I have been using a Sony CD-400 Mavica for all of my digital pic needs. In fact, almost all of the pics you have seen me post over the last two years were taken with this camera.

My daughter plays AAU basketball and had a game this morning that I couldn't attend since several unreasonable people decided to break bones on a weekend I was on call!

Anyway, I asked my son to take some pics of my daughter at the game. It was the first time I had ever given the camera to anyone to use. Long story longer.....HE SPILLED HIS McDONALD'S MILKSHAKE ON IT!!!!!!

I seems to be completely shorted out.

Anyway, I had been contemplating getting a new camera even before this. I am interested in one that is capable of taking MPG videos (like my Mavica) as well as stills. I want at least 4 megapixels (again, like the Mavica) but I would like something that has a better "reaction time" if you know what I mean.

I take a lot of sports shots and with this camera you almost had to guess when/if something was going to happen due to the delay between you hitting the button and the time the pic is taken. Also, I want better "shutter" speed. In other words, less blurring with action shots.

Finally, with the CD Mavica, I can use 200 MB mini discs. I would like at least that much storage space on this newer camera.

Price range would be $500-$750.

Anyone know what camera(s) fit the bill?

Thanks a lot!

 

I'd say to ditch CDs since flash cards of the same capacity are cheap and easier to use. You can just get a card reader for $10-20 and save the hassle of hooking up your cam to your PC.

I don't know if you'd be interested in this one, and I don't know much about the digicam market myself, but my uncle is really interested in this one:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/a2.html

 

Check out dpreview.com

They usually have all the newest reviews, as well as a bunch of sample shots from the camera.

 

Splurge and get a Canon Digital Rebel. Well worth the $.
If you want a smaller snap and shoot type then I recommend the Canon A80 or S400.

 

Bonz, get a higher end canon. I would say the Canon G5 or Powershot Pro1. Definitely abandon the Sony mini CD technology, CF or it's equivalents are very cheap and probably easier to use.

I would actually specifically agrue against the Digital Rebel. Unless you're ready to drop more money on getting SLR lenses, it's not worth it to get a SLR. For the $900 or so you'd spend on a Digi Rebel, you only get the EF-S 18-55 lens, which is adequate but nothing special. You'll probably want a longer zoom, so that's another $300-1200, depending on what you get. I'm not against SLR's, I've got a 10D myself, but unless you're willing to take advantage of their biggest plus (interchangeable lenses), you're not using the camera to it's maximal potential.

Another hot camera to look at is the Sony F-828. It's compared very favorably to some of the less expensive SLR's.

Check out

www.photo.net for more info on cameras and photography in general.

A good site to buy from or just get info is

www.bhphotovideo.com

 

Thanks everyone. I originally liked the mini discs since you coul run then on anyone's computer and they held a lot more pics than the old memory cards. But now it seems that the cards have gotten a lot bigger.

Interchangable lenses aren't really that important to me and in fact I would rather stay away from them.

Do any of the ones mentioned above take MPEG video? What optical and digital zoom do they have? How big a memory card do they offer?

Thanks.

I'll be looking at the links now.

 

>> Thanks everyone. I originally liked the mini discs since you coul run then on anyone's computer and they held a lot more pics than the old memory cards. But now it seems that the cards have gotten a lot bigger.

The cool thing is that you can plug in a USB card reader into any computer with a USB port, and it works the same as a CD (except it's easier to read, edit, and write files with it it.) The card readers are very small and you can store them with your camera.

 

I think anything in the price range you want will cover all the bases, I'm actually looking to get a new camera as well. I hate the shutter lag on digital cameras..I used my sisters and she has somethign called burst mode that helps but I think takes up more memory for the photo. I'll have to research more, I want one that can take 10 shots in rapid succession as well at a decent resolution.

 

Well the Canon Digital Rebel is more expensive, BUT it honestly is one of the best out on the market for the money. I believe it can shoot mpegs too, not 100% sure though. I'd look at the lenses like this, while you get a decent one right off the bat, you can always upgrade the lense later on down the road if you so choose too.

Also, alot of prof. photo guys will tell you quality of that camera is almost as good as a high end 35mm camera.

