My HP's on the blink, and I need a new camera ($200-$300 range)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by dbahnmueller@hotmail.com, Oct 4, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I've got an HP digicam (R707) now. I like the picture quality OK, but
    after a year it's acting up (some buttons don't work sometimes (heat
    sensitive), pictures keep disappearing on the cards, even fairly new
    ones). I'd like to get a new camera of similar or better in features,
    but more reliable. I'd also like to use the cards I'm already using on
    the HP, and a recharge unit small enough to be convenient for travel.

    thanks for your help
     
    , Oct 4, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Shawn Hirn Guest

    In article <>,
    wrote:

    > I've got an HP digicam (R707) now. I like the picture quality OK, but
    > after a year it's acting up (some buttons don't work sometimes (heat
    > sensitive), pictures keep disappearing on the cards, even fairly new
    > ones). I'd like to get a new camera of similar or better in features,
    > but more reliable. I'd also like to use the cards I'm already using on
    > the HP, and a recharge unit small enough to be convenient for travel.
    >
    > thanks for your help


    There are tons of cameras to consider. Check http://www.dpreview.com for
    ideas or just stop by your favorite electronics store to see what's
    available. Buy any of the name brands such as Sony, Casio, Canon, Nikon,
    Pentax, or Olympus that offers the controls you want and that feels good
    in your hands.
     
    Shawn Hirn, Oct 4, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Remember your prey. Don't hunt buffalo with a BB gun. I would say first
    and foremost get a camera with a good lens, Carl Zeiss, Canon. Optical
    zoom vs. digital zoom, digital zoom is an optical illusion, how ironic
    is that? My first digital camera had zero optical zoom and I kicked
    myself more than a few times for foregoing that luxury. My current
    camera has a twelve X optical zoom and is very practical for most of my
    photography. Form follows function, i.e. do I need a compact or
    possibly a bigger body would give me more versatility but less
    spontaneity. megapixels, if you cant zoom in far enough and you have to
    crop you will appreciate a higher megapixel camera, but the first time
    you try to e-mail a 7M file to your friend w/dial up you will realize
    the benefit of reducing file sizes for e-mail, while still retaining
    your hi res originals for printing. dpreview.com has device specific
    forums, reviews and example photograghy taken by actual users with the
    actual products. After the purchase I recommend staying in touch with
    the forums.dpreview.com for tips, tricks and advice for your specific
    product and the situations you might encounter.
    Happy hunting,
    John
    wrote:
    > I've got an HP digicam (R707) now. I like the picture quality OK, but
    > after a year it's acting up (some buttons don't work sometimes (heat
    > sensitive), pictures keep disappearing on the cards, even fairly new
    > ones). I'd like to get a new camera of similar or better in features,
    > but more reliable. I'd also like to use the cards I'm already using on
    > the HP, and a recharge unit small enough to be convenient for travel.
    >
    > thanks for your help
     
    silverthreads, Oct 4, 2006
    #3
  4. bugbear Guest

    silverthreads wrote:
    > Remember your prey. Don't hunt buffalo with a BB gun. I would say first
    > and foremost get a camera with a good lens, Carl Zeiss, Canon. Optical
    > zoom vs. digital zoom, digital zoom is an optical illusion, how ironic
    > is that? My first digital camera had zero optical zoom and I kicked
    > myself more than a few times for foregoing that luxury. My current
    > camera has a twelve X optical zoom and is very practical for most of my
    > photography. Form follows function, i.e. do I need a compact or
    > possibly a bigger body would give me more versatility but less
    > spontaneity. megapixels, if you cant zoom in far enough and you have to
    > crop you will appreciate a higher megapixel camera


    Err. Isn't that EXACTLY the digital zoom
    you call an "optical illusion" ?

    BugBear
     
    bugbear, Oct 4, 2006
    #4
  5. Matt Clara Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've got an HP digicam (R707) now. I like the picture quality OK, but
    > after a year it's acting up (some buttons don't work sometimes (heat
    > sensitive), pictures keep disappearing on the cards, even fairly new
    > ones). I'd like to get a new camera of similar or better in features,
    > but more reliable. I'd also like to use the cards I'm already using on
    > the HP, and a recharge unit small enough to be convenient for travel.
    >
    > thanks for your help
    >
    >


    HP has the reverse Midas Touch. Everything they touch turns to sheisa.
     
    Matt Clara, Oct 4, 2006
    #5
  6. Guest

    thanks, but I bought HP (a name brand) and wasn't happy. I was thinking
    Canon or Casio this time around.


