What is a good digital camera for $250.00+ or-

Messages
2,323
Location
Houston, Texas
Hi Folks:wave:,
My 8 year old coolpix 800 just stopped working. Need to go get one for work and play, close up and distant. Quality photos of work for posting and web. Any suggestions.
Shaz :)
 
1) Are you "married" to Nikon?

2) Just about any new camera will impress you after working with 2.x megapixels and a 2x optical zoom!

3) Are you used to using some of the add-ons (lenses, etc) for the CoolPix 800 that I saw in the [Steve's DigiCams] review?

4) Are you looking for a take-anywhere, pocket-sized ... or a put-on-tripod fancy DSLR, or ... ?
 
For average person I hear nothing but good about the Kodaks. I am using a Kodak DX4530 in my work for several years now and personal stuff. It goes into attics, crawl spaces, boats, you name it. I don't baby it but I don't abuse it either. But I will probably buy another Kodak after this one for work.

I have heard similar stories from some Appraisers. They had the same good luck with their Kodaks too.

Now when I replace all my Pro 35mm stuff I sold, that is another story.
 
Yep - I've owned a [Kodak DX4330] and a [Kodak CX7530] and liked them both. Kodak seems to have "rich color" all figured out. The main reason I moved over to a [Canon PowerShot A520] (and now an [A540]) was to get more manual control.

My A540 has a large LCD view screen, takes 6MP images, has a 4x optical zoom, can use large-capacity SD cards (at least 2GB) and runs on 2 AAs. :thumb:

I take a lot of my pics on motorcycle trips, and I found that the camera had to be pocket-sized or it would be left at home.

But heck, with $250 you'd have almost $100 left over. Keep looking? ;)
 
Response by shaz in red :rolleyes:
1) Are you "married" to Nikon? Hi Kerry :wave:, no not really. I had several Pentax SLR starting in the 70's and a Zenza Bronica 2 1/4" that I have not really ever used, procurements of war, priced low , overseas items:eek:.
2) Just about any new camera will impress you after working with 2.x megapixels and a 2x optical zoom! That is pleasing to hear, however I was pleased with the coolpix and it's clarity. Are you saying things have gotten better?:eek:

3) Are you used to using some of the add-ons (lenses, etc) for the CoolPix 800 that I saw in the [Steve's DigiCams] review? No. I have the SLR telephoto, wide angle and such for the old Pentax but I never use it, or them anymore.

4) Are you looking for a take-anywhere, pocket-sized ... or a put-on-tripod fancy DSLR, or ... ? I am not looking for the micro sized camera and would like to use the tripod as that offers great options in it self. The size of the old camera I have was okay. I have big hands and find the movement towards more compact as counterproductive at this point. I appreciate these clear questions. Thank you for your time and consideration! ...S quote]

For average person I hear nothing but good about the Kodaks. I am using a Kodak DX4530 in my work for several years now and personal stuff. It goes into attics, crawl spaces, boats, you name it. I don't baby it but I don't abuse it either. But I will probably buy another Kodak after this one for work.

I have heard similar stories from some Appraisers. They had the same good luck with their Kodaks too.

Now when I replace all my Pro 35mm stuff I sold, that is another story.
Hi Jeff :wave:,
Thanks for the advise on the Kodak, I do appreciate it. I think I am looking toward the camera you would buy in lieu of the 35mm SLR. I may need spend more and if that is what it takes for the right camera ( Whatever that might be?:dunno::)) so be it.:D
I am so appreciative of the gift of sight and see such beauty around us. I would like to capture it but not make a living in photography. I appreciate your time and consideration in my search for the perfect tool.
Shaz:)
 
I'm using a Kodak Z740 5.0 Mega pixel with a 37 MM lens I purchased for $140 it works great for me. Most of what I shoot is to share here & elsewhere with other wood workers. Before that I had a 3.0 MP Kodak that somehow got damaged even in a padded case. I purchased a Kodak C633 6.1 MP for the LOML & she loves it.
 
