Digital Cameras

[arlenez]

I am thinking of purchasing a new digital camera. I now have an Olympus 750 Ultra Zoom (10x optical) model and it's fabulous except I would like a smaller, lighter weight camera for easier travelling. I am looking for something with an optical zoom greater than 3x. Does anyone have any recommendations? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Arlene

[peaches from georgia]

My husband has a Sony Cyber-shot DSC H1 with the 12X zoom and it is fabulous. The zoom makes all the difference in the world in our cruise pictures. It was recommended by a poster here who is a camera expert (and by our local camera store) as being one of the best if not the best in this category of small digital camera and we couldn't be happier with it. :)

[arlenez]

My husband has a Sony Cyber-shot DSC H1 with the 12X zoom and it is fabulous. The zoom makes all the difference in the world in our cruise pictures. It was recommended by a poster here who is a camera expert (and by our local camera store) as being one of the best if not the best in this category of small digital camera and we couldn't be happier with it. :)

Hi Peaches:

Thanks for your recommendation. I just looked up the camera you suggested on the internet. It's about the same size as the one I have now. I am looking for something smaller and lighter in weight. Anyone else out there with any suggestions.

Regards,
Arlene

[peaches from georgia]

However, I think your problem is that to get the more powerful zoom than 3X the camera is always going to have to be bigger than pocket size. This Sony is the smallest we saw w/ a 12X optical zoom (not total zoom) and it certainly isn't heavy. It's new and not one of the very large professional digitals.

[dj_crusin]

I am thinking of purchasing a new digital camera. I now have an Olympus 750 Ultra Zoom (10x optical) model and it's fabulous except ........
Arlene

I just bought a Olympus 755 (same as 750) to take on our upcoming cruise!!

I'll be interested in the responses

Dan

[arlenez]

I just bought a Olympus 755 (same as 750) to take on our upcoming cruise!!

I'll be interested in the responses

Dan

Hi:

Actually my camera is really a 755 and I love it, but I am just looking for something a little smaller and flatter. The 755 takes fabulous photos and the zoom is great. I bought the camera almost two years ago from Costco, and I'm curious as to where you got yours. I thought by now it had been replaced with a newer model.

Regards,
Arlene

[arlenez]

I just bought a Olympus 755 (same as 750) to take on our upcoming cruise!!

I'll be interested in the responses

Dan

Hi Dan:

I have a question for you regarding the 755. Have you figured out how to set the camera so that the date prints on the photos? I have set the date but it doesn't show up on the photos.

Thanks for your help,
Arlene

[kiwiKeith]

I have been looking for a digital camera (don't own one yet) and have come across a 6x optical zoom on the Canon PowerShot A700.

* 6.0 Megapixel.
* Canon 6x retractable optical zoom lens.
* 2.5" inch LCD screen.
* Macro:1 cm.
* ISO 800 and High ISO Auto settings that reduce the effects of camera shake and sharpen subjects in low-light situations with high shutter speeds.
* High speed start-up, fast autofocus, smooth continuous shooting, faster overall processing and superior image quality thanks to revolutionary DiG!C II Imaging Processor.

It's the only compact digital camera I have seen with an optical zoom above 3x

Reviews see Steve's Digicams (http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/a700.html) and Lets Go Digital (http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_6477.html)

I am not connected with Canon in anyway and have no personal experience of this camera.

[dj_crusin]

Hi Dan:

I have a question for you regarding the 755. Have you figured out how to set the camera so that the date prints on the photos? I have set the date but it doesn't show up on the photos.

Thanks for your help,
Arlene

I just bought mine used on-line. To print the date use the Camedia software and check the box that says "Print Date".

Dan

[Grumpy1]

I wanted a camera that would slip in the pocket easily, and just got a Casio Elixim EX-Z850. It is only 3x optical zoom, but at 8mp you can use the digital zoom and still come up with very good shots. The 2.5in very bright display is really good. The only drawback I have found is that the so-called HQ movie mode has a lot of jaggies on any slanted lines.