    Shawn Hirn wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > wrote:
    >
    > > I've got an HP digicam (R707) now. I like the picture quality OK, but
    > > after a year it's acting up (some buttons don't work sometimes (heat
    > > sensitive), pictures keep disappearing on the cards, even fairly new
    > > ones). I'd like to get a new camera of similar or better in features,
    > > but more reliable. I'd also like to use the cards I'm already using on
    > > the HP, and a recharge unit small enough to be convenient for travel.
    > >
    > > thanks for your help

    >
    > There are tons of cameras to consider. Check http://www.dpreview.com for
    > ideas or just stop by your favorite electronics store to see what's
    > available. Buy any of the name brands such as Sony, Casio, Canon, Nikon,
    > Pentax, or Olympus that offers the controls you want and that feels good
    > in your hands.
     
    , Oct 4, 2006
    #6
  7. <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > thanks, but I bought HP (a name brand) and wasn't happy. I was thinking
    > Canon or Casio this time around.


    I am also not happy with my HP products ... but am quite pleased with Canon
    (if that helps).
     
    Charles Schuler, Oct 4, 2006
    #7
  8. ASAAR Guest

    On 4 Oct 2006 02:43:48 -0700, wrote:

    > I've got an HP digicam (R707) now. I like the picture quality OK, but
    > after a year it's acting up (some buttons don't work sometimes (heat
    > sensitive), pictures keep disappearing on the cards, even fairly new
    > ones). I'd like to get a new camera of similar or better in features,
    > but more reliable. I'd also like to use the cards I'm already using on
    > the HP, and a recharge unit small enough to be convenient for travel.


    I'll mention a few Canon cameras, but Kodak, Fuji and other
    manufacturers make fairly comparable cameras. If you get a model
    that uses AA batteries, you have many chargers to choose from. I've
    got a number of them, but the smallest (and an overall good
    performer) is a collapsible smart charger sold by Radio Shack,
    roughly the size of a C cell, but slightly taller. It has a
    fold-out AC plug, so it doesn't even need a power cord. Some models
    using 2 AA cells are Canon's A530 and A700. The A630, which uses 4
    AA cells is slightly larger, but provides not only twice as many
    shots per charge, but is also a quicker performer, probably due to
    the higher voltage provided by the 4 AA cells.

    The good news is that with today's cameras if a fair number of
    your shots require the camera's flash, you may or may not need to
    use rechargeable batteries, since alkalines can provide hundreds of
    shots per set. The even better news is that if most of your shots
    won't use the flash, for example, using it primarily for outdoor
    shots, you can get up to nearly 1,000 shots per set of batteries.
    If that's the case, and you average fewer than 5,000 shots per year
    (about 200 24 shot rolls of film per year), your yearly expenditure
    for batteries would range from slightly less to far less than the
    cost of one fast food meal, even if you don't want fries with that.
     
    ASAAR, Oct 4, 2006
    #8
  9. I am on my first set of lithium AAs and I am about 300 pics with no
    sign of diiminished battery life. The rechargeables the came with my
    Sony H5 in August are only good for about 100 pics and when the battery
    indicator starts to drop it isn't long before they are dead. I also
    have four backup energizer rechargables that are about 1 year old and
    have a very poor endurance and seem to drain in storage. I am very
    curious to see how fast the lithium AAs drop off after the battery
    indicator starts to indicate the first sign of drop off.
    ASAAR wrote:
    > On 4 Oct 2006 02:43:48 -0700, wrote:
    >
    > > I've got an HP digicam (R707) now. I like the picture quality OK, but
    > > after a year it's acting up (some buttons don't work sometimes (heat
    > > sensitive), pictures keep disappearing on the cards, even fairly new
    > > ones). I'd like to get a new camera of similar or better in features,
    > > but more reliable. I'd also like to use the cards I'm already using on
    > > the HP, and a recharge unit small enough to be convenient for travel.

    >
    > I'll mention a few Canon cameras, but Kodak, Fuji and other
    > manufacturers make fairly comparable cameras. If you get a model
    > that uses AA batteries, you have many chargers to choose from. I've
    > got a number of them, but the smallest (and an overall good
    > performer) is a collapsible smart charger sold by Radio Shack,
    > roughly the size of a C cell, but slightly taller. It has a
    > fold-out AC plug, so it doesn't even need a power cord. Some models
    > using 2 AA cells are Canon's A530 and A700. The A630, which uses 4
    > AA cells is slightly larger, but provides not only twice as many
    > shots per charge, but is also a quicker performer, probably due to
    > the higher voltage provided by the 4 AA cells.
    >
    > The good news is that with today's cameras if a fair number of
    > your shots require the camera's flash, you may or may not need to
    > use rechargeable batteries, since alkalines can provide hundreds of
    > shots per set. The even better news is that if most of your shots
    > won't use the flash, for example, using it primarily for outdoor
    > shots, you can get up to nearly 1,000 shots per set of batteries.
    > If that's the case, and you average fewer than 5,000 shots per year
    > (about 200 24 shot rolls of film per year), your yearly expenditure
    > for batteries would range from slightly less to far less than the
    > cost of one fast food meal, even if you don't want fries with that.
     
