Which Compact Camera To Buy?

[pmjd]

Old camera is going a bit funny, so time to look at getting a new one (as if I need the excuse to buy new gadgets)

I'm looking to get a small camera that can handle low light conditions and action shots well, as any dancing pictures I took with the old one looked like ultrafast blurs on the dancefloor (and no it wasn't pictures of Jamie spinning). I'm not so bothered by megapixelage, prefer good quality pics instead. In the £100 - £150 range.

So far I've been looking at the Canon Ixus 80 IS, Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ3 or DMC-FX33 , Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W120, Fuji F40FD or F50FD.

So any recommendations, ones to avoid or have I missed a good one somewhere?

Thanks Paul

[Lory]

Have a look at THIS SITE, it has brilliant reviews and lets you compare any camera's of your choosing

I've got a Sony T50, which I've been happy with so far. My parents got the T200 after me, which has a few more features but they've done away with the touch screen, which AFAIC is one of the best things about mine! Mine's incredibly user friendly!

My brother's just got a new Canon ixus, (not sure which model but knowing him it'll be the highest spec), he chose it after some extensive research, I saw some pics he's taken with it and was impressed with the shots taken in 'low light' conditions.

Hope this helps

[Daisy Chain]

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W120,

I think I've got this one. Very small, slim, silver and weighs practically nothing and enables me to takes photos like a pro. Really recommend it.

Daisy

(A Snappy Little Flower)

[martingold]

first thing to do when buying a camera of any sort is to go to a local photographic shop not jessops or comet etc as unfortunately they do not employ photographers any more. I dont know if you have a city camera exchange in your area they are normally very good (or call my favourite shop the camera world who will give good advice and wont sell anything you dont need)
tell them what you want and how much you want to spend ask for advice as they will know the latest equipment (its like buying computer gear as soon as you buy it its out of date and the model you bought can be found a lot cheaper than you paid)

Handle the camera they advise you to buy then once chosen go on the web and do a google search for it and buy from the cheapest source

You are completely correct not to worry too much about megapixels as that is only a very small part of the story when buying a camera
optical zoom is important digital zoom is not

[Twirly]

I found this site very useful, though I was looking for something a bit bigger to replace my SLR

[martingold]

I found this site very useful, though I was looking for something a bit bigger to replace my SLR

Bigger than an SLR????

[Lory]

(its like buying computer gear as soon as you buy it its out of date

Tis true You spend ages looking, then as soon as you've brought it, they bring out a new model! Argh!

You are completely correct not to worry too much about megapixels as that is only a very small part of the story when buying a camera
optical zoom is important digital zoom is not

another important thing to look for when thinking about 'dance photo's', is the 'shutter lag' time. Shutter lag is the delay time between pressing the shutter button and a photo actually being taken. It can be most frustrating, when you see an amazing shot, press the button and then have to wait a second!

I found this site very useful, though I was looking for something a bit bigger to replace my SLR

I've got a digital SLR and you can't beat it for quality but to be honest, it gets left at home all the time, as its too big to put in my bag and I also worry about leaving it, as its an expensive piece of kit!

[pmjd]

Thanks Lory and Twirly for the sites, I've already been looking at them, especially impressed by the cameras.co.uk one as the guy buys them all himself to test that's dedication.

I haven't looked at the Sony T20 or T200 but might just go and have a nosey, thought the T200 is a bit out of budget range. The Canon is kinda appealing because it has an old fashioned thing....a viewfinder rather than a screen that can be tricky to look at in direct sunlight.

Still looking and comparing at the moment.....Thanks so far everyone

[martingold]

The Canon is kinda appealing because it has an old fashioned thing....a viewfinder rather than a screen that can be tricky to look at in direct sunlight.

i do admit i am a bit of a canon fan as of monday i am on my third canon SLR (bought myself the eos 40d) also i couldnt agree more i dislike using a screen to take photos unless i am holding it up above my head to take shots above a crowd etc when of course a screen is essential

[Twirly]

Bigger than an SLR????

PMJD is looking for a compact, I was looking for something to replace my film SLR (but couldn't afford a digital SLR back then).

Thanks Lory and Twirly for the sites, I've already been looking at them, especially impressed by the cameras.co.uk one as the guy buys them all himself to test that's dedication.

