i.e. no drivers needed for a unique very small subset of units.
For law enforcement and rent a spooks (or ex special forces) it means your very public photography/movie clip is safe from a software or "hard"ware deleting.
From a Guardian story having its images removed ... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/14/bilderberg-charlie-skelton-dispatch
"One of the policewomen smiled. "Delete photos and you can go, no trouble.""
The "London Street Photography Festival" shows some sides of image/movie making in public places http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJH9F7Hcluo or
the parts of the world where police know to look around and 'remove' all cards/devices after a beating/death.

Try the Tenba Messenger series. Great bags. And I own a lot of bags, so I speak from quite a bit of experience. I actually own the "Mini" size, which holds my iPad or MB Air (actually both if I try), and can fit my Canon 7D without grip, plus a couple of lenses and a flash pretty easily. That's the mini... there's a small, and a large also. It will hold your gear. You can check this thread to see how it will work with a 70-200 attached (hood reverse, obviously).

It would be great if these two technologies can dovetail in a way that I can get a high resolution (6-8 megapixel equivalent in current terms) picture with the ability to pick both my depth of field and focal point post processing.

8 megapixels is nothing special....

And it looks like there still won't be an optical zoom since the Xperia-Pro only has digital zoom

And don't tell me they can't put an optical zoom in an iPhone: the Sony DSC-T7 was only 14.8mm and had a 3x optical zoom way back in 2005 while the iPhone 4 is 9.3mm. I'll gladly sacrifice 5.5mm for a 3x optical zoom (assuming technology hasn't advanced since 2005)

Digital zoom is a joke, I'd don't care if they sell a 50 megapixel iPhone I'd trade it all for a good 3 megapixel with a 3x optical zoom.

But... but... without tons of yuppies constantly buying shiny new cameras they don't need and don't know how to use, how will us real photographers have enough market power to induce Canon/Nikon/Sony compete with one another and to develop innovative products? Hell, if anything, we need to convince everyone that they all need medium format DSLRs (e.g. Leica S2) so that more companies start making them and the prices come down.

Hint: at a place like the Aztec ruins, you can recognize the real photographer because he or she is off the beaten path, using a tripod, and taking time to practice the contemplation, self-reflection, and art that is [em]actual[/em] photography (as opposed to tourism).

You mean something like this:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/

The Olympus E-P1 is another example of a non-SLR digital camera with interchangeable lenses. I do not know much about cameras or photography, but near the bottom of the page below, it shows a huge lens attached with the help of an adapter. If I am not mistaken, I believe that camera supports the Micro 4/3 standard that you mentioned.

Lenses for Olympus E-P1

I have been looking for a digital camera to replace my old beat up pocket sized 35mm Olympus Stylus Epic compact point-and-shoot camera. I bought my old pocket sized 35mm camera about 10 or 15 years ago, for $70. It has always taken amazingly good photos which look much better than the photos from many other 35mm or digital cameras. The lack of a zoom or telephoto lens, might be one reason that it has survived a decades worth of exposure to sand and dirt, while hiking and backpacking in Arizona. It survived much better than my previous 35mm camera which had to be repaired twice, due to sand making the zoom lens jam.

Despite knowing almost nothing about photography, and not having fancy lenses or a tripod, several photos from my old pocket sized 35mm camera ended up being used in a small calendar. They look just as good as the photos that a professional photographer took with his superior skills and fancier equipment.

My old pocket sized 35mm camera still works, but I would like try using a digital camera instead. I want something that would take photos that are at least as good, but perhaps with interchangeable lenses and the option of using manual settings. Most of my photos are taken while hiking, so being compact would be an advantage (although not absolutely essential). I wonder if the above camera would be rugged enough or not? The Olympus E-P1 was one of about 14 cameras recently mentioned in an Audubon magazine article.

Another alternative, would be possibly buying a DSLR camera instead. Perhaps I might get something like the Canon EOS Rebel T1i or a Pentax K-x instead. I saw both mentioned in this month's Consumer Reports review of digital cameras. But again, I do not know how either does around dirt and sand when hiking. I do not plan on ever traveling to Kuwait, so I do not care about their DSLR camera ban.

Before I go shopping, I plan to read "The Compete Idiot's Guide to Photography Essentials." That way, I hope to know enough about the basics of photography, to shop intelligently.