    silverthreads, Oct 11, 2006
    #9
  10. Lithium Batteries

    My lithium batteries died at the X Prize Cup. I am very impressed with
    the number of images I got using one set of lithium batteries. I was a
    little dissapointed by the amount of warning I got when they started to
    diminish. it went from full to a low battery indicator in a very short
    amount of time.
    silverthreads wrote:
    > I am on my first set of lithium AAs and I am about 300 pics with no
    > sign of diiminished battery life. The rechargeables the came with my
    > Sony H5 in August are only good for about 100 pics and when the battery
    > indicator starts to drop it isn't long before they are dead. I also
    > have four backup energizer rechargables that are about 1 year old and
    > have a very poor endurance and seem to drain in storage. I am very
    > curious to see how fast the lithium AAs drop off after the battery
    > indicator starts to indicate the first sign of drop off.
    > ASAAR wrote:
    > > On 4 Oct 2006 02:43:48 -0700, wrote:
    > >
    > > > I've got an HP digicam (R707) now. I like the picture quality OK, but
    > > > after a year it's acting up (some buttons don't work sometimes (heat
    > > > sensitive), pictures keep disappearing on the cards, even fairly new
    > > > ones). I'd like to get a new camera of similar or better in features,
    > > > but more reliable. I'd also like to use the cards I'm already using on
    > > > the HP, and a recharge unit small enough to be convenient for travel.

    > >
    > > I'll mention a few Canon cameras, but Kodak, Fuji and other
    > > manufacturers make fairly comparable cameras. If you get a model
    > > that uses AA batteries, you have many chargers to choose from. I've
    > > got a number of them, but the smallest (and an overall good
    > > performer) is a collapsible smart charger sold by Radio Shack,
    > > roughly the size of a C cell, but slightly taller. It has a
    > > fold-out AC plug, so it doesn't even need a power cord. Some models
    > > using 2 AA cells are Canon's A530 and A700. The A630, which uses 4
    > > AA cells is slightly larger, but provides not only twice as many
    > > shots per charge, but is also a quicker performer, probably due to
    > > the higher voltage provided by the 4 AA cells.
    > >
    > > The good news is that with today's cameras if a fair number of
    > > your shots require the camera's flash, you may or may not need to
    > > use rechargeable batteries, since alkalines can provide hundreds of
    > > shots per set. The even better news is that if most of your shots
    > > won't use the flash, for example, using it primarily for outdoor
    > > shots, you can get up to nearly 1,000 shots per set of batteries.
    > > If that's the case, and you average fewer than 5,000 shots per year
    > > (about 200 24 shot rolls of film per year), your yearly expenditure
    > > for batteries would range from slightly less to far less than the
    > > cost of one fast food meal, even if you don't want fries with that.
     
    silverthreads, Oct 27, 2006
    #10
  11. SMS Guest

    wrote:
    > thanks, but I bought HP (a name brand) and wasn't happy. I was thinking
    > Canon or Casio this time around.


    HP is a name brand, but it's still not a camera company. Stick with a
    top tier camera manufacturer such as Canon or Nikon.
     
    SMS, Oct 27, 2006
    #11
  12. SMS Guest

    silverthreads wrote:
    > I am on my first set of lithium AAs and I am about 300 pics with no
    > sign of diiminished battery life. The rechargeables the came with my
    > Sony H5 in August are only good for about 100 pics and when the battery
    > indicator starts to drop it isn't long before they are dead. I also
    > have four backup energizer rechargables that are about 1 year old and
    > have a very poor endurance and seem to drain in storage. I am very
    > curious to see how fast the lithium AAs drop off after the battery
    > indicator starts to indicate the first sign of drop off.


    The Lithium AA batteries are very good. I just picked some more up on
    sale at Walgreens (4 for $7.99 this week).

    The other batteries to try, that don't have the endurance and storage
    problem, are the Sanyo eneloop batteries, which have just hit the U.S.
    market. They are lower capacity than the highest end NiMh cells, but
    there is very little self-discharge.
     
    SMS, Oct 27, 2006
    #12
  13. Bill Funk Guest

    On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 06:12:25 -0700, SMS <>
    wrote:

    > wrote:
    >> thanks, but I bought HP (a name brand) and wasn't happy. I was thinking
    >> Canon or Casio this time around.

    >
    >HP is a name brand, but it's still not a camera company. Stick with a
    >top tier camera manufacturer such as Canon or Nikon.


