I am in the market for a new camera and i was looking to spend 300-400 dollars. what are some things that i should look for? what does slr-like mean? any reccomendations? i think i want something with anti-shake...

 

You won't find anything SLR-like for $300-400 unless you want something that looks like an SLR but doesn't have SLR features. Cameras in this category are the Canon Powershot and Kodak Easyshare.

In that price range you should consider what features you do want. Also some features will come at the price of giving you a crappy lens. The biggest factor to me is optical zoom versus digital zoom. I want a lens that can zoom to a decent range with the lens (optical) without using processing within the camera (digital) to provide the zooming. Digital zooming reduces the number of pixels used on a shot and thereby also reduces quality.

Do you want something compact, feature rich, something that requires a docking station for prints, what type of media do you want to use or does it matter, do you want a large LCD view-finder for previewing photos or will a traditional viewfinder do? Do you need a movie mode (need to check what kind of video codec and compression it uses)? How large will you go with prints? Most cameras in this range are at least 5MP-7MP and will handle 8x10 and 11x14 prints easily, but if you need something larger, you may want to look for 8MP or more.

 

Canon S3IS is in that price range and one very nice camera, you can check out others at http://www.dpreview.com

 

You always beat me with your advice!
Ive been using Canon for years and have 2 digitals. An old Digi Elph and a 300D SLR. Both are awesome, and the new Canon's are even better!I like the one that Anna Kournikova (SP?) has in that commerical

 

I got a Kodak P850 for $300. SLR like with 5.3 MP, 12x Optical zoom (which I believe is the highest right now), anti shake, beautiful 2.5" Display and a whole load of other goodies. For a Kodak I think the quality is great and Ive really started to pick up photography as an amateur hobby.

 

I bought the Sony DSC-H5, and it's amazing...the pictures come out crystal clear plus the screen is 3 inches and displays phenomenal high resolution images. It's about $390.

 

I like my Powershot S80 because it's small, has a protective shield, a wide angle lens, a big screen, and nice menus. It's great for hiking trips.

Since it has a smaller lens, you might notice a haze effect. You can get better pictures with a camera that has a larger lens, but they're too bulky for me.

 

thank you all for the help. I would be using the camera on vacations and car show mostly.. i would like to maybe make it some what of a hobby after a while but for right now i dont know much about cameras.

wondering which features i should be looking out for.

what is the difference between dslr and slr-like? is the quality of pics better or does it just offer more options?

keep the advice coming!!!!! Thanks alot all, this is helping me out a great deal

 

slr (single lens reflex) means the lens is interchangeable with another (zoom-or any of your choice)

dslr i believe is digital slr,which is just like a slr(film) camera but digital.

if your not using your camera as a photographer,buying a slr maybe too much for what you want. most digitals now can get you 7+ megapixels for under $400,and that is very good quality. and unless you are blowing up your pics larger than 8X10,you won't need a slr with more than 8 megapixel.

i have found the Canon lens to be very good (and I've owned about 4 different types!

 

What do you mean? Just on photography posts? Sorry, I'll try to slow down and give you a chance, but I really enjoy reading and checking out the posts. :-)

 

If you are going to be taking low light pictures it's going to be tough, smaller lens don't let enough light in to take low light pictures, so the lens has to be open longer, if you don't have a tripod and taking still pictures this means they'll be fuzzy.

The Canon S3IS is a wonderful camera and it's auto features help even the novice take good pictures. I don't think there is a better camera on the market right now than the S3IS at least IMHO. I've been through 4 others always trying to cheap out, this time I went in the $500 range and got exactly what I wanted. A great camera.

I did a ton of reading on dpreview.com as well, I would suggest the same for you.

 

I have a DSC-F828 (near DSLR) which has been replaced by a newer Sony model, but I still love it. One of its drawbacks is it uses an inefficient video codec so it creates large video files. I never bought for that anyway. I also have a DSC-M2 5MP camera and like that too. You will find that many people, just like with cars, have biases toward what brand to buy. The major brands all make pretty good cameras, and if you are an average shooter, you will usually be satisfied with your selection if you do a little reading nad it has the features you want.

