Fuji Finepix / Canon Powershot / Kodak Easyhare ...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Kay, Jan 6, 2006.

  1. Kay

    Kay Guest

    After a month of review I have finalised the following models:

    1) Fuji Finepix S5200/S5600
    2) Canon Powershot S2 IS
    3) Kodak Easyshare P850
    4) Olympus Camedia SP500 Ultrazoom

    All these are SLR like camera with >=10x optical zoom, with the same
    price range. After I went thru all the specs of these, now its quite
    confusing to select one among them. Almost all seems to be having the
    same features...

    I welcome ur suggestions reg the better one...
    Thank you...
     
    Kay, Jan 6, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Kay wrote:
    > After a month of review I have finalised the following models:
    >
    > 1) Fuji Finepix S5200/S5600
    > 2) Canon Powershot S2 IS
    > 3) Kodak Easyshare P850
    > 4) Olympus Camedia SP500 Ultrazoom
    >
    > All these are SLR like camera with >=10x optical zoom, with the same
    > price range. After I went thru all the specs of these, now its quite
    > confusing to select one among them. Almost all seems to be having the
    > same features...
    >
    > I welcome ur suggestions reg the better one...
    > Thank you...


    - with 10X optical zoom, I would not recommend any camera without image
    stabilisation (unless you use a tripod all the time).

    - I would include the Panasonic FZ5, which is in the same class as the
    Canon S2 IS, has a better quality lens, and may be a little less
    expensive. I've has my FZ5 for nearly a year now and been very pleased
    with it. It also uses a single package battery, rather than the multiple
    AA cells which some others use, and I also like that feature.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 7, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Kay

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 08:29:51 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

    > - with 10X optical zoom, I would not recommend any camera
    > without image stabilisation (unless you use a tripod all the time).


    That seems to be an overrated talking point. My S5100 with its 10x
    optical zoom does very nicely without image stabilization. When
    slow shutter speeds are necessary, many convenient stabilizing aids
    can usually be taken advantage of even when tripods aren't carried.
    The S5200's more light sensitive sensor compensates to some extent,
    allowing faster shutter speeds comparable cameras. This also has an
    advantage. The cameras that can get away with using slower shutter
    speeds (because of IS) only help eliminate some (not all) camera
    jitter. But if a camera (such as the S5200) could utilize a faster
    shutter speed, it would do a better job dealing with subject
    movement than the typical camera using IS. Ov course I can't stop
    you from recommending 10x cameras only if they have IS, and that
    feature should be considered, but so many people give it far more
    weight than it deserves. _Any_ of the 4 cameras mentioned would be
    the right choice for some people, the wrong choice for others. We
    also seem to disagree on batteries. I like cameras that can use
    smooth, sleek, rounded AA batteries, while you prefer cameras that
    use the more expensive, proprietary, sharp edged thingies. :)
     
    ASAAR, Jan 7, 2006
    #3
  4. Kay

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Kay wrote:
    > After a month of review I have finalised the following models:
    >
    > 1) Fuji Finepix S5200/S5600
    > 2) Canon Powershot S2 IS
    > 3) Kodak Easyshare P850
    > 4) Olympus Camedia SP500 Ultrazoom
    >
    > All these are SLR like camera with >=10x optical zoom, with the same
    > price range. After I went thru all the specs of these, now its quite
    > confusing to select one among them. Almost all seems to be having the
    > same features...
    >
    > I welcome ur suggestions reg the better one...
    > Thank you...
    >


    Given the list, you might find that actually handling each camera for a
    few minutes will answer your question. I am sure any of them will serve
    your needs well, so let the feel of the camera in your hands determine
    your final choice.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jan 7, 2006
    #4
  5. ASAAR wrote:
    > On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 08:29:51 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    >> - with 10X optical zoom, I would not recommend any camera
    >> without image stabilisation (unless you use a tripod all the time).