The tiny thumbnail size sensor makes those 14x and up supper zooms possible. My 400mm on my SLR is huge in comparison. On my full frame sensor is 400 on my crop sensor SLR its about 600mm.
here are the class of camera I'm talking about.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q110superzoomgroup/

Of course these don't work well in low light....

Well there is this micro 4/3-mount lens being released pretty soon: Panasonic 3D lens. More specs here.

Well there is this micro 4/3-mount lens being released pretty soon: Panasonic 3D lens. More specs here.

Why not capture the 18mm of your lens?
You'll get even more information!

You sir, don't understand your camera.

Here's a nice explanation about the difference between tonal range and dynamic range:
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=tonal+range

The 550D has a 14bit AD Converter, but offers a bit more than 9 stops of dynamic range.

Things *have* changed in recent times. Nikon introduced a 35mm-frame DSLR about two years ago, the D3, and now has four fullframe models that are just astounding in low-light performance. The D3S is the best of them: see dpreview's review at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3s/page33.asp .

The D700 I mentioned above is their affordable fullframe model: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond700/page32.asp

Things *have* changed in recent times. Nikon introduced a 35mm-frame DSLR about two years ago, the D3, and now has four fullframe models that are just astounding in low-light performance. The D3S is the best of them: see dpreview's review at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3s/page33.asp .

The D700 I mentioned above is their affordable fullframe model: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond700/page32.asp

It's true that some lenses are already into diminishing returns, particularly fast or wide lenses. But many other lenses are not even oversampled with 2 micron pixel sizes, including many macro and sharp primes. Take a look at this example of a $400 macro lens using 1.2 micron (simulated) pixel size:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=29826265

It's actually something that came up in DPReview's tests: see http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_70-200_2p8_is_usm_c16/page4.asp . (Note that this is the IS version of the lens; the non-IS version has a less-sophisticated optical formula, I believe).

Canon Unveils 120-Megapixel Camera Sensor

Yeah that's great but the consumer market is waaay to caught up in megapixels this and that. When I bought my last digital body I did some extensive reading over at DPReview http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ and I found little difference between two verions of the same model. Sure they're cramming in HD video and face recognition etc but if you can't make significant improvements in quality what's the point (ok sell camera's to uneducated consumers I know)? Case in point Canon xti and xsi, the reviewer found that the older model (xti) even preformed better in some situations than the newer (xsi). The newer model has more pixels and some nice bells and whistles but can you take a substantially better picture to justify the price. I think not. In fact as I was shopping I found a lot of places where they were the same price. That whole industry needs to clean up their act. Sorry for the diatribe but stuff like that really burns me up. Shoehornjob

It seems to improve autofocus

Well, maybe improve accuracy in some cases, but the contrast detection AF of non-DSLRs is usually slower than phase detection AF of DSLRs. The very best CDAF is comparable with PDAF of average DSLRs, and then there are the sports cameras...

Have you tried a modern digital viewfinder? For example the VF of the Olympus EP2. I'd say it has enough resolution to not make a significant difference. It has 100% coverage (of course :-) and 1.15x mag. And for those still life photos you can magnify a portion of the view (up to 10x?) to fine-tune the focus. And best of all, the flange focal distance is small enough to use Leica M-lenses at infinity -- but the 2x "crop factor" may be a curse or a blessing...

Many large manufacturers of DSLR's, such as Canon and Sony, have started removing the mirrors from their prosumer-level camera's in exchange for sensors that can work in different modes.

Well, Canon (and Nikon) are still on the fence. Nikon may (or may not) present a mirrorless system camera at Photokina, Sony has their new NEX-system, then there's Olympus and Panasonic (micro four thirds), and yet another system, Samsung NX. Even Ricoh is jumping on the bandwagon, in their own idiosyncratic way.

Camera sensor size is much more important than megapixels for how many photons you can actually capture. More megapixels on the same size sensor can actually lead to reduced quality and increased noise. Likewise, sensor type affects quality. The iPhone 4G has a back-illuminated sensor -- which means the photons do not have to travel through the wiring layers on the silicon. This means more photons captures and better image quality and better low-light sensitivity.

Doing a Modbook themselves wouldn't gain Apple anything.

