name of snazzy digicam choosing web site?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Andy, Aug 3, 2006.

  1. Andy

    Andy Guest

    A few months ago I saw a snazzy looking web site which helped the user
    to choose a digital camera.

    The user put in various data like price, weight, usage, etc and the web
    page generated a shortlist of cameras.
     
    Andy, Aug 3, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Andy

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 19:49:00 +0100, in rec.photo.digital Andy
    <> wrote:

    >A few months ago I saw a snazzy looking web site which helped the user
    >to choose a digital camera.
    >
    >The user put in various data like price, weight, usage, etc and the web
    >page generated a shortlist of cameras.


    http://www.dpreview.com
    --
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    http://EdwardGRuf.com
     
    Ed Ruf, Aug 3, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Andy

    Stan Beck Guest

    Also:

    www.dcreview.com
    www.steves-digicams.com



    --
    Stan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS

    It's hard to soar with the eagles in the morning if you've been hooting with
    the owls all night.

    To reply, remove 101 from address.
    ***

    "Ed Ruf" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 19:49:00 +0100, in rec.photo.digital Andy
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>A few months ago I saw a snazzy looking web site which helped the user
    >>to choose a digital camera.
    >>
    >>The user put in various data like price, weight, usage, etc and the web
    >>page generated a shortlist of cameras.

    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com
    > --
    > Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    > http://EdwardGRuf.com
     
    Stan Beck, Aug 3, 2006
    #3
  4. Andy

    Lin Chung Guest

    Lin Chung, Aug 3, 2006
    #4
  5. Andy

    Rob-L Guest

    Rob-L, Aug 3, 2006
    #5
  6. Andy

    Guest

    Andy wrote:
    > A few months ago I saw a snazzy looking web site which helped the user
    > to choose a digital camera.
    >
    > The user put in various data like price, weight, usage, etc and the web
    > page generated a shortlist of cameras.


    I don't think you can really do that successfully with cameras.

    I have bought my last two cameras from reading through
    http://www.dcresource.com/buyersguide/, and then reading the reviews
    there.

    They've got recommendations in each price range, and you can look at
    each and basically decide whether you want an SLR, something that looks
    like an SLR but isn't, a mid-sized camera, a smaller camera, or an
    ultra-thin camera. Take a look at the reviews and take your pick.....
     
    , Aug 4, 2006
    #6
  7. Andy

    erics Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Andy wrote:
    >> A few months ago I saw a snazzy looking web site which helped the user
    >> to choose a digital camera.
    >>
    >> The user put in various data like price, weight, usage, etc and the web
    >> page generated a shortlist of cameras.

    >
    > I don't think you can really do that successfully with cameras.
    >
    > I have bought my last two cameras from reading through
    > http://www.dcresource.com/buyersguide/, and then reading the reviews
    > there.
    >
    > They've got recommendations in each price range, and you can look at
    > each and basically decide whether you want an SLR, something that looks
    > like an SLR but isn't, a mid-sized camera, a smaller camera, or an
    > ultra-thin camera. Take a look at the reviews and take your pick.....


    The website they want is just automatically filtering the cameras that fit
    your selected criteria, whereas you have to do it manually.
     
    erics, Aug 4, 2006
    #7
  8. Andy

    Guest

    erics wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > Andy wrote:
    > >> A few months ago I saw a snazzy looking web site which helped the user
    > >> to choose a digital camera.
    > >>
    > >> The user put in various data like price, weight, usage, etc and the web
    > >> page generated a shortlist of cameras.

    > >
    > > I don't think you can really do that successfully with cameras.
    > >
    > > I have bought my last two cameras from reading through
    > > http://www.dcresource.com/buyersguide/, and then reading the reviews
    > > there.
    > >
    > > They've got recommendations in each price range, and you can look at
    > > each and basically decide whether you want an SLR, something that looks
    > > like an SLR but isn't, a mid-sized camera, a smaller camera, or an
    > > ultra-thin camera. Take a look at the reviews and take your pick.....

    >
    > The website they want is just automatically filtering the cameras that fit
    > your selected criteria,


    Which is not a very good idea.... It's the Argos catalogue approach.
    They sell washing machines, etc. on the basis of numbers 'this one is
    1400 spin', 'this one is 1200', so the 1400 must be better.

    You can go into Dixons and they will say 'ow many megapixels do you
    want', which is a pretty stupid question for most people, as pretty
    much any digital camera has enough megapixels, but not all cameras are
    equal in quality. On this basis they will end up selling you a crappy
    Praktica '8 mega pixel' (which is actually interpolated and isn't 8
    megapixel at all, and has a tiny CCD)

    > whereas you have to do it manually.