I've put the pictures I've taken up on a 42" plasma display and they look great. At 3.5"x2.375"x.87", it is really a go everywhere camera. It won't totally replace my Minolta Dimage 7 with the zoom lens that is the equivalent to a 28mm-205mm on a film camera. (The Casio lens is the equivalent to a 35mm-105mm film camera lens) The Dimage is just too big and bulky to always have it with me, so a lot of shots never get taken.

The Casio Elixim EX-Z1000 (ten megapixel!) will be out within a month.

[Sierrachik]

I just went to the Konica Minolta site to see their newest....my husband and I each have the DiMage X50, we love them. They have gotten out of the camera busness as of six weeks ago and Sony will now take care of customer service issues with their cameras. You can read more about it here: http://ca.konicaminolta.com/.

Bummer...I would've bought another of their cameras when the time came.

[whogo]

We have been delighted with our Pentax Optio with 3X optical zoom. It is about the size of a pack of cigarettes and much lighter than our other digital camera.

[arlenez]

I wanted a camera that would slip in the pocket easily, and just got a Casio Elixim EX-Z850. It is only 3x optical zoom, but at 8mp you can use the digital zoom and still come up with very good shots. The 2.5in very bright display is really good. The only drawback I have found is that the so-called HQ movie mode has a lot of jaggies on any slanted lines.

I've put the pictures I've taken up on a 42" plasma display and they look great. At 3.5"x2.375"x.87", it is really a go everywhere camera. It won't totally replace my Minolta Dimage 7 with the zoom lens that is the equivalent to a 28mm-205mm on a film camera. (The Casio lens is the equivalent to a 35mm-105mm film camera lens) The Dimage is just too big and bulky to always have it with me, so a lot of shots never get taken.

The Casio Elixim EX-Z1000 (ten megapixel!) will be out within a month.

Hi:

The new EX-Z1000 looks great. I just found it on line and will look for it in the stores next month to check it out. Thanks for the heads up.

Regards,
Arlene

[mjmagee]

KiwiKeith, I just bought that Canon Powershot A700. Still reading the manual and playing with it. Way more sophisticated than my last digital camera. Check the review at Megapixel.com. That is what sold me. Marilyn

[Aussie Gal]

I have had a Canon A400 for the last two years and it takes fantastic photos. I also would like a larger zoom and may go for the A700 shortly, though I doubt if the photos will be any better than my A400. It is a great little camera and I think it takes better shots than my husband's Canon 35mm with the expensive lens.

Jennie

[Mosaic]

Keep in mind one very important thing will not SLR digital cameras---they cannot take moving pcitures well at all--none of them. For action shots you must click, follow, then have the camera snap the picture---a 1/2 second later often.

[Randyk47]

Right now we have a Nikon D-70, which is a digital SLR, with all the goodies (i.e., flash, filters, lens), an older (5 years ?) Sony Cyber-shot, and a Panasonic digital video recorder. Probably will update the Sony here in the next few months, at least before our cruise next March, and really like the Sony DSC-R1. Since we work a lot with our photos on our computers, using a couple different photo software packages, the more pixels the better. The DSC-R1 is 10.3 MP but is still basically a point and shoot even though it looks like an SLR. My wife really like the feel and size of the camera and since it will replace her older Sony that's good enough for me. :)

[Grumpy1]

Keep in mind one very important thing will not SLR digital cameras---they cannot take moving pcitures well at all--none of them. For action shots you must click, follow, then have the camera snap the picture---a 1/2 second later often.I have to disagree with you to some extent. Shutter lag on the Casio is down to something like .02 saconds. The shutter lag on digitals is getting better all of the time.

[OldCodger73]

Keep in mind one very important thing will not SLR digital cameras---they cannot take moving pcitures well at all--none of them. For action shots you must click, follow, then have the camera snap the picture---a 1/2 second later often.