Ah but I think they would, otherwise they'd never have done the iPad. The iPad is just an overblown iPhone that can't make phone calls or a crippled MacBook, if Apple were to release a tablet like the Modbook Pro, with a compleat implementation of OS X they could sell for more than a MacBook Pro. When I first heard of the iPad I, and many other photographers, were hoping for a laptop with a built-in tablet. With one we could take it with us to a photoset for a day of shooting and be able to use a pin for some editing. Here's a poster on photo.net wanting a way to go through a photo session while between different places to pick and choose keepers and throwout don't keeps. Now I won't suggest the driver doing it but a second person can. As the article Apple iPad: For Photographers? says the iPad is designed for the consumer, but if Apple were to release a tablet for photographers many would want to get one.

Sure those photographers who want one bad enough can buy the Modbook Pro, but then they wouldn't get the support Apple offers. I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro I bought almost 3 years ago. Every tyme I had a problem with it, 3 tymes, I was able to put it in my backpack and go to an Apple store to have it looked at. The first tyme was the day after I got it, I had ordered software utility with it but I could not boot with the disk when I tried when I got it. So I slipped it into my backpack and drove to an Apple store the following day. There I found out the software version was an old one whereas the MBP was a new one. Another tyme I had to reinstall OS X and the other tyme the graphics system had to be replaced. Each tyme I was able to go to Apple and have it looked at that day. I wouldn't be able to do that with a Modbook.

Apple made the right choice for Apple.

With many Apple users being graphics artists and photographers Apple would sell more tablets if it were not an overblown iPhone or a crippled MacBook. Here's more of what photographers say about the iPad both positive and negative. There are good ideas or points made on both sides, one good one being taking the iPad to a meeting and being able to show photographs, but related to that is the bad of the lack of much mass storage.

Falcon

From what I remember, the eye-fi doesn't delete content locally, it just uploads. so you'd have to play around with some way of having the modified firmware delete the oldest N photos or something.

Ahh... it seems that the newest cards will auto-delete: http://www.dpreview.com/news/1001/10010501eyefiprox2.asp

-Peter

I think you're confusing the D2X with something else. The Coolpix 5700 is a 5MP prosumer fixed lens camera from 2002. The D2X is the former flagship Nikon dSLR (2005). It has a 12MP, full-frame sensor, etc.

Or maybe I'm just confused?

I think you're confusing the D2X with something else. The Coolpix 5700 is a 5MP prosumer fixed lens camera from 2002. The D2X is the former flagship Nikon dSLR (2005). It has a 12MP, full-frame sensor, etc.

Or maybe I'm just confused?

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=panasonic_dmcfz50%2Cleica_vlux1&show=all

Only $100 difference now.

The verification word for this post is: sensible
Dang AIs are getting smarter every day.

Some cameras already use technologies to optimize the dynamic range e.g. using Apical solutions: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09031801apical.asp not really like multiple shots with different exposures, but still very effective. Moreover, I prefer to leave such things to the post-processing phase of my work flow. Still nice that the camera is open, I hate manufacturers issuing dozen of new cameras every six months with very small increments in the feature set every time.

meant to include this link, as well, which shows more of a build-in-progress of my server:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1004&message=25140889

That's just because Nikon hasn't figured out how to do that. If you look at some of the samples that DPReview has with recent Canon DSLRs with cranked up sensitivity, it's surprisingly good.

Canon EOS 500D / Review Sample Is a pretty good example at ISO 1600. You can see the degradation, but it's pretty good overall. It's still not really a good substitute for a tripod, but it's definitely acceptable for many things.

And no, you can't really simulate high ISO like that, you can sort of do that with film, but digital doesn't really work like that. The maximum number ISO is usually decided upon based upon what kind of Signal to Noise ratio you're able to get. As the gain is upped the significance of the noise gets larger and at some point it degrades the quality to the point of being completely unrecognizable. But, the reason why you're suggestion doesn't really work is that the information has to be recorded in the first place and if you're trying to boost gamma in post production rather than boosting sensitivity during production, there's just not going to be enough information to work with the camera just won't have the dynamic range to handle it.

Projectors are just one of those things which companies shouldn't even think about building until they get the rest of their ducks in a row. Full HD video isn't bad in a DSLR provided that the camera functions properly first and that the video actually integrates in a way that works as well.

Specs here.

A demo video (at the bottom).

