Best mini digital camera : Nikon coolpix S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by aniramca@yahoo.com, Nov 24, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Could anyone comments about mini digital camera, such as Nikon Coolpix
    S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
    I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
    in my pocket. Unfortunately, Sony, Fuji, Olympus are out of the
    picture, as I only want a camera supported by SD cards.
    Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?
    I don't mind about gadget like Wifi, big screen, etc. The important one
    is size, and therefore I have tentatively selected above. I am not
    looking anything larger than 6 megapixels. I think it is a good size
    quality and don't need anything larger than that. I now own a Panasonic
    Lumix/Leica, but rather big in size.I don't have any complaint and they
    have excellent picture quality. I must have clicked over 3000 shots,
    and still going strong. Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
    of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
    above list (i.e more expensive)?
    Is Nikon lens better than Canon or Pentax lenses? The Casio exilim has
    excellent large screen, but a little to skinny for me and therefore
    awkward in the hand. SD 400 or Pentax S7 seems perfect on my hand.
    Nikon S9 is a little to thin, but I like the Nikon brand name.
    Which one is more rugged? I also owned an older Pentax Optio 30, and I
    noticed picture quality is just a notch lower than my Panasonic/Lumix
    (perhaps unnoticable by regular photographers).
    any comments on the above cameras?
    Thanks for info.
     
    , Nov 24, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Tony Polson Guest

    wrote:
    >
    >Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
    >of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
    >above list (i.e more expensive)?



    The Panasonic DMC-LX2 is fairly small and has excellent performance at
    low ISOs. It has a "Leica" 28-112mm (equivalent) lens and a 16:9 wide
    aspect feature which is excellent for landscapes. The rear LCD is
    large at 2.8 inches. It has Panasonic's very impressive Mega Optical
    image stabiliser to help eliminate the effects of camera shake.

    As you posted this to a UK newsgroup I assume you are in the UK. The
    Panasonic DMC-LX2 comes in silver or black finish and sells here for
    as little as £270 (www.ebuyer.com).

    There is a Leica version of the same camera - the D-Lux 3 - that sells
    for as much as £490, but you get a longer no-quibble Leica Passport
    warranty which covers accidental damage, and a nice leather case.

    Whether this is worth the additional £220 is a moot point. The Leica
    version lacks the hand grip of the Panasonic and is more difficult to
    hold, though it looks very nice. <g>

    [In case the pound sterling sign got munged, the prices are GBP 270
    for the Panasonic DMC-LX2 and GBP 490 for the Leica D-Lux 3, a
    difference of GBP 220.]
     
    Tony Polson, Nov 24, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest Guest

    I am looking for the same thing as you.
    I had a HP 707 that I carried in my shirt pocket as a go everywhere camera.
    After about 30 months of uses It needs to be replaced.
    I am looking at the Nikon P4, 8MP X 3.5 Optical zoom, vibration reduction
    with 2 years warranty for $299,00 CAD.
    My other choice is the Samsung 530, 5.1MP X 3.0 Optical zoom with 1 year
    warranty for $129.00 CAD. The dpreviews gives it a 4 1/2 stars.
    As I have learned most Cameras are designed to operate at a max. of 80-90
    degree of relative humidity and a not to exceed around 90 degrees of heat.
    So should I pay big money for a pocket camera that will have a life span of
    approx. 30 months?
    The Luminix/Leica is my first choice for artistic shots and far away
    subjects. However, its size makes me look conspicuous and it does not carry
    as well as a small camera that fits into your shirt pocket. Unless I hear
    negative feedbacks at the end of the day I may go with the Samsung 530 at
    $129.00 CAD and replace it when it stops working?


    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Could anyone comments about mini digital camera, such as Nikon Coolpix
    > S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
    > I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
    > in my pocket. Unfortunately, Sony, Fuji, Olympus are out of the
    > picture, as I only want a camera supported by SD cards.
    > Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?
    > I don't mind about gadget like Wifi, big screen, etc. The important one
    > is size, and therefore I have tentatively selected above. I am not
    > looking anything larger than 6 megapixels. I think it is a good size
    > quality and don't need anything larger than that. I now own a Panasonic
    > Lumix/Leica, but rather big in size.I don't have any complaint and they
    > have excellent picture quality. I must have clicked over 3000 shots,
    > and still going strong. Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
    > of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
    > above list (i.e more expensive)?
    > Is Nikon lens better than Canon or Pentax lenses? The Casio exilim has
    > excellent large screen, but a little to skinny for me and therefore
    > awkward in the hand. SD 400 or Pentax S7 seems perfect on my hand.
    > Nikon S9 is a little to thin, but I like the Nikon brand name.
    > Which one is more rugged? I also owned an older Pentax Optio 30, and I
    > noticed picture quality is just a notch lower than my Panasonic/Lumix
    > (perhaps unnoticable by regular photographers).
    > any comments on the above cameras?
    > Thanks for info.
    >
     