Mosaic, I guess I'm a little dense this morning so I don't understand what you're saying in your post. Forgive me if I interpret it wrong.

Point and shoot cameras usually have a some kind of movie mode. I've never used it on my P&S so I don't know how useful it is. Most P&S, when taking single pictures have a 1 - 3 second shutter lag between pictures, which is a bummer for rapid action.

DSLRs don't have a movie mode. DSLRs also have no shutter lag, you press the shutter and it takes a picture. They also have a continuous shooting mode, you press the shutter, and depending on how you've set it, it'll fire off the number of frames you've set up to the maximum size of the camera's buffer, which can be anywhere up to 20 or more photos depending on whether you're shooting RAW or .jpg.

[arlenez]

Hi All:

Thanks for all of your recommendations. I love this website. I learn so many new things and have made so many new friends. CC'ers are the greatest group of people in the world!

War regards,
Arlene

[Grumpy1]

I have to disagree with you to some extent. Shutter lag on the Casio is down to something like .02 saconds. The shutter lag on digitals is getting better all of the time.After checking several expert reviews of the Casio 850, I find that I am wrong about the .02 shutter lag. With the flash off, the lag is actually .005 second!

There is an interesting feature that I haven't tried yet. In the "short movie mode" the camera is constantly storing 5 seconds worth of what the lens is seeing. So, if you are following a scene and looking for just the right time to start recording, when you finally push the button (which is usually a couple of seconds after the moment you were looking for) you will also have the previous 5 seconds recorded.

[xpcdoojk]

I bought a Canon PS2IS that is not tiny, but is a great tool. It does just about everything a real 35 mm camera can do except change lenses. A great optical zoom and 5 mega pixel. Uses regular AA batteries which is a better option than high priced rechargeables (can also use cheap AA rechargeables). Unfortunately they add weight, but you can always find a battery unlike my experience in Macchu Picchu last year when my battery was dead and I couldn't recharge it or just put in regular batteries.

jc

[Grumpy1]

I bought a Canon PS2IS that is not tiny, but is a great tool. It does just about everything a real 35 mm camera can do except change lenses. A great optical zoom and 5 mega pixel. Uses regular AA batteries which is a better option than high priced rechargeables (can also use cheap AA rechargeables). Unfortunately they add weight, but you can always find a battery unlike my experience in Macchu Picchu last year when my battery was dead and I couldn't recharge it or just put in regular batteries.

jcGood points, JC, and I'm certainly not relegating my Minolta Dimage7 to the dustbin, yet. It will still be with me on some of the tours. The reason I bought the Casio is so I can carry it in my pocket and be ready to take a picture anytime. I missed some great shots of whales coming into Hilo, Hawaii because we were out for a stroll and the camera was in the cabin. I did get a spare battery for the Casio.

[boomerSexyK]

We picked up a Konica Minolta Dimage X1 in St. Thomas last fall. 3X Optical zoom, 4X Digital Zoom, 8.3 megapixel. Have been very pleased with its performance so far. At 2.5 X 3.5 X 0.8 " it's definitely small enough to fit just about anywhere

[dougnewmanatsea]

Two things to keep in mind.

First, if you are looking for a long zoom, I highly recommend that you buy a camera with an image stabilizer. Indeed, I highly recommend this feature for any compact digital camera, but especially for those with long zooms. Very often, the long end of a compact, non-stabilized super-zoom camera's lens is pretty much useless anyway unless you have a tripod. It is not easy to hand-hold a slow (small aperture) 400mm equivalent lens unless you have image stabilization!

There are very few small, long-zoom cameras with this feature. (Indeed, there are very few small, long-zoom cameras altogether.) I would take a good look at the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ1 which has a 10x zoom (35-350mm equivalent) or the DMC-LZ5 which have a 6x zoom (37-222mm). All these are compact cameras and have Panasonic's excellent optical image stabilizer which means that unlike many similar cameras, the long end of the lens is actually usable!