Shaz - I'm one of those digital freaks who loves gadgets. I've used digital cameras since they first came out. In fact, my first digital camera was B&W because they didn't have color imagers at that time.

Since then, I've gone through a number of digital cameras topping out with a Nikon D100 package - couple of lenses and good flash. While it was a good camera, my wife hated it because of the size and weight. 35mm cameras are a certain size because that was what was needed to contain the film. And in their time, 35mm cameras were considered small.

But today, there's no reason to stick with the 35mm sized camera. With a digital imager, the camera can be made quite small, which also reduces the size of the lens, which reduces the cost of the camera.

Since my wife hated the Nikon so much, I eventually sold it (taking a bath on it in the process) and bought a Kodak Z740 (12x zoom). Although the Nikon had some capabilities and features that the Kodak doesn't, I don't really miss anything major when I shoot with the Kodak (except the flash won't carry across a room).

This is not to say that I think the Kodak is the best - I think that's a moving target. Canon (I think) has a digital camera out with image stabilization and a feature that recognizes faces and focuses on them. When you're shooting two people, you often frame them so that the center of the picture is between them, often giving you great focus on the background and fuzzy faces, if you're not careful to compensate. The Canon feature of recognizing the faces and focusing on them avoids that problem.

If you get fixed on Kodak, maybe I can sell you mine so I can buy one with all the latest features and functions (I'm goofy that way).

Mike

[added note] One more comment. Whatever camera you buy, you have to think of it as a throwaway in a few years. They're making such great progress in digital cameras that no matter what camera you choose, yours will be well obsolete in that time.
 
Last edited:
I am no photographer but I have used some pretty nice cameras (for a few moments at a time). I bought my daughter a Rebel for her B.A. graduation (better start saving up before she finishes her masters). It is out of the price range but, there is a point to me brining it up.

If you stripped away all the other great stuff that camera has, the things that impressed me as necessary in my next camera are:

- Jiggle control, very cool and available in your price range.
- Quick recovery time after taking a pic, also available in your price range.
- Ability to support a seperate flash, great for improving your pics by doing nothing more than aiming the flash a different direction (not sure about availability).

So, no solid recommendation. Just some observations that may help thin the herd.

P.s. I have had two Fujifilm 'point and shoot' style cameras for years and both worked great until stolen or are still working (they missed one). ;-)
 
I've been using a Kodak Z650 since my Coolpix died. Never used the full image capabilities on the Nikon and probably never will on the Kodak either but there's a huge improvement in image stability, zoom, picture modes, etc., etc. I'm actually kind of glad the Nikon died or I'd still be using it.
 
You've gotten good advice here, Shaz. The two cameras I use now (a Nikon DSLR and a little bitty Casio) both fall outside your specifications, either price-wise or size-wise.

One place I always go when looking at camera options is http://dpreview.com/. They have reviews and specs of just about any camera you might be interested in.
 
I'm using a Kodak Z740 5.0 Mega pixel with a 37 MM lens I purchased for $140 it works great for me. Most of what I shoot is to share here & elsewhere with other wood workers. Before that I had a 3.0 MP Kodak that somehow got damaged even in a padded case. I purchased a Kodak C633 6.1 MP for the LOML & she loves it.
Hi Bart :wave: ,
Thanks for the vote on that Kodak stuff, you and your LOYL sound sold...S..:D

Shaz - I'm one of those digital freaks who loves gadgets. I've used digital cameras since they first came out. In fact, my first digital camera was B&W because they didn't have color imagers at that time.
Hi Mike :wave:,
When was that? B&W digital. Never would have occured to me, a digital B&W:eek:. What did you do with the photos, how far along was the computer?

Since then, I've gone through a number of digital cameras topping out with a Nikon D100 package - couple of lenses and good flash. While it was a good camera, my wife hated it because of the size and weight. 35mm cameras are a certain size because that was what was needed to contain the film. And in their time, 35mm cameras were considered small.

But today, there's no reason to stick with the 35mm sized camera. With a digital imager, the camera can be made quite small, which also reduces the size of the lens, which reduces the cost of the camera.