    >
    > That seems to be an overrated talking point. My S5100 with its 10x
    > optical zoom does very nicely without image stabilization. When
    > slow shutter speeds are necessary, many convenient stabilizing aids
    > can usually be taken advantage of even when tripods aren't carried.
    > The S5200's more light sensitive sensor compensates to some extent,
    > allowing faster shutter speeds comparable cameras. This also has an
    > advantage. The cameras that can get away with using slower shutter
    > speeds (because of IS) only help eliminate some (not all) camera
    > jitter. But if a camera (such as the S5200) could utilize a faster
    > shutter speed, it would do a better job dealing with subject
    > movement than the typical camera using IS. Ov course I can't stop
    > you from recommending 10x cameras only if they have IS, and that
    > feature should be considered, but so many people give it far more
    > weight than it deserves. _Any_ of the 4 cameras mentioned would be
    > the right choice for some people, the wrong choice for others. We
    > also seem to disagree on batteries. I like cameras that can use
    > smooth, sleek, rounded AA batteries, while you prefer cameras that
    > use the more expensive, proprietary, sharp edged thingies. :)


    We have different preferences on batteries, although I wouldn't put it as
    strong as a disagreement, simply making a different choice. A
    "disagreement" sounds as if it needs to be settled one way or the other,
    whereas a preference does not.

    I don't accept that the speed gain by improved sensitivity (if any) of the
    Fuji over other models in its class is anything like as much as the speed
    gain available through image stabilisation (IS). The best IS systems
    offer three stops, gains through a better CCD one stop at most. We will
    see all manufacturers using better CCDs as time progresses, and I'm
    delighted to see Fuji leading the way.

    Of course, if you need the faster shutter speed for stopping subject
    movement, image-stabilisation will not help you. However, I have been
    surprised by the number of times it /does/ help you - even with wide-angle
    lenses, For example, you are shooting at ISO 100 to minimise noise. On a
    dark winter's day here the exposure outdoors with a darer subject can be
    as low as 1/8s even at a reasonable aperture. Having the IS there can
    make all the difference, even with a wide-angle lens. Yes, at times you
    can brace using available objects and surfaces, but many times you cannot.

    It's through actual field experience of using cameras both with and
    without IS that I make my strong recommendation.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 7, 2006
    #5
  6. Kay

    John Bean Guest

    On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 11:00:01 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    wrote:
    >It's through actual field experience of using cameras both with and
    >without IS that I make my strong recommendation.


    Seconded, for exactly the same reason.

    As an aside this week's AP magazine has a test of the FZ5
    against Fuji S5600, Olympus SP500 and KM Z5.

    Not a lot in it but the FZ5 wins, and not just for its OIS
    system, as this summary shows:

    "Panasonic produces the cleanest images with most detail.
    The Panasonic model is also one of the most pleasant models
    to use and benefits from a rapid and more importantly
    accurate AF system which particularly impresses in macro
    mode."

    --
    John Bean
     
    John Bean, Jan 7, 2006
    #6
  7. Kay

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 11:00:01 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

    > We have different preferences on batteries, although I wouldn't put it as
    > strong as a disagreement, simply making a different choice. A
    > "disagreement" sounds as if it needs to be settled one way or the other,
    > whereas a preference does not.


    Well, it may not have been you, but I recall someone here being
    quite vociferous about how big a problem AA batteries were, always
    ending up rolling on the floor, not being able to power cameras very
    long, so I tend to notice when people simply state a preference.
    All battery types have their strong and weak points. If I could be
    assured that all cameras that used lithium rechargeables would be
    able to easily get inexpensive replacements for at least the next 40
    or 50 years (whether I want to continue using the camera or not),
    I'd be much more inclined to not consider AA batteries so favorably.
    Sony uses very small "gumstick" rechargeable batteries in some of
    their products, such as players and MiniDisc and CD players. They
    are available (but not interchangeable) as either NiMH or Lithium.
    But the NiMH gumsticks (which last year were improved from 1100mah
    to 1400mah) understandably last only 1/2 as long as NiMH AA cells
    that power the same products, are very difficult to find, and cost
    more than 10 times as much. I think Sony has now reduced the price
    to $20 each. Standard, readily available, inexpensive lithium
    batteries don't yet exist. When they do, I'll be all for them.


    > I don't accept that the speed gain by improved sensitivity (if any) of the
    > Fuji over other models in its class is anything like as much as the speed
    > gain available through image stabilisation (IS). The best IS systems
    > offer three stops, gains through a better CCD one stop at most. We will
    > see all manufacturers using better CCDs as time progresses, and I'm
    > delighted to see Fuji leading the way.


