General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > General [M]ayhem > Photography and I[M]aging
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
jamietie
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tree
I would like to recommend the Fujifilm F10 in the 350$ range. Not a lot in the way of manual controls, nor does it have a optical viewfinder nor does it use CF or SD cards (it takes xD)...but!...it boasts some of the best results straight out of the camera of any digital compact. It has by far the lowest noise in its class and has a maximum light sensitivity of ISO 1600. If you want the best low light performance in a digital compact then this is the camera for you.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf10zoom/
The new f11 looks to have all of the coolness of the f10, PLUS manual controls
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec...finepixf11.asp

I don't know if I'm in the market for a compact P&S, but this is quite tempting, esp. if it comes in close to the F10's price...
__________________
47626b33b3d46df83789416649b85811
Old 10-18-2005, 09:05 AM jamietie is offline  
Reply With Quote
#16  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

McGee
seriously, i'm the worst poster here...really
 
McGee's Avatar
 
Would it be a bad choice to purchase an A95? I'm planning on getting one around the winter holidays, are they seriously outdated now / lacking features? I'm looking for a good camera just to take pictures of stuff with and dabble in photography, and I was planning on the a95.
Are there newer models of cameras that are better for around the same price?
__________________
formerly McGee
Old 10-28-2005, 12:23 PM McGee is offline  
Reply With Quote
#17  

pyrosyndicate
 
sorry for being so noob, but i just wanted to ask a few questions about cameras, feel free to delete/ban me for being stupid. i was looking at the S ony A 510 and throught it was really nice for its price, but i was wondering in digital cameras, what determines how long it takes to capture the picture. from reading some guides i found out about apperture being the amount of light let in and affects the length of the capture, but doesn't the size of the image for digital cameras also make a difference? if this is true, is there any advice to give for fast shutter speed for live/fast action or just go to film and save myself the trouble of memory sticks and such? i'm just looking for something around ~$300 and preferably digital with the option of attaching lenses or 3-5x optical zoom.

thanks for all the help, much love for genmay.
__________________
3ac75b967630b2f1bf15c38eea60e033
Old 11-21-2005, 05:39 PM pyrosyndicate is offline  
Reply With Quote
#18  

Junkie Mod
totensiebush
shit the needle broke off in my ass cheek
 
Junkie Mod's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyrosyndicate
sorry for being so noob, but i just wanted to ask a few questions about cameras, feel free to delete/ban me for being stupid. i was looking at the S ony A 510 and throught it was really nice for its price, but i was wondering in digital cameras, what determines how long it takes to capture the picture. from reading some guides i found out about apperture being the amount of light let in and affects the length of the capture, but doesn't the size of the image for digital cameras also make a difference? if this is true, is there any advice to give for fast shutter speed for live/fast action or just go to film and save myself the trouble of memory sticks and such? i'm just looking for something around ~$300 and preferably digital with the option of attaching lenses or 3-5x optical zoom.

thanks for all the help, much love for genmay.
The A510 (at least the one that I know of) is a Canon as opposed to a Sony.
As for how long it takes to capture the picture, the resolution of it doesn't matter. What matters are amount of light, aperature, and sensitivity. The A510 for example has an F2.6 lens and can go from ISO 50 to ISO 400. Lower aperature is faster based on aperature^2, and higher ISO is faster on a linear scale (ie F2.0 is 4x as fast aka 1/4th as long as F4.0, ISO 200 is 2x as fast as ISO100). The A510 is a good camera, but you should be able to get it for quite a bit less than that. I would reccomend looking at the A610, it is higher resolution, better build quality, and has a flip-out LCD. MSRP on it is $300 but it can be found for considerably less. As for attaching lenses to P&S cameras, they don't work very well and are expensive.
Old 11-21-2005, 06:09 PM Junkie Mod is offline  
Reply With Quote
#19  

Shak3nNotStirr3d
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IMNobody II
The A510 (at least the one that I know of) is a Canon as opposed to a Sony.
As for how long it takes to capture the picture, the resolution of it doesn't matter. What matters are amount of light, aperature, and sensitivity. The A510 for example has an F2.6 lens and can go from ISO 50 to ISO 400. Lower aperature is faster based on aperature^2, and higher ISO is faster on a linear scale (ie F2.0 is 4x as fast aka 1/4th as long as F4.0, ISO 200 is 2x as fast as ISO100). The A510 is a good camera, but you should be able to get it for quite a bit less than that. I would reccomend looking at the A610, it is higher resolution, better build quality, and has a flip-out LCD. MSRP on it is $300 but it can be found for considerably less. As for attaching lenses to P&S cameras, they don't work very well and are expensive.