    Right.
    Kawasaki is an earthmoving equipment and shipbuilding company.
    Oh yes, they also make motorcycles.
    Does that make Kawasaki not a motorcycle company?
    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
     
    Bill Funk, Oct 27, 2006
    #13
  14. Re: Lithium Batteries

    silverthreads wrote:
    > My lithium batteries died at the X Prize Cup. I am very impressed with
    > the number of images I got using one set of lithium batteries. I was a
    > little dissapointed by the amount of warning I got when they started to
    > diminish. it went from full to a low battery indicator in a very short
    > amount of time.
    > silverthreads wrote:
    >
    >>I am on my first set of lithium AAs and I am about 300 pics with no
    >>sign of diiminished battery life. The rechargeables the came with my
    >>Sony H5 in August are only good for about 100 pics and when the battery
    >>indicator starts to drop it isn't long before they are dead. I also
    >>have four backup energizer rechargables that are about 1 year old and
    >>have a very poor endurance and seem to drain in storage. I am very
    >>curious to see how fast the lithium AAs drop off after the battery
    >>indicator starts to indicate the first sign of drop off.
    >>ASAAR wrote:
    >>
    >>>On 4 Oct 2006 02:43:48 -0700, wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>I've got an HP digicam (R707) now. I like the picture quality OK, but
    >>>>after a year it's acting up (some buttons don't work sometimes (heat
    >>>>sensitive), pictures keep disappearing on the cards, even fairly new
    >>>>ones). I'd like to get a new camera of similar or better in features,
    >>>>but more reliable. I'd also like to use the cards I'm already using on
    >>>>the HP, and a recharge unit small enough to be convenient for travel.
    >>>
    >>> I'll mention a few Canon cameras, but Kodak, Fuji and other
    >>>manufacturers make fairly comparable cameras. If you get a model
    >>>that uses AA batteries, you have many chargers to choose from. I've
    >>>got a number of them, but the smallest (and an overall good
    >>>performer) is a collapsible smart charger sold by Radio Shack,
    >>>roughly the size of a C cell, but slightly taller. It has a
    >>>fold-out AC plug, so it doesn't even need a power cord. Some models
    >>>using 2 AA cells are Canon's A530 and A700. The A630, which uses 4
    >>>AA cells is slightly larger, but provides not only twice as many
    >>>shots per charge, but is also a quicker performer, probably due to
    >>>the higher voltage provided by the 4 AA cells.
    >>>
    >>> The good news is that with today's cameras if a fair number of
    >>>your shots require the camera's flash, you may or may not need to
    >>>use rechargeable batteries, since alkalines can provide hundreds of
    >>>shots per set. The even better news is that if most of your shots
    >>>won't use the flash, for example, using it primarily for outdoor
    >>>shots, you can get up to nearly 1,000 shots per set of batteries.
    >>>If that's the case, and you average fewer than 5,000 shots per year
    >>>(about 200 24 shot rolls of film per year), your yearly expenditure
    >>>for batteries would range from slightly less to far less than the
    >>>cost of one fast food meal, even if you don't want fries with that.

    >
    >

    Lithium batteries maintain a good voltage almost to the end, and "die"
    suddenly. I always carry spare Lithium batteries with me, one for my
    cellphone and one for my digicam.

    Morton
     
    Morton Linder, Oct 28, 2006
    #14
  15. John Turco Guest

    Bill Funk wrote:
    >
    > On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 06:12:25 -0700, SMS <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > wrote:
    > >> thanks, but I bought HP (a name brand) and wasn't happy. I was thinking
    > >> Canon or Casio this time around.

    > >
    > >HP is a name brand, but it's still not a camera company. Stick with a
    > >top tier camera manufacturer such as Canon or Nikon.

    >
    > Right.
    > Kawasaki is an earthmoving equipment and shipbuilding company.
    > Oh yes, they also make motorcycles.
    > Does that make Kawasaki not a motorcycle company?
    > --
    > Bill Funk
    > replace "g" with "a"



    Hello, Bill:

    Furthermore, Yamaha began as a manufacturer of musical instruments
    (which it still is), General Electric is the world's largest builder
    of jet engines, and the Ford Motor Company has long had an aerospace
    division.

    Hewlett-Packard's digicams are crummy, regardless. :p


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Oct 31, 2006
    #15
    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. Rich

    Eye blink

    Rich, Oct 14, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    1,410
    slumpy
    Oct 15, 2003
  2. Steven C \(Doktersteve\)

    Re: New to this. What should I look for in the $300 range?

    Steven C \(Doktersteve\), Sep 5, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    270
    Graham
    Sep 5, 2003
  3. Barry Bean

    Digital camera for serious amateur in the $200-400 range

    Barry Bean, Apr 15, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    941
    Barry Bean
    Apr 19, 2004
  4. silberk

    Sipix Blink Camera

    silberk, Aug 24, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,200
    silberk
    Aug 24, 2006
  5. Laganis
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,790
    Laganis
    Jan 25, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page