    Does the Panasonic camera you recommended offer the full three
    stops advantage? The better CCD in the Fuji F10 seems to have
    provided more than a one stop improvement. If we assume that the
    Panasonic FZ5 consistently provides a 2 stop advantage, and the
    S5200/S5600's better sensor only provides a 1 stop advantage, then
    yes, the FZ5 has a 1 stop advantage over the S5200. But still, only
    applicable to camera shake. For subject movement the Fuji would
    have a 1 stop advantage over the Panasonic. Whichever you prefer,
    the difference is not very great, and that's why it seems
    unreasonable to say that you'd never recommend a camera with 10x
    zoom that doesn't offer IS. There are so many other factors to
    consider. Where it would be easier to make a choice is if Panasonic
    offered two models, one with and one without IS, but were otherwise
    identical.


    > Of course, if you need the faster shutter speed for stopping subject
    > movement, image-stabilisation will not help you. However, I have been
    > surprised by the number of times it /does/ help you - even with wide-angle
    > lenses, For example, you are shooting at ISO 100 to minimise noise. On a
    > dark winter's day here the exposure outdoors with a darer subject can be
    > as low as 1/8s even at a reasonable aperture. Having the IS there can
    > make all the difference, even with a wide-angle lens. Yes, at times you
    > can brace using available objects and surfaces, but many times you cannot.


    But that's conveniently avoiding the advantage that a better
    sensor provides. You can shoot at ISO 200 and 400 with very little
    noise, which would allow you to use a faster shutter speed. If this
    is a sticking point in the selection of a camera, a good DSLR that
    can take low noise shots at ISO 800 or higher would be needed.


    > It's through actual field experience of using cameras both with and
    > without IS that I make my strong recommendation.


    There's nothing wrong with your preference, but all too often
    when someone makes recommendations to others, they'll either leave
    out weak points (such as noisier sensors, among other things) or
    fail to mention advantages other cameras might have. I'd be much
    more likely to accept the advice of someone that said "If you need a
    camera that can do A, the Panasonic FZ5 is ideal, but if you need it
    to do B, the Kodak P850 is more suitable for what you want." When
    one camera model is always recommended, the tendency is to think
    "Yeah, I had a feeling you'd say that." <g>
     
    ASAAR, Jan 7, 2006
    #7
  8. ASAAR wrote:
    []
    > Standard, readily available, inexpensive lithium
    > batteries don't yet exist. When they do, I'll be all for them.


    ... and I fully support that. I had hoped that someone in the USA - a
    consumers' right champion - might take on the manufacturers!

    []
    > Does the Panasonic camera you recommended offer the full three
    > stops advantage?


    I see a factor of about 10X - i.e. three stops gain if not a little more.

    The better CCD in the Fuji F10 seems to have
    > provided more than a one stop improvement. If we assume that the
    > Panasonic FZ5 consistently provides a 2 stop advantage, and the
    > S5200/S5600's better sensor only provides a 1 stop advantage, then
    > yes, the FZ5 has a 1 stop advantage over the S5200. But still, only
    > applicable to camera shake. For subject movement the Fuji would
    > have a 1 stop advantage over the Panasonic. Whichever you prefer,
    > the difference is not very great, and that's why it seems
    > unreasonable to say that you'd never recommend a camera with 10x
    > zoom that doesn't offer IS. There are so many other factors to
    > consider. Where it would be easier to make a choice is if Panasonic
    > offered two models, one with and one without IS, but were otherwise
    > identical.


    IS is a major advantage, so you won't find Panasonic dropping it except
    for a very good reason. Would be even better were Fuji to put Panasonic's
    Leica lens and IS onto their sensor!

    >> Of course, if you need the faster shutter speed for stopping subject
    >> movement, image-stabilisation will not help you. However, I have
    >> been surprised by the number of times it /does/ help you - even with
    >> wide-angle lenses, For example, you are shooting at ISO 100 to
    >> minimise noise. On a dark winter's day here the exposure outdoors
    >> with a darer subject can be as low as 1/8s even at a reasonable
    >> aperture. Having the IS there can make all the difference, even
    >> with a wide-angle lens. Yes, at times you can brace using available
    >> objects and surfaces, but many times you cannot.