Since my wife hated the Nikon so much, I eventually sold it (taking a bath on it in the process) and bought a Kodak Z740 (12x zoom). Although the Nikon had some capabilities and features that the Kodak doesn't, I don't really miss anything major when I shoot with the Kodak (except the flash won't carry across a room). It is nice to know that your Kodak is a satisfactory replacement... even after the bath! :eek:...:rofl:...S

This is not to say that I think the Kodak is the best - I think that's a moving target. Canon (I think) has a digital camera out with image stabilization and a feature that recognizes faces and focuses on them. When you're shooting two people, you often frame them so that the center of the picture is between them, often giving you great focus on the background and fuzzy faces, if you're not careful to compensate. The Canon feature of recognizing the faces and focusing on them avoids that problem. Sounds like an important feature, as fuzzy faces are best only when they are intended..

If you get fixed on Kodak, maybe I can sell you mine so I can buy one with all the latest features and functions (I'm goofy that way). (another Kodak?)

Mike

[added note] One more comment. Whatever camera you buy, you have to think of it as a throwaway in a few years. They're making such great progress in digital cameras that no matter what camera you choose, yours will be well obsolete in that time. Hey Mike, this P.S. is a most valuable piece of information. Thank you for your input, I believe it is that piece of information that will help me when it comes time for me to "take that bath:eek:"........... :D :rofl::rofl::rofl:

I am no photographer but I have used some pretty nice cameras (for a few moments at a time). I bought my daughter a Rebel for her B.A. graduation (better start saving up before she finishes her masters). It is out of the price range but, there is a point to me brining it up.

If you stripped away all the other great stuff that camera has, the things that impressed me as necessary in my next camera are:

- Jiggle control, very cool and available in your price range. Hi Glenn :wave:, what is this jiggle control?...S
- Quick recovery time after taking a pic, also available in your price range. Yes, I understand and agree, thanks.
- Ability to support a seperate flash, great for improving your pics by doing nothing more than aiming the flash a different direction (not sure about availability). Hmmmmm

So, no solid recommendation. Just some observations that may help thin the herd. Thanks Glenn, I like herd thinning:D...S

P.s. I have had two Fujifilm 'point and shoot' style cameras for years and both worked great until stolen or are still working (they missed one). ;-)
I appreciate the input. I went to Fry's earlier today looking for a Nikon, only because " I Want a Nikon Camera, I want to take Phooootographs...Oh Mamma don't taaaake my koda chrome awayyyyyyyy:D
but they had none. So I left, and I came here, I guess I'll buy Mike's and probably take a bath!:D:rofl::rofl:
Shaz
 
Not sure of the model, but we bought my mom a Kodak last Christmas for just over $100 after rebate that was I think 8 megapixel and had a great optical zoom. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. If my mom can figure out how to use it to take good pictures, ANYONE can use it to take good pictures.
 
Shaz

Take a look at the cannon S21S as its a little bigger than some of the power shots. Has 12:1 Zoom and great video. Came out at 500 dropped to 400 and may be close to your target price now.

Only thing we have about it that is a negative is the flash has to be manually popped up and the wife liked her older film Rebel that when the light was needed popped up the flash itself. Now after you flip it up it still only fires when needed on auto.

Also it has a lot of manual control if you chose to go that way. Uses SD memory and I recently bought 2 gig cards for 14.00 each.

But really I think its pretty hard to make a bad choice today.

I prefer the SD memory over the XD or the Sony memory Stick only because they are more available thus cheaper and they are more standard for the drug store printers. That is much less of an issue today than it was a few years ago.



Garry
 
Shaz - I'm one of those digital freaks who loves gadgets. I've used digital cameras since they first came out. In fact, my first digital camera was B&W because they didn't have color imagers at that time.
Hi Mike :wave:,
When was that? B&W digital. Never would have occured to me, a digital B&W:eek:. What did you do with the photos, how far along was the computer?
Shaz
I should qualify my statement to say that it was the first consumer digital camera I dealt with and it used a B&W imager because color imagers were too expensive. It was made by Logitech who did not stay in the camera business. Attached is a picture of me taken with that camera. Note the small monochrome monitor in the picture and how young the guy is (even with the beard). The picture had a month and day in the name but not the year so I don't know exactly when it was taken. I tried to see if that was Windows running on the computer but I can't tell for sure. I think it was pre-Windows because the monitor is mono and I don't remember ever running Windows in monochrome. The usable version of Windows (3.0 and 3.1) was released in 1990-1992 so my best guess was that the picture was taken about 1990 or 1991.