This camera seems targeted at those who store all their pics in the memory card.

Not in a maintained list, but probably every camera that got an update on june 15 from here.
"Cracked" batteries will of course come out after any fw update (see this, for instance), but they'll probably only work for that fw (so don't update unless the fixes are significant). More reactions can be found here (DPReview pana forum).

That said, the older cameras that didn't have the chipped the batteries cannot get firmwares that check if third party batteries are used with the camera, but they seem to be shipping most (if not all, i haven't checked) new models with the chip "technology". Anyway, if you want a good camera without it, either get the FZ28 (very good superzoom cam, but not very usable with low light without the flash), get a camera with a known-to-be-working firmware (with no bugs that will need to be addressed), then get the batteries that work with the fw.
Mind you, my battery pack is good for about 500 shots (when shot with pauses between batches) without flash, so having an extra battery pack might not be imperative.

Not in a maintained list, but probably every camera that got an update on june 15 from here.
"Cracked" batteries will of course come out after any fw update (see this, for instance), but they'll probably only work for that fw (so don't update unless the fixes are significant). More reactions can be found here (DPReview pana forum).

That said, the older cameras that didn't have the chipped the batteries cannot get firmwares that check if third party batteries are used with the camera, but they seem to be shipping most (if not all, i haven't checked) new models with the chip "technology". Anyway, if you want a good camera without it, either get the FZ28 (very good superzoom cam, but not very usable with low light without the flash), get a camera with a known-to-be-working firmware (with no bugs that will need to be addressed), then get the batteries that work with the fw.
Mind you, my battery pack is good for about 500 shots (when shot with pauses between batches) without flash, so having an extra battery pack might not be imperative.

When I worked for a big box electronics retailer back in the mid 90s you better believe us clueless sales people had to know stuff like that. They would even send people from head office to "shop" us and make sure we knew our marketing plan and the "company tract," and if we didn't know it well enough we got our numbers pulled and spent the next two weeks shadowing another sales person and working for base instead of making money off of selling stuff.

If you get a "clueless BB sales person" who doesn't know the answer to questions like this, tell them thank you and leave the store. There is also this great thing called the Internet, where you can research all this stuff before plunking down your hard-earned cash. This is a great place to start.

No, canon has a much bigger marketing department (which is why you see 4000 canon products in every store but almost no Pana products)
In the digital compact market Panasonic is holding its own fairly well. Although the newest models indeed have these nonsensical battery firmware updates, the FZ28 can go head to head easily with the canon SX10.. And if you don't upgrade firmware, the LX3 with the 1.1 FW is one of the best cameras in its segment. Similarly for the tz7.
Yes, canon has the brand hame, but if you have a look at DPReview, you can compare reviews to see how the cameras/brands compare.

Me too! Damn, I wanted a DMC-GH1!

You could buy a used Fuji Finepix E900 for around US$80,-. It has great value, still. Use it with Sanyo Eneloop Rechargables and off you go for hours and hours of nonstop shooting: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/FujiFilm/fuji_finepixe900z.asp. It is a great small package and very convenient to use and carry. At the moment it anihilates our need (more lust, though) for a DSLR and videocam completely, as it is much more convenient to lugg around - to save the moments only parents ... you know what I mean ...

Run over to Digital Photography Review and peer around the reviews. I think your price point is a tad low for a RAW format camera, but I could well be wrong....

but it works, doesn't it? :-)

Nope. Not in the UK. You just get given no rights, beaten and arrested under terrorism charges. Or worse.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=29975989%5D

>3 returns in a year and you are banned for life.

I want the following from a digital camera...
1. Small physical size (I wanna slip it in my pocket).
2. Good image quality
3. Good telephoto lens.
4. ???

Depending on the size of your pocket.
If a camera that fits in a coat pocket is acceptable, go for the Panasonic DMC-FZ28 as it seems to offer the best compromise.

I'm still hoping that they will find a way to combine your 3 points with:
4. Good low-light performance.