    >
    > But that's conveniently avoiding the advantage that a better
    > sensor provides. You can shoot at ISO 200 and 400 with very little
    > noise, which would allow you to use a faster shutter speed. If this
    > is a sticking point in the selection of a camera, a good DSLR that
    > can take low noise shots at ISO 800 or higher would be needed.


    I don't see how any manufacturer can get a gain in the sensor of 4 times,
    without making some fundamental change in sensor design. If one can do
    it, then all can given time. I've yet to see any technical (rather than
    marketing) description of how Fuji gets this better performance, and would
    appreciate if you could provide one.

    >> It's through actual field experience of using cameras both with and
    >> without IS that I make my strong recommendation.

    >
    > There's nothing wrong with your preference, but all too often
    > when someone makes recommendations to others, they'll either leave
    > out weak points (such as noisier sensors, among other things) or
    > fail to mention advantages other cameras might have. I'd be much
    > more likely to accept the advice of someone that said "If you need a
    > camera that can do A, the Panasonic FZ5 is ideal, but if you need it
    > to do B, the Kodak P850 is more suitable for what you want." When
    > one camera model is always recommended, the tendency is to think
    > "Yeah, I had a feeling you'd say that." <g>


    One guiding principle I try and apply (but may be don't always succeed)
    when giving advice is to only recommend those items of which I have direct
    personal experience, so my strong recommendations will be confined to
    cameras I've actually used (or from personal references I trust).

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 7, 2006
    #8
  9. Kay

    Guest

    If you look back in rec.photo.digital, you'll find a similar list shows
    up often. Someone without enough experience to have a clear preference
    in *work flow* ends up with a list that includes several cameras which
    are, for the moment, hot.

    Reality doesn't intervene for a few hundred shots, when - IMHO - most
    folks find they use their new camera the same way they used previous
    cameras and get pretty much the same results no matter which camera on
    the Hot list they get.

    The real differences between cameras don't show up in intermittent use.
    They blow up when you're under pressure or have special needs and when
    you sell it to buy the next hot camera. The used market has been
    merciless to almost everybody but Nikon but if you don't like the feel
    of Nikon, it's a bad deal to buy one. Ergonomics counts.

    Whatever you buy today is likely to be obsolete by this time next year
    - the "hot" list will have moved on. Within two years, you will find it
    hard to get support, no matter the brand. Digital cameras are showing
    the same sorts of "hot" times as computers. Within five years, every
    camera on your list will no longer have meaningful support from anybody
    except other users. If it needs repair, it will probably be cheaper to
    buy a new one with advanced features.

    Have you USED anything on the list? Bring a memory card and click a few
    shots off in the store of the sort you want to take. Walk through a
    project. Touch and handle those cameras before you make up your mind on
    paper specs. There are no perfect cameras. Buy the camera for pictures
    you need to take now, pictures you would have taken over the last two
    weeks if you'd had it. Digital cameras do not have long lifespans, make
    sure the one you buy can do most of what you want to do TODAY. They do
    not improve with age. Go to user groups devoted to that camera model
    and read what they have to say. That will bring up technical issues
    that you might not think of otherwise.
     
    , Jan 7, 2006
    #9
  10. Kay

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 13:06:03 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

    > One guiding principle I try and apply (but may be don't always succeed)
    > when giving advice is to only recommend those items of which I have direct
    > personal experience, so my strong recommendations will be confined to
    > cameras I've actually used (or from personal references I trust).


    And I sometimes do, and sometimes don't. I've given a list of the
    weak points of the S5100 a few times when people were seeking
    comparisons. I even sometimes recommend cameras that I haven't
    used, if there seems to be a consensus among reviewers and people in
    the ng that have posted their experiences. In one recent reply I
    mentioned only that I was more than satisfied with the S5100 and
    would purchase another if it was lost or stolen. But I didn't say
    *why* I thought it was a good camera because I had no idea what
    needs the OP had. He was vague and so was I. It's all well and
    good to say the FZ5 is a great camera because it has a wonderfully
    implemented IS. But what if you later discovered that the need was
    for a camera that would never be used without a tripod? If there
    was some way to keep a score of my recommendation successes, I'd say
    that it wouldn't be based on how many people I managed to convince
    to get a particular camera. It would be based more on how many were
    pleased with the camera after using it for 6 months to a year. For
    that you need to know more than camera type + 10x zoom at a
    particular price point. Knowing the intended use is more important,
    as many people asking questions haven't enough experience to know
    the right questions to ask. :)
     
    ASAAR, Jan 7, 2006
    #10
  11. Kay

    Ron Hunter Guest

    ASAAR wrote:
    > On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 08:29:51 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    >> - with 10X optical zoom, I would not recommend any camera
    >> without image stabilisation (unless you use a tripod all the time).