Both of those cameras are "only" five megapixel models, but that brings me to the second thing to keep in mind... The megapixel myth. If you don't print bigger than 8x10 or so, don't even bother worrying about megapixels. See this article (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm) for why megapixels are really not important.

[Old Salty Dog]

There has been a lot of good information on this thread. One of the posters indicated that you can get much of the benefit of a many x zoom if you have high megapixel camera. I have a small Kodak digital with 3x optical zoom and a 6.1 megapixel chip. When needed I get excellent resolution by tightly cropping (I use Picasa and Photoshop) and get the equivalent of perhaps 6 or 8x zoom. Picasa software is a free download from Google and is extremely easy to use.

[Grumpy1]

Good points, Doug, but both of those cameras are still too big for me to carry around all of the time. The Casio, with a smaller footprint and half as thick is just the right size for me. Your needs may be different. The Casio has digital anti shake, which is not as good as optical antishake, but does a pretty good job. With 8x digital zoom on top of the 3x optical, anti shake is definitely needed.

As to the megapixel arguments, the Panasonic 6mp has a max resolution of 2816x 2112. The Casio 8mp is 3264x2448. Both are fine for 8x10 prints. BUT, if I want to crop a picture and print an 8x10 out of the middle, I've got a little more room to crop the picture. It also lets me use a little of that 8x digital zoom when I want to. The downside, since the 8mp are squeezed onto a die that is about the same size as the 6mp, a speck of dust on the lens or any anomaly in the lens will cover more pixels. That would negate the ability to enlarge and crop. to truely get the most out of megapixels, the chip needs to enlarge by the same ratio as the pixels. Unfortunately, bigger chips are more expensive than packing more pixels on a chip of the same size, so large die size is going to be limited to the higher end cameras for quite a while yet.

With cameras, there are many, many tradeoffs that have to be considered. The perfect camera for me may be next to useless for you and vice versa. Although the choices can be confusing, it is nice to have choices and not be forced into "one size fits nobody".

[arlenez]

I have a small Kodak digital with 3x optical zoom and a 6.1 megapixel chip. When needed I get excellent resolution by tightly cropping (I use Picasa and Photoshop) and get the equivalent of perhaps 6 or 8x zoom. Picasa software is a free download from Google and is extremely easy to use.

This is really useful information and I will certainly keep this in mind when purchasing my next digital camera.

Thanks & regards,
Arlene

[arlenez]

I started shopping around and looking at digital cameras. I came across a Kodak V610 that is the smallest 10x optical camera. It looks very nice, but a review I read didn't impress me. I would love to hear from anyone that may have this camera or know anything about it.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Regards,
Arlene

[Grumpy1]

I started shopping around and looking at digital cameras. I came across a Kodak V610 that is the smallest 10x optical camera. It looks very nice, but a review I read didn't impress me. I would love to hear from anyone that may have this camera or know anything about it.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Regards,
ArleneThat is an interesting camera. It's alittle bit longer than my Casio, but same thickness and about the same width. It certainly qualifies as a go anywhere camera in my book. Reviews are pretty skimpy right now, but I did see comments about the way they get a 10x optical zoom. There are two lenses, each having a roughly 3x range. The first is 38mm to 114mm which matches my Casio. when you run out of range on that lens, it switches to the second lens which is 130mm to 380mm. There is a definite and, to some, an annoying jump at the switchover point. There are two sensors in the camera, so I'm pretty sure that each lens has its own sensor.

It has lots of bells and whistles, builtin wireless bluetooth connectivity, which with a bluetooth enabled GPS could allow a GPS coordinate stamp as well as date/time on the picture. In the work I used to do, such a feature would have been very desirable, but probably not that much use to the average user.

Here's a link to some pictures that were shot with the camera, including one of an NCL ship at maximum zoom. At full size display on my 17"monitor, it looked pretty good. http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/kodak/v610-review/gallery.shtml

You'll have to add the price of a big memory card. The builtin card is 38mb or thereabouts. I have not seen any information on battery life.