I haven't looked at the Sony T20 or T200 but might just go and have a nosey, thought the T200 is a bit out of budget range. The Canon is kinda appealing because it has an old fashioned thing....a viewfinder rather than a screen that can be tricky to look at in direct sunlight.

Still looking and comparing at the moment.....Thanks so far everyone

I've got a Canon Poweshot (though it's 2.5 years old, so not listed on the websites) which I love.

Have to admit that I very rarely use my the screen, almost always use the viewfinder, in all weathers and lights. I used to do a lot of photography when using 35mm film (even developing and printing) and iso t's more familiar. I find it easier to frame the shot correctly with a viewfinder, the screen feels odd and clunky. Just had to get used to the fact that you can't see if the focus is clear - though you can tell if the focus is totally off, and correct it before you take the shot.

Mine also does very good videos, not that it's been used very much for that, but they are clear and good quality. Might be useful to think about if you want to video yourself or others dancing.

Also read the advice centre on the cameras.co.uk It was really helpful understanding the jargon, particularly the difference between optical and digital zoom (basically, if you want good pics, get a camera with good optical zoom as it gives you more to play with - I try and avoid using the digital zoom on my camera if poss). I read that, then decided which things were important and looked for the cameras with them.

[~*~Saligal~*~]

Thanks Lory and Twirly for the sites, I've already been looking at them, especially impressed by the cameras.co.uk one as the guy buys them all himself to test that's dedication.

I haven't looked at the Sony T20 or T200 but might just go and have a nosey, thought the T200 is a bit out of budget range. The Canon is kinda appealing because it has an old fashioned thing....a viewfinder rather than a screen that can be tricky to look at in direct sunlight.

Still looking and comparing at the moment.....Thanks so far everyone

I have a panasonic lumix - the one with the 10 x zoom... and it has a great screen to view what you've taken. After taking it on a vacation I found that I miss having a view finder - when the sun was so bright I had trouble seeing what I was taking as the photograph.
If you're after a "hardy" camera, Olympus is pretty good - and also well priced for it's options (at least in Australia).
Overall, I think it's best to check out what the market is offering in the way of products, and then compare this with the options you think you'll use. Also good to check out how the batteries are charged and how long they take to charge (sometimes good to buy an extra battery depending on how much you use your camera) - I agree with Ducasi on batteries. Some of the better cameras have the "anti-shake" option - which can come in handy!
Goodluck!

[ducasi]

I'm looking to get a small camera that can handle low light conditions and action shots well, ...

I was hoping you'd start this thread Paul – saved me from having to do it...

I currently have three cameras – each with their own flaws. I'd rather have one perfect one.

• I have an old-ish Pentax Optio-S. It's great, very controllable, not bad zoom, but it's lacking in megapixels, and doesn't do low-light well. I love the way I can stick it in my pocket though.
• I have a 2-year old Sanyo Xacti C5. It's a video camera, which records MP4 files onto a SD card. It also take 5 megapixel still images. As a camera it doesn't have the flexibility of the Pentax, but it's not bad. As a video recorder, it's useless without *lots* of light. It has a great 10x zoom lens. Because it looks like a video camera, it means I can't use it even to take still photos where video recording is banned.
• I have a rather good 5MP camera in my phone. It's great, though it's not very fast, and has no proper zoom. The best thing about it though, is I always have it handy.

Have the problems of low-light photography been fixed in non-SLR cameras?

Does anyone know of any good conventional-looking camera that can also do good MP4 movie capture?

I don't want a Sony camera that requires proprietary memory cards – it needs to take SD(HC).

[Twirly]

Have the problems of low-light photography been fixed in non-SLR cameras?

Does anyone know of any good conventional-looking camera that can also do good MP4 movie capture?

I don't want a Sony camera that requires proprietary memory cards – it needs to take SD(HC).

Not sure about low light as haven't tried it in very low light, but mine looks like a camera, and does good video (as I said above, the exact model won't be available now, but the other Canon ones now available are likely to be even better). Have a SanDisk card (is that what you mean by SD? where's my geek when you need him?!)

Also ordinary batteries (didn't want to have to keep recharging a battery unit). It does sometimes drain the batteries though, so try and carry spares as have been caught out - wish it could indicate battery levels.