    >
    > That seems to be an overrated talking point. My S5100 with its 10x
    > optical zoom does very nicely without image stabilization. When
    > slow shutter speeds are necessary, many convenient stabilizing aids
    > can usually be taken advantage of even when tripods aren't carried.
    > The S5200's more light sensitive sensor compensates to some extent,
    > allowing faster shutter speeds comparable cameras. This also has an
    > advantage. The cameras that can get away with using slower shutter
    > speeds (because of IS) only help eliminate some (not all) camera
    > jitter. But if a camera (such as the S5200) could utilize a faster
    > shutter speed, it would do a better job dealing with subject
    > movement than the typical camera using IS. Ov course I can't stop
    > you from recommending 10x cameras only if they have IS, and that
    > feature should be considered, but so many people give it far more
    > weight than it deserves. _Any_ of the 4 cameras mentioned would be
    > the right choice for some people, the wrong choice for others. We
    > also seem to disagree on batteries. I like cameras that can use
    > smooth, sleek, rounded AA batteries, while you prefer cameras that
    > use the more expensive, proprietary, sharp edged thingies. :)
    >


    Well, at least one of those on the list HAS IS (the Kodak p850). Not
    sure of the others.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jan 7, 2006
    #11
  12. ASAAR wrote:
    []
    > And I sometimes do, and sometimes don't. I've given a list of the
    > weak points of the S5100 a few times when people were seeking
    > comparisons. I even sometimes recommend cameras that I haven't
    > used, if there seems to be a consensus among reviewers and people in
    > the ng that have posted their experiences. In one recent reply I
    > mentioned only that I was more than satisfied with the S5100 and
    > would purchase another if it was lost or stolen. But I didn't say
    > *why* I thought it was a good camera because I had no idea what
    > needs the OP had. He was vague and so was I. It's all well and
    > good to say the FZ5 is a great camera because it has a wonderfully
    > implemented IS. But what if you later discovered that the need was
    > for a camera that would never be used without a tripod? If there
    > was some way to keep a score of my recommendation successes, I'd say
    > that it wouldn't be based on how many people I managed to convince
    > to get a particular camera. It would be based more on how many were
    > pleased with the camera after using it for 6 months to a year. For
    > that you need to know more than camera type + 10x zoom at a
    > particular price point. Knowing the intended use is more important,
    > as many people asking questions haven't enough experience to know
    > the right questions to ask. :)


    It will be interesting to hear back from Kay about what her photographic
    needs are, and which camera she got in the end. As others have said,
    sometimes just holding the camera in your hands you immediately know which
    one you could live with!

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 7, 2006
    #12
  13. Kay

    Ron Hunter Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > ASAAR wrote:
    >> On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 08:29:51 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:
    >>
    >>> - with 10X optical zoom, I would not recommend any camera
    >>> without image stabilisation (unless you use a tripod all the time).

    >> That seems to be an overrated talking point. My S5100 with its 10x
    >> optical zoom does very nicely without image stabilization. When
    >> slow shutter speeds are necessary, many convenient stabilizing aids
    >> can usually be taken advantage of even when tripods aren't carried.
    >> The S5200's more light sensitive sensor compensates to some extent,
    >> allowing faster shutter speeds comparable cameras. This also has an
    >> advantage. The cameras that can get away with using slower shutter
    >> speeds (because of IS) only help eliminate some (not all) camera
    >> jitter. But if a camera (such as the S5200) could utilize a faster
    >> shutter speed, it would do a better job dealing with subject
    >> movement than the typical camera using IS. Ov course I can't stop
    >> you from recommending 10x cameras only if they have IS, and that
    >> feature should be considered, but so many people give it far more
    >> weight than it deserves. _Any_ of the 4 cameras mentioned would be
    >> the right choice for some people, the wrong choice for others. We
    >> also seem to disagree on batteries. I like cameras that can use
    >> smooth, sleek, rounded AA batteries, while you prefer cameras that
    >> use the more expensive, proprietary, sharp edged thingies. :)