    It's not that hard. You can buy something pretty basic for £100ish,
    something better for £200, or something quite nice indeed for about
    £300. If you are a pro, you will get a digital SLR, and a fancy lens.
    For most people it comes down to size and image quality, plus whether
    you want image stabilization, a long zoom, etc. It pays to do your
    research.
     
    , Aug 4, 2006
    #8
  9. Andy

    erics Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...

    erics wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > Andy wrote:
    > >> A few months ago I saw a snazzy looking web site which helped the user
    > >> to choose a digital camera.
    > >>
    > >> The user put in various data like price, weight, usage, etc and the web
    > >> page generated a shortlist of cameras.

    > >
    > > I don't think you can really do that successfully with cameras.
    > >
    > > I have bought my last two cameras from reading through
    > > http://www.dcresource.com/buyersguide/, and then reading the reviews
    > > there.
    > >
    > > They've got recommendations in each price range, and you can look at
    > > each and basically decide whether you want an SLR, something that looks
    > > like an SLR but isn't, a mid-sized camera, a smaller camera, or an
    > > ultra-thin camera. Take a look at the reviews and take your pick.....

    >
    > The website they want is just automatically filtering the cameras that fit
    > your selected criteria,


    >> Which is not a very good idea....


    Don't be stupid, of course it is a good idea. If I have already decided I
    want a camera that costs less than £200, is a compact format, and takes CF
    cards, why would I want to look at a camera that costs £600, is an SLR
    format, and takes SD cards?

    >> It's the Argos catalogue approach.
    >> They sell washing machines, etc. on the basis of numbers 'this one is
    >> 1400 spin', 'this one is 1200', so the 1400 must be better.


    It's the purchaser that is deciding 1400 is better, not argos - they just
    provide the info and the user filters out what they consider to be inferior.

    >> You can go into Dixons and they will say 'ow many megapixels do you
    >> want', which is a pretty stupid question for most people, as pretty
    >> much any digital camera has enough megapixels, but not all cameras are
    >> equal in quality. On this basis they will end up selling you a crappy
    >> Praktica '8 mega pixel' (which is actually interpolated and isn't 8
    >> megapixel at all, and has a tiny CCD)


    A lot of people equate pixels to quality which as you point out is not
    always true. The salesman is doing what he needs to make a sale. You do not
    have to filter out cameras based on the number of pixels, or you can specify
    a range which is important if you want to print out huge prints. It is no
    use getting a 2 mega pixel camera which gives great 4x6 prints if you really
    want to produce great A3 sized prints, because no matter how good that
    camera is, at that size its prints will look pixelated.

    > whereas you have to do it manually.


    >> It's not that hard.


    Its not, and what you do CAN be automated. You are only applying a set of
    simple rules to filter the search - something a site could easily do as
    well.

    > You can buy something pretty basic for £100ish,
    > something better for £200, or something quite nice indeed for about
    > £300. If you are a pro, you will get a digital SLR, and a fancy lens.
    > For most people it comes down to size and image quality, plus whether
    > you want image stabilization, a long zoom, etc. It pays to do your
    > research.


    So in a filter system you select
    * image stabilazation
    * long zoon lens
    * SLR/compact/
    * Price range
    etc

    and then look at the cameras that match your filter selections and reviews
    of them.
     
    erics, Aug 4, 2006
    #9
  10. Andy

    Guest

    erics wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    > A lot of people equate pixels to quality which as you point out is not
    > always true. The salesman is doing what he needs to make a sale. You do not
    > have to filter out cameras based on the number of pixels, or you can specify
    > a range which is important if you want to print out huge prints. It is no
    > use getting a 2 mega pixel camera which gives great 4x6 prints if you really
    > want to produce great A3 sized prints, because no matter how good that
    > camera is, at that size its prints will look pixelated.


    There are no longer any 2 megapixel digital cameras on sale. Any camera
    costing £100 or more these days will have more than enough megapixels
    for someone who's not a camera pro. What they might not have is a good
    quality picture. But enough megapixels yes.

    > > You can buy something pretty basic for £100ish,
    > > something better for £200, or something quite nice indeed for about
    > > £300. If you are a pro, you will get a digital SLR, and a fancy lens.
    > > For most people it comes down to size and image quality, plus whether
    > > you want image stabilization, a long zoom, etc. It pays to do your
    > > research.

    >
    > So in a filter system you select
    > * image stabilazation
    > * long zoon lens
    > * SLR/compact/
    > * Price range
    > etc
    >
    > and then look at the cameras that match your filter selections and reviews
    > of them.