I got a canon A610 yesturday for $231. I have never taken pictures and have no experiance in cameras. But I was impressed with this camera. I looked around and read about it first. I am really liking this thing. I hope to learn more about camers as I go and this has alot of nice features and is real cheap. Also can get wide lens and a telesopic lense. I would recomend this for it is easy to use and i find it alot of fun. 2 cents
Old 11-24-2005, 07:35 PM Shak3nNotStirr3d is offline  
Reply With Quote
#20  

Raw Kuts
 
Raw Kuts's Avatar
 
ok, from the first post and the reviews from steves-digitalcam.com the A520 is an upgrade from the A510, so why is the A520 cheaper on newegg than the 510?
A510 $198.99
A520 $174.99

Am I missing something? Is there anything worse about the 520 I should know about?
__________________
( o< --!"Take that bass out you're voice, you talk to me in treble."
/ / \
\/_/_ -->Mos Def (He's a TBA Club member, like me)
Old 12-10-2005, 02:54 AM Raw Kuts is offline  
Reply With Quote
#21  

Stealthmode
needs moar stealhmode
 
Stealthmode's Avatar
 
not that i know of
Old 12-10-2005, 04:35 AM Stealthmode is offline  
Reply With Quote
#22  

ceejamon
Ignore this post
 
ceejamon's Avatar
 
Is there a significant difference in image quality between the A510 and the A520? CNet's reviews say that the A510 actually performed better. I don't need megapixels so much as I need good image quality. I won't be printing any photos I take with it; I have a film SLR for that. I just need something that has good quality images to put online for websites and such.

I don't want to spend more than $300. I'm eyeballing the A510. It's got plenty of pixels what I need. However, if the A520 (or another camera in my budget) has better image quality, that's the route I'll go. Advice would be appreciated.
__________________
You see the glass as half empty. I see it as the perfect level for blowing milk bubbles!
Old 12-14-2005, 02:25 PM ceejamon is offline  
Reply With Quote
#23  

Junkie Mod
totensiebush
shit the needle broke off in my ass cheek
 
Junkie Mod's Avatar
 
If you are willing to spend the extra few dollars for it, go with the A610. It has some nice extra features, such as a fold out LCD, as well as a larger sensor and therefore I think slightly less noise.
Old 12-14-2005, 04:25 PM Junkie Mod is offline  
Reply With Quote
#24  

ceejamon
Ignore this post
 
ceejamon's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IMNobody II
If you are willing to spend the extra few dollars for it, go with the A610. It has some nice extra features, such as a fold out LCD, as well as a larger sensor and therefore I think slightly less noise.

Can I get a second opinion? I don't mind the price tag if the image quality is really better.
__________________
You see the glass as half empty. I see it as the perfect level for blowing milk bubbles!
Old 12-15-2005, 07:42 AM ceejamon is offline  
Reply With Quote
#25  

Stealthmode
needs moar stealhmode
 
Stealthmode's Avatar
 
th a610 is an upgrade from the a95. i can vouche for the a95 but have yet to play with this upgraded version.
www.dpreview.com
id suggest reading a review or three and seeing what you think
Old 12-15-2005, 11:56 AM Stealthmode is offline  
Reply With Quote
#26  

TheVE
 
The 610 is much larger than the 510. If size and pocketability are important the 610 won;t travel with you are easily. But the 610 is way faster and takes cleaner images.
__________________
Go Canucks!!!
Old 12-19-2005, 01:04 PM TheVE is offline  
Reply With Quote
#27  

ceejamon
Ignore this post
 
ceejamon's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVE
The 610 is much larger than the 510. If size and pocketability are important the 610 won;t travel with you are easily. But the 610 is way faster and takes cleaner images.

That's what I wanted to know. Portability isn't an issue; I carry my 17" Powerbook with me everywhere I go as it is. It's just another thing in my bag.

I believe I'll go with the 610. Thanks for your help, everybody.
__________________
You see the glass as half empty. I see it as the perfect level for blowing milk bubbles!
Old 12-21-2005, 08:50 AM ceejamon is offline  
Reply With Quote
#28  

Junkie Mod
totensiebush
shit the needle broke off in my ass cheek
 
Junkie Mod's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVE
The 610 is much larger than the 510. If size and pocketability are important the 610 won;t travel with you are easily. But the 610 is way faster and takes cleaner images.
Wow, I hadn't relized quite how much faster the A6x0 is than the A5x0. It seems to take about 2/3 as long for most stuff. Its also considerably faster than my G6 . Its always annoying when you buy the higher end model (although by no means as good as a DSLR) and then the new consumer one comes out and beats it at a bunch of stuff, but such is life in digital cameras and computers.
Old 12-21-2005, 10:34 AM Junkie Mod is offline  
Reply With Quote
#29  

Loading
 
Loading's Avatar
 
I was just linked from this thread

I now have another contender to ask about.

I'm considering the A520, A610 and now the SD500.

On boxing day, futureshop has the Canon PowerShot SD500 for the same price as the A610. Which one to choose. The SD500 is 7.1 megapixels, but honestly, I'm thinking that 5 megapixels is more then enough. However, if the picture quality is about equal, or better with the SD500, I'm thinking I'd prefer it for it's compactness.

Any thoughts comparing these 2?

Thanks.
Old 12-22-2005, 12:44 AM Loading is offline  
Reply With Quote
#30  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:41 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.