    >
    > We have different preferences on batteries, although I wouldn't put it as
    > strong as a disagreement, simply making a different choice. A
    > "disagreement" sounds as if it needs to be settled one way or the other,
    > whereas a preference does not.
    >
    > I don't accept that the speed gain by improved sensitivity (if any) of the
    > Fuji over other models in its class is anything like as much as the speed
    > gain available through image stabilisation (IS). The best IS systems
    > offer three stops, gains through a better CCD one stop at most. We will
    > see all manufacturers using better CCDs as time progresses, and I'm
    > delighted to see Fuji leading the way.
    >
    > Of course, if you need the faster shutter speed for stopping subject
    > movement, image-stabilisation will not help you. However, I have been
    > surprised by the number of times it /does/ help you - even with wide-angle
    > lenses, For example, you are shooting at ISO 100 to minimise noise. On a
    > dark winter's day here the exposure outdoors with a darer subject can be
    > as low as 1/8s even at a reasonable aperture. Having the IS there can
    > make all the difference, even with a wide-angle lens. Yes, at times you
    > can brace using available objects and surfaces, but many times you cannot.
    >
    > It's through actual field experience of using cameras both with and
    > without IS that I make my strong recommendation.
    >
    > David
    >
    >

    I agree that IS in a 10x or greater zoom camera is a plus. However, I
    don't know that it is a show stopper if it is not there as that depends
    on how the user intends to use the camera. If he shoots inside, and
    with a tripod, or always uses a tripod outside, it might not make a lot
    of difference to that user.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jan 7, 2006
    #13
  14. Kay

    Rich Guest

    On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 11:00:01 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    wrote:

    >ASAAR wrote:
    >> On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 08:29:51 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:
    >>
    >>> - with 10X optical zoom, I would not recommend any camera
    >>> without image stabilisation (unless you use a tripod all the time).

    >>
    >> That seems to be an overrated talking point. My S5100 with its 10x
    >> optical zoom does very nicely without image stabilization. When
    >> slow shutter speeds are necessary, many convenient stabilizing aids
    >> can usually be taken advantage of even when tripods aren't carried.
    >> The S5200's more light sensitive sensor compensates to some extent,
    >> allowing faster shutter speeds comparable cameras. This also has an
    >> advantage. The cameras that can get away with using slower shutter
    >> speeds (because of IS) only help eliminate some (not all) camera
    >> jitter. But if a camera (such as the S5200) could utilize a faster
    >> shutter speed, it would do a better job dealing with subject
    >> movement than the typical camera using IS. Ov course I can't stop
    >> you from recommending 10x cameras only if they have IS, and that
    >> feature should be considered, but so many people give it far more
    >> weight than it deserves. _Any_ of the 4 cameras mentioned would be
    >> the right choice for some people, the wrong choice for others. We
    >> also seem to disagree on batteries. I like cameras that can use
    >> smooth, sleek, rounded AA batteries, while you prefer cameras that
    >> use the more expensive, proprietary, sharp edged thingies. :)

    >
    >We have different preferences on batteries, although I wouldn't put it as
    >strong as a disagreement, simply making a different choice. A
    >"disagreement" sounds as if it needs to be settled one way or the other,
    >whereas a preference does not.


    AA batteries are a pain in the a--. I had them in my C3040 (4 of
    them) and I hated them. Now I have one, and it's so much easier.
    -Rich
     
    Rich, Jan 7, 2006
    #14
  15. Kay

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:05:24 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

    > It will be interesting to hear back from Kay about what her photographic
    > needs are, and which camera she got in the end. As others have said,
    > sometimes just holding the camera in your hands you immediately know
    > which one you could live with!


    That I completely agree with. Though I like the S5100 very much,
    I think it would feel better while taking shots if it was about 15%
    to 25% larger. But when not actually using it, the small size and
    weight almost make me forget I'm holding it. If I got my wish I'm
    not sure if I'd keep holding it, but would put it down more often.
    It's probably more a matter of ergonomics than pure weight though,
    as I've found it much more enjoyable holding a larger SLR for
    extended periods when gripping the handle of an external flash
    bracket. So I often attached the bracket even when I didn't bring
    the flash along.
     