    Guest, Nov 24, 2006
    #3
  4. Guest Guest

    The Nikon P4 uses SD card and an a supplied proprietary rechargeable 3.7
    volts ion battery and charger. The Samsung 530 uses SD card and comes with
    two supplied alkaline AA batteries with no charger? I already have NiMh
    rechargeable batteries.

    <> wrote in message
    news:IgB9h.24184$...
    >I am looking for the same thing as you.
    > I had a HP 707 that I carried in my shirt pocket as a go everywhere
    > camera. After about 30 months of uses It needs to be replaced.
    > I am looking at the Nikon P4, 8MP X 3.5 Optical zoom, vibration reduction
    > with 2 years warranty for $299,00 CAD.
    > My other choice is the Samsung 530, 5.1MP X 3.0 Optical zoom with 1 year
    > warranty for $129.00 CAD. The dpreviews gives it a 4 1/2 stars.
    > As I have learned most Cameras are designed to operate at a max. of 80-90
    > degree of relative humidity and a not to exceed around 90 degrees of heat.
    > So should I pay big money for a pocket camera that will have a life span
    > of approx. 30 months?
    > The Luminix/Leica is my first choice for artistic shots and far away
    > subjects. However, its size makes me look conspicuous and it does not
    > carry as well as a small camera that fits into your shirt pocket. Unless
    > I hear negative feedbacks at the end of the day I may go with the Samsung
    > 530 at $129.00 CAD and replace it when it stops working?
    >
    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Could anyone comments about mini digital camera, such as Nikon Coolpix
    >> S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
    >> I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
    >> in my pocket. Unfortunately, Sony, Fuji, Olympus are out of the
    >> picture, as I only want a camera supported by SD cards.
    >> Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?
    >> I don't mind about gadget like Wifi, big screen, etc. The important one
    >> is size, and therefore I have tentatively selected above. I am not
    >> looking anything larger than 6 megapixels. I think it is a good size
    >> quality and don't need anything larger than that. I now own a Panasonic
    >> Lumix/Leica, but rather big in size.I don't have any complaint and they
    >> have excellent picture quality. I must have clicked over 3000 shots,
    >> and still going strong. Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
    >> of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
    >> above list (i.e more expensive)?
    >> Is Nikon lens better than Canon or Pentax lenses? The Casio exilim has
    >> excellent large screen, but a little to skinny for me and therefore
    >> awkward in the hand. SD 400 or Pentax S7 seems perfect on my hand.
    >> Nikon S9 is a little to thin, but I like the Nikon brand name.
    >> Which one is more rugged? I also owned an older Pentax Optio 30, and I
    >> noticed picture quality is just a notch lower than my Panasonic/Lumix
    >> (perhaps unnoticable by regular photographers).
    >> any comments on the above cameras?
    >> Thanks for info.
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Guest, Nov 24, 2006
    #4
  5. thoss Guest

    On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 wrote:

    >I am looking for the same thing as you.
    >I had a HP 707 that I carried in my shirt pocket as a go everywhere camera.
    >After about 30 months of uses It needs to be replaced.
    >I am looking at the Nikon P4, 8MP X 3.5 Optical zoom, vibration reduction
    >with 2 years warranty for $299,00 CAD.
    >My other choice is the Samsung 530, 5.1MP X 3.0 Optical zoom with 1 year
    >warranty for $129.00 CAD. The dpreviews gives it a 4 1/2 stars.
    >As I have learned most Cameras are designed to operate at a max. of 80-90
    >degree of relative humidity and a not to exceed around 90 degrees of heat.
    >So should I pay big money for a pocket camera that will have a life span of
    >approx. 30 months?
    >The Luminix/Leica is my first choice for artistic shots and far away
    >subjects. However, its size makes me look conspicuous and it does not carry
    >as well as a small camera that fits into your shirt pocket. Unless I hear
    >negative feedbacks at the end of the day I may go with the Samsung 530 at
    >$129.00 CAD and replace it when it stops working?
    >
    >
    ><> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Could anyone comments about mini digital camera, such as Nikon Coolpix
    >> S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
    >> I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
    >> in my pocket. Unfortunately, Sony, Fuji, Olympus are out of the
    >> picture, as I only want a camera supported by SD cards.
    >> Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?
    >> I don't mind about gadget like Wifi, big screen, etc. The important one
    >> is size, and therefore I have tentatively selected above. I am not
    >> looking anything larger than 6 megapixels. I think it is a good size
    >> quality and don't need anything larger than that. I now own a Panasonic
    >> Lumix/Leica, but rather big in size.I don't have any complaint and they
    >> have excellent picture quality. I must have clicked over 3000 shots,
    >> and still going strong. Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
    >> of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
    >> above list (i.e more expensive)?
    >> Is Nikon lens better than Canon or Pentax lenses? The Casio exilim has
    >> excellent large screen, but a little to skinny for me and therefore
    >> awkward in the hand. SD 400 or Pentax S7 seems perfect on my hand.
    >> Nikon S9 is a little to thin, but I like the Nikon brand name.
    >> Which one is more rugged? I also owned an older Pentax Optio 30, and I
    >> noticed picture quality is just a notch lower than my Panasonic/Lumix
    >> (perhaps unnoticable by regular photographers).
    >> any comments on the above cameras?
    >> Thanks for info.
    >>

    >
    >

    One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast, but some Canons
    seem to still have them.
    --
    Thoss
     
    thoss, Nov 24, 2006
    #5
  6. On 23 Nov 2006 21:24:39 -0800, <> wrote:
    > Could anyone comments about mini digital camera, such as Nikon Coolpix
    > S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
    > I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
    > in my pocket. Unfortunately, Sony, Fuji, Olympus are out of the
    > picture, as I only want a camera supported by SD cards.
    > Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?
    > I don't mind about gadget like Wifi, big screen, etc. The important one
    > is size, and therefore I have tentatively selected above. I am not
    > looking anything larger than 6 megapixels. I think it is a good size
    > quality and don't need anything larger than that. I now own a Panasonic
    > Lumix/Leica, but rather big in size.I don't have any complaint and they
    > have excellent picture quality. I must have clicked over 3000 shots,
    > and still going strong. Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
    > of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
    > above list (i.e more expensive)?


    If you want to stay with Panasonic, the FX series (I'm not sure off-hand
    what the latest model is) is roughly the equivalent of the Canon SD and
    so forth. They also make the LX series, which is a bit bigger, has a
    higher-end lens, full manual controls, and costs quite a bit more.

    -dms
     
    Daniel Silevitch, Nov 24, 2006
    #6
  7. wrote:
    > Could anyone comments about mini digital camera, such as Nikon Coolpix
    > S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
    >
    > Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?


    Panasonic FX01. Or, its successor FX03. Or, maybe the FX01's successor
    is FX50 or FX07 ? I tottally got lost in thos cameras. They look so
    much the same, and have very similar features.

    They are small. Just what you need.
     
    =?iso-8859-1?B?bWlubmVz+HR0aQ==?=, Nov 24, 2006
    #7
  8. thoss wrote:

    > One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    > optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,


    Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them besides the old
    geezers ?
     
    =?iso-8859-1?B?bWlubmVz+HR0aQ==?=, Nov 24, 2006
    #8
  9. Geoff Berrow Guest

    Message-ID: <> from
    minnesøtti contained the following:

    >> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    >> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,

    >
    >Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them


    People who want to take unblurred pictures in daylight?

    --
    Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
    It's only Usenet, no one dies.
    My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
    Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/
     
    Geoff Berrow, Nov 24, 2006
    #9
  10. Guest Guest

    One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast, but some Canons
    seem to still have them.
    --
    Thoss

    The Samsung 530 has an optical view finder and a LCD viewer. The Nikon only
    has a larger LCD viewer.
    I spoke to the technician at Nikon.CA and his answer was that Nikon is
    responding the people preferences.
    Plus it takes less space not having an optical view finder and does not add
    up to the cost of the camera.
    I am from the old school and I find it faster to capture an image using an
    optical view finder than a larger LCD screen.
    Especially when you are doing outdoor activities like canoeing, skiing,
    sailing etc etc.