The specs on the flash looked a little weak to me. I think its worthy of consideration, based on what I've seen. It is a little pricy, though.

[shelwin24]

I have the Kodak V570 and love it. It is the v610 little brother. I took it on my cruise a few weeks a go and the pics were great. The best thing is the new widescreen lens. You can take a group shot without having to back up. It is 5mp which is fine for anything 8x10 or below.

[dougnewmanatsea]

Good points, Doug, but both of those cameras are still too big for me to carry around all of the time. The Casio, with a smaller footprint and half as thick is just the right size for me.
Oh, of course - but the original poster wanted something with a long zoom.

The Casios are great little cameras, probably the best "pocket cameras" out there.

With 8x digital zoom on top of the 3x optical
Digital zoom is a pretty worthless feature - it's no different from just cropping after the fact in whatever image editing program you use.

The downside, since the 8mp are squeezed onto a die that is about the same size as the 6mp, a speck of dust on the lens or any anomaly in the lens will cover more pixels.
More importantly, generally speaking, smaller pixels = higher noise levels.

Over time, the results one can get with smaller pixels is better and better. A couple of years ago, when the first 8 MP consumer cameras, the results were atrocious. Those tiny little pixels caused all sorts of trouble like high noise levels and awful chromatic aberration. Now, they've gotten much better.

Unfortunately, a lot of consumer cameras' lenses can't resolve as much detail as these sensors, which means that all you get is a bigger image (you could get the same thing by interpolating in Photoshop), rather than actual resolution.

At any rate, a 2 MP camera is enough to produce good 8x10 prints... Honest. I've seen gorgeous, huge poster-size prints made with the obsolete 3 MP Nikon D1/D1H SLRs... Though unlike consumer cameras, it takes about 10 MP in a digital SLR before the sensor starts out-resolving the lens.

Unfortunately, bigger chips are more expensive than packing more pixels on a chip of the same size
Not to mention that it means bigger cameras :) !

[Grumpy1]

Oh, of course - but the original poster wanted something with a long zoom.
She also wanted small size, which is why we've been discussing tradeoffs.

The Casios are great little cameras, probably the best "pocket cameras" out there.


Digital zoom is a pretty worthless feature - it's no different from just cropping after the fact in whatever image editing program you use.
I've taken some shots at 3x optical and then added about 4x digital zoom for a second shot. I've then cropped the 3x shot to match the 3x optical/4x digital. Very little difference at 8x10. There are times I don't want to bother with editing and cropping, so digital zoom is useful. If it were a worthless feature, as you claim, it wouldn't be on almost every digital camera made. As I said, what is useful for one person is worthless to another, but if I just want to take some shots, burn them to a CD and put them up as a slide show without extensive editing, I'll use some digital zoom on occasion. what you do with your shots is up to you.


More importantly, generally speaking, smaller pixels = higher noise levels.

Over time, the results one can get with smaller pixels is better and better. A couple of years ago, when the first 8 MP consumer cameras, the results were atrocious. Those tiny little pixels caused all sorts of trouble like high noise levels and awful chromatic aberration. Now, they've gotten much better.

Unfortunately, a lot of consumer cameras' lenses can't resolve as much detail as these sensors, which means that all you get is a bigger image (you could get the same thing by interpolating in Photoshop), rather than actual resolution.
If you are serious enough about photography to need Photoshop. I'm not.

At any rate, a 2 MP camera is enough to produce good 8x10 prints... Honest. I've seen gorgeous, huge poster-size prints made with the obsolete 3 MP Nikon D1/D1H SLRs... Though unlike consumer cameras, it takes about 10 MP in a digital SLR before the sensor starts out-resolving the lens.


Not to mention that it means bigger cameras :) !
I've seen some very tiny (and thin) 35mm spy cameras, so it can be done.