 

edit: my dad has a digital rebel, I suck at using it though.



that was with the rebel.

the interchangable lenses are the only way to fly. you may not THINK you want it, but you do... first the lens that comes with its has a .9foot macro. gotta love getting up close and personal when need be.

and when longer shots are needed, grab the bigger lens and do it. I dont have the photos here, but I took a photo about .2miles away with a 200mm lens, zooms right in. larger zooms mean worse macro.

also FYI, digital zoom is worthless, ignore it. you should disable it if the camera allows it. take the photo at the max optical zoom, and you can do the same digital zoom in a 10$ photo editing program. it does not enhance the photo by doing it on the camera, it just makes it pixelated.

with that said, P&S are not like SLR. the SLR have a larger CCD chip, this means the recievers are more spread out(reduces noise between them), thus the new sony 8mp P&S takes aweful photos. while a 6mp rebel takes incredable pictures.

just some things to consider, the SLR has no shutter lag, it has rapid shoot which is 2.5shots per second I think. not familiar with a movie mode though.

about the biggest drawback to SLR is the lack of real time view finder. you have to look through the shutter, you cant see what your shooting on the screen untill after you shoot it.

 

I agree with the CD causing the delay because it has to write the photo to disk which is the only reason I avoided it. I also looked into this recently and read all the reviews.

It came down to the Canon or the Olympus. Sounds like the Canon is right for you, we went with the Olympus because not only does it have a 17 optical zoom you can also buy a 100 x zoom lens. I also agree digital zoom is crap.

The bottom line was it's close up quality which my wife needs for our business. It takes excellent close-ups in macro mode.

My 2 cents.

 

I have an old (like 15 year old) Canon AE-1 35mm camera. I have a nice macro lens and a big a$$ zoom lens. Will those fit on the Digital Rebel? If so, it may be worth it to get.

 

They might Bonz, if you have a good camera shops around you, it might be worth it to ask them.

 

No, they probably will not. I don't think that Canon has had the EF lensmount for that long. I'll check on that, but I'm pretty sure that's before the days of autofocus, so you would have to manually focus your lenses, even on a modern day SLR.

Also keep in mind that the Canon Digital Rebel is NOT able to take MPEG video. Bonz, I would really caution you to look further before you get the Digital Rebel. The plus is that there is no shutter lag, and that you can get other lenses, but as I said, that's also a big weakness for a lot of people. I don't mind lugging my camera with lens, plus another lens or two around, but many don't want to deal with the hassle. I only have a few lenses, but each one cost somewhere between $400 to $900 bucks. It's painful to pay as much for a lens as you did for the body.

I don't think that you can say that the Sony F-828 takes horrible pics. If I wasn't interested in a SLR, that's what I would take a look at. I haven't heard anything bad about it. Definitely check it out. It does have a movie mode, a very good one actually.

Keep me informed.

 

yeah bring the lens to the store, it may fit. it takes both 2 sizes, but it should be autofocus.

itll take some of the best digital photos youve ever seen, user selectable apareture and exposure time up to 30seconds. lets you get some cool effects for night shots or super fast exposures.

 

Bonz, is this your camera?

http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/com...rces/SLRs/ae1/

If so, it takes the old FD lens mount and there is NO WAY that your old FD lenses will fit on the current EF mount. Well, I shouldn't say no way, I'm sure there are lens mount converters, but having said that, you still will not have autofocus capability, which is an incredible loss.

I agree with ares that it's a good camera, I have the same CCD on my 10D. The feature set is actually a little more limited than on the 10D. All the cameras I mentioned in my first post have user selectable aperture priority and shutter priority, along with adjustable WB....plenty of other stuff. A lot of that is probably adjustability that the majority of the owners will never use, but it's all handy to have in case you decide to.

 

Oh, I might as well add that the most important factor in taking a good picture is not the camera, the lens, the flash or the film, but the guy holding the thing.

I would bet that you could get some very nice pics with your old kit, the lenses are probably fairly good. Believe me, the equipment is not typically the limiting factor, although we all think that it is.

 

You know what. I was wrong, it wasn't an AE-1 (my dad had that one). Mine was a Canon T50. Here it is:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography.../t50/index.htm

Anyway, after further review, the Rebel does not do the movies and I really need that for what I use the camera for.

I am leaning strongly toward the Canon Powershot Pro 1.

It is 8 Megapixels with 7X optical zoom. It comes with a 64 MB flash card and I am thinking of also getting a 256 MB card also. All together with shipping it will be just under 1k. A bit more than I wanted to spend but oh well. Can't spend all my money on the Z!

What do you think of this camera guys?

 

The other 8 megapixel equivalents would be the Sony DSC-F828, the Konica/Minolta Dimage A2, and the Olympus C-8080

Comments on these vs the Powershot Pro 1?

 

Bonz, if your really that concerned with movies then why not buy one of the small digital camcorders that sony has?