Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Which Would You Pick . . .

Reply
Thread Tools

Which Would You Pick . . .

 
 
Tom C.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2004
Looking to get a good digital camera (who isn't?) to use for outdoor sports,
family outings and the usual kid shots. I'd also like to take short movies
with it so that I don't have to lug around my video camera. I have three
kids, 7, 4 and 1 that require a fast shooting times, so the autofocus speed
needs to be pretty good. I don't want another SLR system - too big and
bulky to carry. Smaller and digital is better for me at this point. I've
increased my budget to around $700 and these are the models that I've
narrowed the choices down to:

Olympus C-5060wz (~$500)
Is it always better to go less camera and more memory? I can add a good
size memory card, and just be at my budget.

Minolta Dimage A2 (~$700)
Put my whole budget into the good camera and get a larger memory card later
after I save up a few bucks.

Olympus C-8080 (~725)
I guess I can squeeze out a few more bucks.

Maybe Fuji S7000??? (~$450)
Nikon Coolpix 8700??? (~750 minus $200 rebate = ~$550)

Any others I should consider?

Thanks-


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tom C.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2004
BTW - I would like to print some 8x10 photos (maybe larger), but mostly 4x6
prints would work for my family.

Thanks again-


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Petr
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2004
Olympus C8080 would be my choice but bear in mind that this is a compact
digital so essentially a point and shoot. In my experience it is the best
out of all the 8mp compacts. The coolpix is a piece of junk in regards to
pic quality. Just read the reviews on them here and decide
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/comp...s7000&show=all
I would go for the 8080 hands down.

"Tom C." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Looking to get a good digital camera (who isn't?) to use for outdoor

sports,
> family outings and the usual kid shots. I'd also like to take short

movies
> with it so that I don't have to lug around my video camera. I have three
> kids, 7, 4 and 1 that require a fast shooting times, so the autofocus

speed
> needs to be pretty good. I don't want another SLR system - too big and
> bulky to carry. Smaller and digital is better for me at this point. I've
> increased my budget to around $700 and these are the models that I've
> narrowed the choices down to:
>
> Olympus C-5060wz (~$500)
> Is it always better to go less camera and more memory? I can add a good
> size memory card, and just be at my budget.
>
> Minolta Dimage A2 (~$700)
> Put my whole budget into the good camera and get a larger memory card

later
> after I save up a few bucks.
>
> Olympus C-8080 (~725)
> I guess I can squeeze out a few more bucks.
>
> Maybe Fuji S7000??? (~$450)
> Nikon Coolpix 8700??? (~750 minus $200 rebate = ~$550)
>
> Any others I should consider?
>
> Thanks-
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2004
Petr wrote:
> The coolpix is a piece of junk in regards to pic quality.


The picture quality on the Nikon Coolpix 5700 is excellent - I own one and
use it so I have direct experience. Is your opinion based on ownership?

The picture quality of the Minolta A2 (8MP) is no better than the 5MP
Nikon 5700 in my own tests. (Yes, I have owned both).

The original poster could save themselves quite a lot of money by going
for a 5MP camera instead of an 8MP one. If they want god telephoto zoom,
I would recommend the Nikon 5700, otherwise the Nikon 5400. Going for 5MP
will leave some money for those memory cards and accessories that you will
need. There are plenty of other models which will do as well, of course.

Cheers,
David


 
Reply With Quote
 
Petr
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2004
The pictures from the 5700 were compared to a Canon pro 1 and I much
preffered the canon. That is from personal experience. However, I ended up
with a D70 so there is really no comparison between that and any of the
compacts. What type of photos do you take with your Coolpix?
"David J Taylor" <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk>
wrote in message news:vkvSc.3622$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Petr wrote:
> > The coolpix is a piece of junk in regards to pic quality.

>
> The picture quality on the Nikon Coolpix 5700 is excellent - I own one and
> use it so I have direct experience. Is your opinion based on ownership?
>
> The picture quality of the Minolta A2 (8MP) is no better than the 5MP
> Nikon 5700 in my own tests. (Yes, I have owned both).
>
> The original poster could save themselves quite a lot of money by going
> for a 5MP camera instead of an 8MP one. If they want god telephoto zoom,
> I would recommend the Nikon 5700, otherwise the Nikon 5400. Going for 5MP
> will leave some money for those memory cards and accessories that you will
> need. There are plenty of other models which will do as well, of course.
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-11-2004
Petr wrote:
> The pictures from the 5700 were compared to a Canon pro 1 and I much
> preffered the canon. That is from personal experience. However, I
> ended up with a D70 so there is really no comparison between that and
> any of the compacts. What type of photos do you take with your
> Coolpix? "David J Taylor"


Thanks for that, Petr. I have ruled out a DSLR on weight, bulk and costs
grounds (even though I used to use a Nikon SLR). A lot of these
preferences can depend on in-camera defaults for sharpness, contrast,
colour balance etc.