    ASAAR, Jan 8, 2006
    #15
  16. Kay

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 10:04:05 -0600, Ron Hunter wrote:

    > Well, at least one of those on the list HAS IS (the Kodak p850). Not
    > sure of the others.


    Really? I know one of the Kodaks has it, but I wasn't sure if it
    was the p850 or the p880. I think the smaller, lower end version
    has IS. Is that the p850 or the p880? I thought it was the p880
    but you're probably right. You're not sure of any of the others,
    even the Canon Powershot S2 ***** IS ***** ? <g>
     
    ASAAR, Jan 8, 2006
    #16
  17. Kay

    Guest

    ASAAR wrote:

    > In one recent reply I
    > mentioned only that I was more than satisfied with the S5100 and
    > would purchase another if it was lost or stolen. But I didn't say
    > *why* I thought it was a good camera because I had no idea what
    > needs the OP had. He was vague and so was I.


    I'm the OP of that thread and I should have realised that it would be
    easier for others to give proper advice if I had been more specific
    about my requirements. As a long-time pro in electronics in one of the
    less advanced regions, I'm constantly approached by people who want to
    buy their first computer, with only the vaguest idea of what they or
    their children want to do with it. I have to coax it out of them,
    explaining, for instance, that gaming will probably be high priority
    for their 14-year-old, and that Internet surfing and wordprocessing can
    be done with just about any computer. Or what extra cost will be
    involved for good music playback.

    The problem is that novices often don't know exactly what we need or
    what we'll be doing with our purchase a few months later on. As for
    myself (and I suspect some others), I want to do a bit of everything -
    kids' birthday party snapshots, an attempt at serious art, portraits,
    and so on. Well, almost everything - war correspondence is out :). But
    we don't want or cannot afford to have several different cameras at the
    same time.

    Regarding batteries and other accessories that are likely to wear out
    after some time, my own preference is to go for standard
    non-proprietary types that are cheap and easily available anywhere.
     
    , Jan 8, 2006
    #17
  18. Kay

    RobG Guest

    ASAAR <> wrote
    > Ov course I can't stop
    > you from recommending 10x cameras only if they have IS, and that
    > feature should be considered, but so many people give it far more
    > weight than it deserves. _Any_ of the 4 cameras mentioned would be
    > the right choice for some people, the wrong choice for others. We
    > also seem to disagree on batteries. I like cameras that can use
    > smooth, sleek, rounded AA batteries, while you prefer cameras that
    > use the more expensive, proprietary, sharp edged thingies. :)
    >
    >


    YAY!!! Finally, someone who agrees with me re IS in digicams - I was
    beginning to think I was the lone dissenting voice in the wilderness. And
    I, too, think that AA batteries are the way to fly.

    RobG
    The Lone Luddite
     
    RobG, Jan 8, 2006
    #18
  19. Kay

    RobG Guest

    Ron Hunter <> wrote
    > I am sure any of them will serve
    > your needs well, so let the feel of the camera in your hands determine
    > your final choice.


    Sound advice.

    RobG
     
    RobG, Jan 8, 2006
    #19
  20. Kay

    RobG Guest

    wrote
    >
    > Whatever you buy today is likely to be obsolete by this time next year

    <snip>
    > Buy the camera for pictures
    > you need to take now, pictures you would have taken over the last two
    > weeks if you'd had it. Digital cameras do not have long lifespans, make
    > sure the one you buy can do most of what you want to do TODAY. They do
    > not improve with age. Go to user groups devoted to that camera model
    > and read what they have to say. That will bring up technical issues
    > that you might not think of otherwise.
    >


    More sound advice.

    RobG
     
    RobG, Jan 8, 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. Chris Gunn
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,547
    David Oddie
    Jul 14, 2003
  2. The Ruzicka Family
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,210
    Chris Gunn
    Jul 12, 2003
  3. The Ruzicka Family
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,008
    The Ruzicka Family
    Jul 11, 2003
  4. cop welfare
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,092
    cop welfare
    Nov 19, 2005
  5. michel guimond

    Fuji Finepix S5200 or Canon Powershot A610

    michel guimond, Nov 25, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    373
    salgud
    Nov 25, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page