My personal list of favorite brands are (no particular order):
Canon
Sony
Nikon
Fuji
Olympus

 

The S3IS and SD700IS are both very good cameras.

 

To clears thing up SLR has nothing to do with lens or interchangeablity and all companies have lens that will only fit there camera

Single Lens Reflex simply means the image that you see in the view finder is reflected off a semi transparent mirror know as a focus screen that gets its image from the lens, behind the focus screen sits the raw film on a SLR cover up til you take the shor or because the focus screen is semi-trasparent it also projects the image on the CMOS or CCD on a digital SLR so it can be seen though the LCD monitor


when you click to take a picture the focus screen lifts up to allow the complete image to hit the film, CMOS or CCD thus why you see black in the viewfinder after you click for a shot because the focus screen is no longer
reflecting the image to you.

This is way camera have been working since the early 70's and became the norm in the 80's

Okay as for my advice, I was a freelance cinematographer so most of my knowledge is with video cameras but still photo camera have the same basic idea.

Your price range is a little low so maybe buy use if you can first inspect it,

first most people with fancy cameras, pictures look as good as someone with a $20 disposable so a fancy camera wont give you nice shots if you dont use it proper

Though you might not understand most of this if you want the best thing for your money look for the following simple things

1: 35 mm lens with a f-stop no more then 2.4- most slr lens are 35-70mm but they have min. f-stops of 4 meaning is going to be worthless in low light
the lower the f- stop the more light it can allow to pass though the lens

2: the ability to manually white balance or it has atleast 4 white balance presets

3: a decent optical zoom -- I dont think SLR have digital zooms but I could be wrong, anyway digital zooms are completely worthless

4: forget anti-shake, get a tripod, most low end D-SLR have a digital anti- shake feature all this will do is reduce the number of active pixels thus reducing image quality
everyone elses advice is fairly solid, and I can explain futher if you wish

 

>> forget anti-shake, get a tripod...

Why do you say that? My uncle has a Maxxum 7D (I think) and its anti-shake seems to be very useful. I don't think it's always too easy to carry a tripod...

 

Anti shake is useful for small digital--non slr cameras, because their lens have a high fstop therefore little light is allowed in and you adjusting their ISO only goes to reduce image quality so the shutter has to be left open longer for low light shots, anti-shake is useful for preventing stropping (smear because of movement)

BUT.. on a decent DSLR if he follow my suggestions and gets a fast lens (fstop of 2.4 or less) their will be enough light for most cases going though the lens, and he can adjust ISO without degrading image. Therefore the need for anti-shake is not there.
even if you just leave everything to auto instead of manual --ISO, and fstop will be set so the shutter will not have to stay open long and movement wont be detected in most cases.

also the use of anti-shake really called digital image stabilization most reduce the amount of active CMOS pixels inorder to detect stropping, thus reducing image quality that can be detected when printed to the max size according to its megapixel rating

 

But, it doesnt really matter, as I said before most fancy camera owners, take pictures that look as good as disposable cameras simply they dont bother to learn how to work the camera proper

 

Olympus C-750 Ultra Zoom. About $300.

 

If the pros use IS lenses for magazine layouts, you won't be able to tell the difference in quality loss (if any). You still gain about a stop with IS, so a f/2.4 IS is a very good low light lens. I'll never be printing out anything larger than a 5x7 anyway.

That being said, IS may save some of your shots, depending on your ability.

 

Pro who take photos indoors without tripods dont use IS because they light the hell out of everything, alot of high end cameras dont even has this feature.

Pros who take outdoor photos use a tripod or aleast a monopod, am not aware of any one who does different

Iam not argueing with you but am not aware of use of IS in pros

Also keep in mind their are pro level cameras with IS but they are Optical stablizers not digital so there would be no loss in quality but low end SLR only have digital IS

Anyways use IS, dont use IS - who really gives a damn in the end