[ducasi]

Not sure about low light as haven't tried it in very low light, but mine looks like a camera, and does good video (as I said above, the exact model won't be available now, but the other Canon ones now available are likely to be even better). Have a SanDisk card (is that what you mean by SD? where's my geek when you need him?!)

Also ordinary batteries (didn't want to have to keep recharging a battery unit). It does sometimes drain the batteries though, so try and carry spares as have been caught out - wish it could indicate battery levels.

SD = Secure Digital. Almost everyone, apart from Sony, use this format these days.

I should have said, I don't like "ordinary" batteries – I won't buy a camera that uses them.

Oh, and the Canon's I've looked at don't do MPEG-4 movies.

Liking the look of this one. Any thoughts, anyone?

[martingold]

SD = Secure Digital. Almost everyone, apart from Sony, use this format these days.

I should have said, I don't like "ordinary" batteries – I won't buy a camera that uses them.

Oh, and the Canon's I've looked at don't do MPEG-4 movies.

Liking the look of this one. Any thoughts, anyone?

Looks interesting my only real concern would be the amount of optical zoom on a camera that small
you would need a pretty high shutter speed to avoid camera shake at the upper end of the focal length of that lens

[ducasi]

Looks interesting my only real concern would be the amount of optical zoom on a camera that small
you would need a pretty high shutter speed to avoid camera shake at the upper end of the focal length of that lens

I've decided against the Casio camera. In reviews it does badly in low light, and it needs a special cradle to charge it and connect it to a computer. Standard USB connections, or a simple adaptor is a must, IMO.

[Twirly]

I should have said, I don't like "ordinary" batteries – I won't buy a camera that uses them..

Mind if I ask why not?

Oh, and the Canon's I've looked at don't do MPEG-4 movies.

Sorry - not so good with names formats of things.

[ducasi]

Mind if I ask why not?

If you buy normal ones, you are damaging the environment, and if you buy rechargeable ones, you don't seem to get any life out them at all.

Lithium-Ion batteries last much longer (both in amount of charge they hold, plus the number of times you can recharge them), they're easier to manage, smaller and lighter. This also means the camera is smaller and lighter.

[Barry Shnikov]

The important question is this.

Do you plan to do any post processing (ie, with Photoshop or something similar) or do you want to just post your chip in a machine in Tescos and get six-be-four prints in one go?

This is a critical issue to the question of which camera you get.

If you want to do your own post processing, look for a camera with a RAW facility. Even if you don't use photoshop there are free progs - CameraRAW is one of them - that will process the RAW data (geddit?) and this gives you at least two stops improvement on non-RAW cameras in low light conditions. (As good as at least one step in 'film speed', probably two; i.e. take a picture at 800 ASA and be able to 'boost' it in RAW processing to 1600 or better.)

The big problem with low-light pictures is that when you lighten them in post-processing, you can get a lot of 'colour noise'. Noise Ninja, a Photoshop add-on and available stand alone (about $30, IIRC), is brilliant at removing colour noise and isn't very expensive. There are probably free programs which do much the same thing.

I've just bought a Fuji E900 on eBay which has RAW and is otherwise highly recommended, for £80 odd.

Downside for the E900 - shutter lag (but that's almost universal in compacts) and long storage time - can be 3 or 4 seconds before it's ready to take another piccy. It's a second camera for me so I don't really care about the above.

If you aren't going to muck around with the picture on your own PC, get whatever is currently recommended as the fastest low-light camera. You won't get the best performance for £150, though. More like £300 required. (Although bear in mind that £150 will get you what was the best performance a couple of years ago.)

This site is the best for camera reviews, and there are some hugely informative forums as well.

[martingold]

PMJD is looking for a compact, I was looking for something to replace my film SLR (but couldn't afford a digital SLR back then).

sorry i thought you said bigger than an SLR

And in low light conditions?

I dont know yet as i only got the camera on monday and the spec doesnt state for low light i guess that would also depend on the lens aperture anyway
i have the EF-S 17-85mm 4.5/5.6 IS so that doesn't open up as much as a prime 50mm lens would its a good lens though and for still subjects the image stabilising is great

still shouldnt hijack PMJ's thread with us going off subject lol i am just excited by my new purchase lol