I take a whole variety of shots of events (conferences, holidays,
personalities etc.) with my camera, but nothing with a tripod. Daytime,
evening nights, indoors and out. Very general. For macro I would
probably stick with my Nikon 990. I very rarely make prints, though, all
my viewing is on computer screens. I have had my shots published, but
just to illustrate a conference report.

Cheers,
David


 
Reply With Quote
 
Petr
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2004
Ah, yeah I tend to do a lot of enlargements in the area of 20x30 so the slr
suits me better. I need to buy a little point and shoot to do macros though.
SLR.s are not the best for those, especially considering the prices of a
macro lens and the 1.6x multiplier does not help a macro lens either. BTW
the Canon Pro 1 had a defect. When you put on the filter adaptor with a UV
filter and the lens cap and you happen to turn the camera on on its side (as
in vertical portrait) the lens would jam as it comes out. This happened on
all the Pro 1's in the store when I tried to return it. Just a warning to
anyone who is looking for one.
Later
Petr

"David J Taylor" <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk>
wrote in message news:VWwSc.3694$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Petr wrote:
> > The pictures from the 5700 were compared to a Canon pro 1 and I much
> > preffered the canon. That is from personal experience. However, I
> > ended up with a D70 so there is really no comparison between that and
> > any of the compacts. What type of photos do you take with your
> > Coolpix? "David J Taylor"

>
> Thanks for that, Petr. I have ruled out a DSLR on weight, bulk and costs
> grounds (even though I used to use a Nikon SLR). A lot of these
> preferences can depend on in-camera defaults for sharpness, contrast,
> colour balance etc.
>
> I take a whole variety of shots of events (conferences, holidays,
> personalities etc.) with my camera, but nothing with a tripod. Daytime,
> evening nights, indoors and out. Very general. For macro I would
> probably stick with my Nikon 990. I very rarely make prints, though, all
> my viewing is on computer screens. I have had my shots published, but
> just to illustrate a conference report.
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
JAY
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2004
I had the same needs and after some great advice from the group on what to
look for i settled on the sony cyber-shot dsc-p100
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/p100.html
and let me tell you im not a big sony fan but this thing is impresive 1.5
seconds from hiting the power button to shooting your first pic very little
to no wait between shots and it is real small and handy!
Good luck
"Tom C." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Looking to get a good digital camera (who isn't?) to use for outdoor
> sports,
> family outings and the usual kid shots. I'd also like to take short
> movies
> with it so that I don't have to lug around my video camera. I have three
> kids, 7, 4 and 1 that require a fast shooting times, so the autofocus
> speed
> needs to be pretty good. I don't want another SLR system - too big and
> bulky to carry. Smaller and digital is better for me at this point. I've
> increased my budget to around $700 and these are the models that I've
> narrowed the choices down to:
>
> Olympus C-5060wz (~$500)
> Is it always better to go less camera and more memory? I can add a good
> size memory card, and just be at my budget.
>
> Minolta Dimage A2 (~$700)
> Put my whole budget into the good camera and get a larger memory card
> later
> after I save up a few bucks.
>
> Olympus C-8080 (~725)
> I guess I can squeeze out a few more bucks.
>
> Maybe Fuji S7000??? (~$450)
> Nikon Coolpix 8700??? (~750 minus $200 rebate = ~$550)
>
> Any others I should consider?
>
> Thanks-
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Marvin Margoshes
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2004

"Tom C." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Looking to get a good digital camera (who isn't?) to use for outdoor

sports,
> family outings and the usual kid shots. I'd also like to take short

movies
> with it so that I don't have to lug around my video camera. I have three
> kids, 7, 4 and 1 that require a fast shooting times, so the autofocus

speed
> needs to be pretty good. I don't want another SLR system - too big and
> bulky to carry. Smaller and digital is better for me at this point. I've
> increased my budget to around $700 and these are the models that I've
> narrowed the choices down to:
>

<snip>
There are new digital vidicams on the market that also take 2 Mp stills.
That is enough for excellent 4X6 prints, and decent 8X10 prints. I don't
have the details handy on these vidicams; I've only seen them advertised.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Thomas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-20-2004
Don't waste time witht he digital stills from a digital camcorder. I
have a JVC that can take a fair picture of a still object. Enought to
make an OK image for an online auction. These tend not to have enough
point and shoot inteligence to make decent pictures or enough manual
settings to come anywhere close to a true digital camera.



"Marvin Margoshes" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...

> <snip>
> There are new digital vidicams on the market that also take 2 Mp stills.
> That is enough for excellent 4X6 prints, and decent 8X10 prints. I don't
> have the details handy on these vidicams; I've only seen them advertised.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2011: Which Ruby books have you read? And which would you recommend? Aston J. Ruby 13 03-16-2011 07:36 AM
When to pick quad core and when to pick dual core thingy NZ Computing 6 11-21-2006 07:08 AM
When to pick ASP.Net, when to pick desktop? tom c ASP .Net 5 11-01-2006 06:15 PM
Which camera would YOU buy if you have $300? Newbie Digital Photography 10 04-06-2005 01:07 AM
What camera would you pick? Rainy Digital Photography 49 02-04-2004 02:44 PM



Advertisments