    "thoss" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 wrote:
    >
    >>I am looking for the same thing as you.
    >>I had a HP 707 that I carried in my shirt pocket as a go everywhere
    >>camera.
    >>After about 30 months of uses It needs to be replaced.
    >>I am looking at the Nikon P4, 8MP X 3.5 Optical zoom, vibration reduction
    >>with 2 years warranty for $299,00 CAD.
    >>My other choice is the Samsung 530, 5.1MP X 3.0 Optical zoom with 1 year
    >>warranty for $129.00 CAD. The dpreviews gives it a 4 1/2 stars.
    >>As I have learned most Cameras are designed to operate at a max. of 80-90
    >>degree of relative humidity and a not to exceed around 90 degrees of heat.
    >>So should I pay big money for a pocket camera that will have a life span
    >>of
    >>approx. 30 months?
    >>The Luminix/Leica is my first choice for artistic shots and far away
    >>subjects. However, its size makes me look conspicuous and it does not
    >>carry
    >>as well as a small camera that fits into your shirt pocket. Unless I hear
    >>negative feedbacks at the end of the day I may go with the Samsung 530 at
    >>$129.00 CAD and replace it when it stops working?
    >>
    >>
    >><> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>> Could anyone comments about mini digital camera, such as Nikon Coolpix
    >>> S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
    >>> I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
    >>> in my pocket. Unfortunately, Sony, Fuji, Olympus are out of the
    >>> picture, as I only want a camera supported by SD cards.
    >>> Among the top shown cameras, which one is the best?
    >>> I don't mind about gadget like Wifi, big screen, etc. The important one
    >>> is size, and therefore I have tentatively selected above. I am not
    >>> looking anything larger than 6 megapixels. I think it is a good size
    >>> quality and don't need anything larger than that. I now own a Panasonic
    >>> Lumix/Leica, but rather big in size.I don't have any complaint and they
    >>> have excellent picture quality. I must have clicked over 3000 shots,
    >>> and still going strong. Does Panasonic/Lumix make a mini one like one
    >>> of the above model? Perhaps not in the same range price such as the
    >>> above list (i.e more expensive)?
    >>> Is Nikon lens better than Canon or Pentax lenses? The Casio exilim has
    >>> excellent large screen, but a little to skinny for me and therefore
    >>> awkward in the hand. SD 400 or Pentax S7 seems perfect on my hand.
    >>> Nikon S9 is a little to thin, but I like the Nikon brand name.
    >>> Which one is more rugged? I also owned an older Pentax Optio 30, and I
    >>> noticed picture quality is just a notch lower than my Panasonic/Lumix
    >>> (perhaps unnoticable by regular photographers).
    >>> any comments on the above cameras?
    >>> Thanks for info.
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    > One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    > optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast, but some Canons
    > seem to still have them.
    > --
    > Thoss
     
    Guest, Nov 24, 2006
    #10
  11. wrote:

    > I am from the old school and I find it faster to capture an image using an
    > optical view finder than a larger LCD screen.
    > Especially when you are doing outdoor activities like canoeing, skiing,
    > sailing etc etc.


    This thread is not about discussing whether it is better to have the
    optical viewfinder in the modern P&S or not (this is the same kind of
    discussion -- what is better, Mac or PC ?).

    I agree it is faster to use the optical viewfinder when you are
    canoeing or sailing. However, the modern digital P&S aren't fast (the
    shutter lag is about half a second). If you want a fast camera, you
    need the camera which is pre-focussed and pre-set for aperture and
    exposure time. That's where you might want an optical VF. It is a
    different beast to the modern digital P&S cameras.
     
    =?iso-8859-1?B?bWlubmVz+HR0aQ==?=, Nov 24, 2006
    #11
  12. J. Clarke Guest

    Re: Best mini digital camera : Nikon coolpix S9, Canon SD400,Pentax S7

    On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:21:18 +0000, Geoff Berrow wrote:

    > Message-ID: <> from
    > minnesøtti contained the following:
    >
    >>> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    >>> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,

    >>
    >>Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them

    >
    > People who want to take unblurred pictures in daylight?


    How does using the optical finder help you avoid that? If you've got
    daylight you can use a high shutter speed so camera movement is not an
    issue and there's no focusing aid in the finder so it doesn't improve
    focus, thus I don't see any real benefit to using it except where there is
    sunlight directly on the LCD, but even there a piece of cardboard takes
    care of the problem.