The picture quality is not great. It was also a fixed focus camera, like a cellular phone camera. The picture format was TIFF instead of JPEG. I converted it to JPEG to post it here.

Mike
 

Attachments

  • Old-B&W.jpg
    Old-B&W.jpg
    32 KB · Views: 17
Not sure of the model, but we bought my mom a Kodak last Christmas for just over $100 after rebate that was I think 8 megapixel and had a great optical zoom. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. If my mom can figure out how to use it to take good pictures, ANYONE can use it to take good pictures.
Hi Matt :wave:,
That solves my problem... If I buy a Kodak and have a problem I am calling your Mom! :D Thanks for the input, as I grow older I am more happy with the few functions I can get to work.:eek::D...S

Shaz

Take a look at the cannon S21S as its a little bigger than some of the power shots. Has 12:1 Zoom and great video. Came out at 500 dropped to 400 and may be close to your target price now. Hi Garry :wave:,
Thanks, I will check this out, hadn't considered the video portion:eek:!

Only thing we have about it that is a negative is the flash has to be manually popped up and the wife liked her older film Rebel that when the light was needed popped up the flash itself. Now after you flip it up it still only fires when needed on auto. I don't think that would bother me, yet, thanks for the insight!:thumb:

Also it has a lot of manual control if you chose to go that way. Uses SD memory and I recently bought 2 gig cards for 14.00 each. Is the SD "sandisk"? If so I have been using a 32 mg flashcard.:eek:

But really I think its pretty hard to make a bad choice today.

I prefer the SD memory over the XD or the Sony memory Stick only because they are more available thus cheaper and they are more standard for the drug store printers. That is much less of an issue today than it was a few years ago. I am not familiar with these terms, I did however see some kids in one of my classes ( not as the teacher ) making use of what they were calling a memory stick. I have the setup for the sandisk compact flash memory card...S



Garry

I should qualify my statement to say that it was the first consumer digital camera I dealt with and it used a B&W imager because color imagers were too expensive. It was made by Logitech who did not stay in the camera business. Attached is a picture of me taken with that camera. Note the small monochrome monitor in the picture and how young the guy is (even with the beard). Nice picture of days gone by...Is that an early R.Redford :D ? Monitor about 10" horizontally? The picture had a month and day in the name but not the year so I don't know exactly when it was taken. Amazing how much information can be obtained from a photo! I tried to see if that was Windows running on the computer but I can't tell for sure. I think it was pre-Windows because the monitor is mono and I don't remember ever running Windows in monochrome. The usable version of Windows (3.0 and 3.1) was released in 1990-1992 so my best guess was that the picture was taken about 1990 or 1991. Where you working the keyboard when DOS was the only game in town?

The picture quality is not great. It was also a fixed focus camera, like a cellular phone camera. The picture format was TIFF instead of JPEG. I converted it to JPEG to post it here.

Mike
Just solidifies the fact you mentioned earlier...obsolescence will ocurr with increasing rapidity, compounding daily.
Thanks Mike :wave:,
Shaz :)
 
Is the SD "sandisk"? If so I have been using a 32 mg flashcard.

Where you working the keyboard when DOS was the only game in town?

Shaz :)

Gary's reference to "SD" probably means "Secure Digital" which is one of the formats of the flash cards. SD is nice because it's thin. There's also two smaller versions of the SD card called (I think) Mini-SD and Micro-SD. The micro is really small.

Yes, I've been using a computer all the way back to the original IBM PC with only floppy drives (no hard disk). The next computer with a 80286 processor and a hard drive was blindingly fast by comparison.

Mike
 
Top