    But all the cameras matching those criteria might be crap. It's easier
    to look at best of breed and then decide which of those best suits your
    needs.
     
    , Aug 4, 2006
    #10
  11. Andy

    erics Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...

    erics wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    > A lot of people equate pixels to quality which as you point out is not
    > always true. The salesman is doing what he needs to make a sale. You do
    > not
    > have to filter out cameras based on the number of pixels, or you can
    > specify
    > a range which is important if you want to print out huge prints. It is no
    > use getting a 2 mega pixel camera which gives great 4x6 prints if you
    > really
    > want to produce great A3 sized prints, because no matter how good that
    > camera is, at that size its prints will look pixelated.


    There are no longer any 2 megapixel digital cameras on sale. Any camera
    costing £100 or more these days will have more than enough megapixels
    for someone who's not a camera pro. What they might not have is a good
    quality picture. But enough megapixels yes.

    There are if you look.

    You mean *might* have more than enough pixels - I am not a pro, but how do
    you know what my requirements are??? The number of pixels will determine the
    maximum print size you can achieve so it is an important criteria, as is
    price to most people, and of course image quality.

    > > You can buy something pretty basic for £100ish,
    > > something better for £200, or something quite nice indeed for about
    > > £300. If you are a pro, you will get a digital SLR, and a fancy lens.
    > > For most people it comes down to size and image quality, plus whether
    > > you want image stabilization, a long zoom, etc. It pays to do your
    > > research.

    >
    > So in a filter system you select
    > * image stabilazation
    > * long zoon lens
    > * SLR/compact/
    > * Price range
    > etc
    >
    > and then look at the cameras that match your filter selections and reviews
    > of them.


    But all the cameras matching those criteria might be crap. It's easier
    to look at best of breed and then decide which of those best suits your
    needs.

    How do I easily find best of breed at a price point I am interesed in and
    with the features I want - filter the results, just as you do manually.

    *might*, then again they might not be. Your review site *might* not list all
    the cameras available at the time I look. Your review site *might* have not
    reviewed a cracking camera, therefore they have already filtered your search
    for you.

    Anyway, you stick your your manual methods if they suit you. I think there
    IS an alternative method to searching for a suitable model, especially if
    you know roughly want you want. So we will agree to disagree.

    Whatever method you use to get a short list, its best to look at reviews and
    do your research on any candidate models.
     
    erics, Aug 4, 2006
    #11
  12. Andy

    Tron[ADS] Guest

    Tron[ADS], Aug 5, 2006
    #12
  13. Andy

    Tron[ADS] Guest

    "Tron[ADS]" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > www.steves-digicams.com
    > i think will be usefull.....provided ive remembered the url correctly
    >



    Although you dont need a website to know that according to all review
    sources, the current best compact around is the new Fuji F30 by a country
    mile. Just wish I had some spare cash to get myself one.....ISO3200, nice.
     
    Tron[ADS], Aug 5, 2006
    #13
  14. Andy

    J. Clarke Guest

    Tron[ADS] wrote:

    >
    > "Tron[ADS]" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> www.steves-digicams.com
    >> i think will be usefull.....provided ive remembered the url correctly
    >>

    >
    >
    > Although you dont need a website to know that according to all review
    > sources, the current best compact around is the new Fuji F30 by a country
    > mile. Just wish I had some spare cash to get myself one.....ISO3200, nice.


    That's _all_ it's got.

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    J. Clarke, Aug 5, 2006
    #14
  15. Andy

    Bill Funk Guest

    On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 04:12:52 +0100, "Tron[ADS]"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"Tron[ADS]" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> www.steves-digicams.com
    >> i think will be usefull.....provided ive remembered the url correctly
    >>

    >
    >
    >Although you dont need a website to know that according to all review
    >sources, the current best compact around is the new Fuji F30 by a country
    >mile. Just wish I had some spare cash to get myself one.....ISO3200, nice.
    >

    There is no "best" current compact. There is only best for specific
    uses.
    You might think a certain car is the "best"; if it doesn't fit the
    needs of everyone, it can't be the "best", only one of the best for
    certain needs.
    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
     
    Bill Funk, Aug 5, 2006
    #15
  16. Andy

    Andy Guest

    Andy, Aug 6, 2006
    #16
    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. Bill Mcdonald
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    421
    MarkH
    Dec 24, 2003
  2. me

    need help choosing digicam

    me, Dec 28, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    314
  3. Ian Riches

    Advice on choosing digicam...

    Ian Riches, Aug 2, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    343
  4. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    249
  5. Make a snazzy Flash slide show

    , Nov 29, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    305
Loading...

Share This Page