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    J. Clarke, Nov 24, 2006
    #12
  13. Guest Guest

    This thread is about " Could anyone comments about mini digital camera,
    such as Nikon Coolpix
    S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
    I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
    in my pocket."
    My observations are: you can get a suitable camera like the Nikon P4 without
    a view finder or camera that have both a view finder and LCD screen. It up
    the the users preferences. Sure there are many good digital cameras on the
    market that can suit the original thread requirement. However, knowing that
    carrying a camera in your shirt pocket every day of the week may reduce its
    longevity.
    At $129.00 CAD with a 4 1/2 stars DPreview, a view finder and LCD screen
    the Samsung 530 is worth placing on the short list as a go everywhere
    camera.
    Not to mention that the Samsung 530 uses an SD card and conventional AA
    batteries. The other camera to consider would be the Canon PowerShot A530






    "minnesøtti" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I am from the old school and I find it faster to capture an image using
    >> an
    >> optical view finder than a larger LCD screen.
    >> Especially when you are doing outdoor activities like canoeing, skiing,
    >> sailing etc etc.

    >
    > This thread is not about discussing whether it is better to have the
    > optical viewfinder in the modern P&S or not (this is the same kind of
    > discussion -- what is better, Mac or PC ?).
    >
    > I agree it is faster to use the optical viewfinder when you are
    > canoeing or sailing. However, the modern digital P&S aren't fast (the
    > shutter lag is about half a second). If you want a fast camera, you
    > need the camera which is pre-focussed and pre-set for aperture and
    > exposure time. That's where you might want an optical VF. It is a
    > different beast to the modern digital P&S cameras.
    >
     
    Guest, Nov 24, 2006
    #13
  14. Guest Guest

    " I don't see any real benefit to using it except where there is
    sunlight directly on the LCD, but even there a piece of cardboard takes
    care of the problem."
    The idea of using a piece of cardboard is doable.
    When I am going downhill on my skis and the sun behind me reflecting on
    white snow I do not feel comfortable using a piece of cardboard nor would I
    be able to.
    The same thing takes place when sailing, I have to steer my boat and the
    subject has to be captured quickly.
    If I am standing still then I can arranged to have some shielding from the
    sun and press on the trigger at the most pertinent time.



    "J. Clarke" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 14:21:18 +0000, Geoff Berrow wrote:
    >
    >> Message-ID: <> from
    >> minnesøtti contained the following:
    >>
    >>>> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    >>>> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,
    >>>
    >>>Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them

    >>
    >> People who want to take unblurred pictures in daylight?

    >
    > How does using the optical finder help you avoid that? If you've got
    > daylight you can use a high shutter speed so camera movement is not an
    > issue and there's no focusing aid in the finder so it doesn't improve
    > focus, thus I don't see any real benefit to using it except where there is
    > sunlight directly on the LCD, but even there a piece of cardboard takes
    > care of the problem.
    >
    > --
    > --John
    > to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    > (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    Guest, Nov 24, 2006
    #14
  15. Steve B Guest

    "minnesøtti" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > thoss wrote:
    >
    >> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    >> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,

    >
    > Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them besides the old
    > geezers ?
    >


    Uh, people who want to compose their picture and view all the icons on the
    viewer? Those who want to use manual mode and adjust focus? Those who want
    to be able to see what they're taking a photo of when it's bright sunlight
    outside, and the back screen washes out from bright light?

    Just a couple of guesses.
     
    Steve B, Nov 24, 2006
    #15
  16. thoss Guest

    On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 =?iso-8859-1?B?bWlubmVz+HR0aQ==?= wrote:

    >
    >thoss wrote:
    >
    >> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    >> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,

    >
    >Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them besides the old
    >geezers ?
    >

    And what's wrong being an old geezer? You will probably be one some
    day.
    --
    Thoss
     
    thoss, Nov 24, 2006
    #16
  17. thoss Guest

    On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 Steve B wrote:

    >
    >"minnesøtti" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>
    >> thoss wrote:
    >>
    >>> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    >>> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,

    >>
    >> Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them besides the old
    >> geezers ?
    >>

    >
    >Uh, people who want to compose their picture and view all the icons on the
    >viewer? Those who want to use manual mode and adjust focus? Those who want
    >to be able to see what they're taking a photo of when it's bright sunlight
    >outside, and the back screen washes out from bright light?
    >
    >Just a couple of guesses.
    >
    >

    Also those who want to steady the camera against their foreheads rather
    than holding it at shaking-arms length.
    --
    Thoss
     
    thoss, Nov 24, 2006
    #17
  18. thoss Guest

    On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 =?iso-8859-1?B?bWlubmVz+HR0aQ==?= wrote:

    >
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I am from the old school and I find it faster to capture an image using an
    >> optical view finder than a larger LCD screen.
    >> Especially when you are doing outdoor activities like canoeing, skiing,
    >> sailing etc etc.