Micro-Four Thirds is what I'm interested in. I am amateur for sure, and have no direct love or hate for the mirror box. I think that a tiny compact camera with a standard replaceable lens sounds like the most important innovation in the sub-pro camera field since the DSLR. The first one out the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 seems to have no advantage over the tiny Olympus E410 which when fitted with a pancake lens is just freaking tiny.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=28850462
http://www.photokina-show.com/news_images/0593_micro-four-thirds-system.jpg

The new Leica S2 is an interesting leap with a 37.5 megapixel CCD, a larger sensor (56% larger than 35mm full-frame). http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092301_leica_s2.asp
http://www.s.leica-camera.com/

With higher MP, you will need higher optics or switch to medium format cameras.

The megapixel market isn't running to a close at all.

But it is getting asymptotic to a maximum. In the DSLR field you have the 20+ megapixel cameras (Nikon D3x, Sony A900, Canon ID Mark III). These are all high end machines which require excellent optics and, more important, excellent techniques to get the most out of the camera. Yeah, you go on the DP reviewsforums and folks will whine about wanting more (although nobody seems to want to pay more...). But like most high end things, you're out of the sweet spot. You end up paying a lot of money for a limited increase in performance. For some, that will be worth it but for the consumer market, 10-12 megapixels is more than enough.

Dynamic range (the ability to hold shadows and highlights in a high contrast scene without a lot of fiddling) has lots of room to grow. That seems to be a tough nut to crack, especially in the smaller sensors.

Who knows, it hasn't been released yet.

Ah, didn't realize that. To be fair, I did also check the SD1000 page, which is the camera I've had for two years now, and it also doesn't have that information, nor do I see a detailed review of it, nor do I remember there being one when I was in the market.

Their reviews of non-DSLRs are a bit spotty -- you're definitely not guaranteed to find one for the camera you're looking at. (Though you will be able to find one in the same family around the right time.)

I'm not saying that you shouldn't go look at dpreview or something like that (I used them heavily for both my cameras); I'm just saying that there is rather a bit of value to actually trying the thing yourself too.

Perhaps you can tell me what shutter release timings correspond to "poor", "okay", "acceptable", and "good", because I certainly don't know that information

Compare with others, or read the review, where they will certainly point out if it's particularly fast or slow.

Are the times dpreview gives from the shutter button half-way down and AF set, or including the AF time

They usually give both, plus "power off to first shot" and intra-shot recycle times (e.g. SD 1100 IS).

What's the shutter release time of the SD 780 IS?

Who knows, it hasn't been released yet. Manufacturers don't always provide that data, and if they did - would you trust them? So the thing has to be reviewed and tested, and that usually means it has to be in the channel. DPReview aren't always the fastest at getting reviews out the door, but I personally wouldn't buy anything they hadn't tested - they do a MUCH better job than I could with 5 mins in Best Buy playing with the thing.

No, but you can go to dpreview.com and read the shutter release stats (and usually a full review) for pretty much every camera out there.

I did acknowledge that if you had kept reading. Perhaps you can tell me what shutter release timings correspond to "poor", "okay", "acceptable", and "good", because I certainly don't know that information. Are the times dpreview gives from the shutter button half-way down and AF set, or including the AF time, which will make these comparisons worthless because nothing will focus that fast?

In fact, I'm not even convinced they have that information for everything now. What's the shutter release time of the SD 780 IS?

Srsly - any compact camera from the last three years also makes an excellent video camera. How about the Canon PowerShot D10, which is also waterproof and drop-resistant?

That Leica looks like a really cool camera!

Dunno what you call that stuff (besides cool). It ain't P&S though.

Does anyone make a (reasonably priced...) digital equivalent of the old standard learning camera -- fully manual, no gobs of features, just shutter, aperture, focus, and an exposure meter?

Nope. But then again, K1000s aren't especially pricey. Neither, for that matter, are those flimsy FM10s. But personally I'd rather get one with a little more heft and go with an FM3a or FE2.

But the goal is to take pictures, I hope. You don't need a bare-bones all-manual film rig. And you sure don't need a full-featured whiz-bang dSLR. You just need something that you're going to take with you and not regret. For me, that's this guy. No worry about memory cards, no worry about lens caps, it doesn't weigh a ton. I take it and use it and have fun with it.

I used to use an FM3a, but found that I was leaving it at home more often than not. It's a great camera, but it didn't help me reach my goals. Then again, the goal of some people is to fondle cameras, so who am I to judge?

No doubt. It's a fabulous camera from the articles I've read about it.

But, like I said, the price is well out of my budget.

http://www.dpreview.com/