    >
    >This thread is not about discussing whether it is better to have the
    >optical viewfinder in the modern P&S or not (this is the same kind of
    >discussion -- what is better, Mac or PC ?).
    >

    This thread is about advising the OP as to which camera to buy. And the
    presence or absence of an optical viewfinder may well sway him one way
    or another.
    --
    Thoss
     
    thoss, Nov 24, 2006
    #18
  19. J. Clarke Guest

    Re: Best mini digital camera : Nikon coolpix S9, Canon SD400,Pentax S7

    On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:07:41 +0000, marierdj wrote:

    > This thread is about " Could anyone comments about mini digital camera,
    > such as Nikon Coolpix
    > S9, Canon SD400, Pentax S7, Casio Exilim EX-S600, etc?
    > I like to have a good quality, durable and strong camera that I can put
    > in my pocket."
    > My observations are: you can get a suitable camera like the Nikon P4 without
    > a view finder or camera that have both a view finder and LCD screen. It up
    > the the users preferences. Sure there are many good digital cameras on the
    > market that can suit the original thread requirement. However, knowing that
    > carrying a camera in your shirt pocket every day of the week may reduce its
    > longevity.
    > At $129.00 CAD with a 4 1/2 stars DPreview, a view finder and LCD screen
    > the Samsung 530 is worth placing on the short list as a go everywhere
    > camera.
    > Not to mention that the Samsung 530 uses an SD card and conventional AA
    > batteries. The other camera to consider would be the Canon PowerShot
    > A530


    Personally if the requirement is for "durable and strong that I can put
    in my pocket" the Olympus Stylus 720SW is the obvious choice. Drop it,
    roll your kayak, fall off your surfboard, it doesn't care.

    > "minnesøtti" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> I am from the old school and I find it faster to capture an image
    >>> using an
    >>> optical view finder than a larger LCD screen. Especially when you are
    >>> doing outdoor activities like canoeing, skiing, sailing etc etc.

    >>
    >> This thread is not about discussing whether it is better to have the
    >> optical viewfinder in the modern P&S or not (this is the same kind of
    >> discussion -- what is better, Mac or PC ?).
    >>
    >> I agree it is faster to use the optical viewfinder when you are
    >> canoeing or sailing. However, the modern digital P&S aren't fast (the
    >> shutter lag is about half a second). If you want a fast camera, you
    >> need the camera which is pre-focussed and pre-set for aperture and
    >> exposure time. That's where you might want an optical VF. It is a
    >> different beast to the modern digital P&S cameras.
    >>


    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    J. Clarke, Nov 24, 2006
    #19
  20. J. Clarke Guest

    Re: Best mini digital camera : Nikon coolpix S9, Canon SD400,Pentax S7

    On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 09:27:00 -0800, Steve B wrote:

    > "minnesøtti" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> thoss wrote:
    >>
    >>> One point you might like to bear in mind is: does the camera have an
    >>> optical viewfinder? They seem to be vanishing fast,

    >>
    >> Optical viewfinder is a toss (ha-ha). Who needs them besides the old
    >> geezers ?
    >>

    >
    > Uh, people who want to compose their picture and view all the icons on the
    > viewer?


    ??? I'm sorry, but how does the optical finder let you do that?

    > Those who want to use manual mode and adjust focus?


    What point-and-shoot has an optical finder that is useful in adjusting
    focus?

    > Those who
    > want to be able to see what they're taking a photo of when it's bright
    > sunlight outside, and the back screen washes out from bright light?


    Piece of cardboard and some duct tape fixes that.
    >
    > Just a couple of guesses.


    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    J. Clarke, Nov 24, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Nikon Coolpix 775 or Nikon Coolpix 2500

    Larry R Harrison Jr, Aug 2, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    551
    Larry R Harrison Jr
    Aug 2, 2003
  2. Tim S

    Canon SD400?

    Tim S, Oct 23, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    460
    Jim Townsend
    Oct 23, 2003
  3. Sony DSCW5 vs Canon SD400?

    , Mar 24, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    287
  4. casey j cress

    Canon SD400 vs SD500 - more scene modes?

    casey j cress, Jun 10, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    305
    Bucky
    Jun 10, 2005
  5. Konica Dimage x60 vs. Canon SD400

    , Jun 23, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    341
Loading...

Share This Page