|
Salutations gentlemen.
I want to buy a cheap camera for around £60-100 to take with me for 2 months backpacking in India.
Has anyone got a recomendation, or some advice on what to get? I know shit about cameras tbh. Someone recomended a Panasonic Lumix to me.
Needs to be sd card compatible, have good battery life and not be something I'd be too worried about loosing.
Many thanks
|
Don't know anything about cameras in that price range, but when I'm buying I usually do my reading here :
http://www.dpreview.com/
best camera site on the net, imo.
|
There's basically no huge difference in cameras within that price range. Just go for the one with most MP (10-12 for that price) which has a large display screen.
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 22 2009 22:07 MaReK wrote: There's basically no huge difference in cameras within that price range. Just go for the one with most MP (10-12 for that price) which has a large display screen. You don't need MP that high, and you probably don't want it unless you've got a DSLR (which is not what the OP is looking for.)
I don't know much about cameras in that price range, tbh. I'd look for something that has an optical viewfinder (the hole) instead of just the LCD screen, because those are worthless in the sunlight. Something that runs on batteries might be good too, so you can get a set of rechargeable.
|
I'm with Jibba. The LCD screen is also useless for trying to get pics of anything that's moving - response time just isn't good enough.
|
United States17042 Posts
I would think that you're looking for a point/shoot camera, and with that kind of money constraint you'll be able to get a nice camera with about 4x zoom and 8-12 MP, with flash. In that price range, amazon recommends http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Stylus-Digital-Optical-Stabilized/dp/B0011E870Y/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1243005949&sr=1-4
It looks nice? Comparing cameras in that price range is all about the optical zoom and the size of the LCD, if you care about that; the sensors are all from one or two places. I did a custom search on Amazon usa from here:
http://www.amazon.com/s/qid=1243005921/ref=sr_st?keywords=digital camera&rs=330405011&page=1&rh=i:aps,k:digital camera,i:electronics,n:172282,n:!493964,n:502394,n:281052,n:330405011,p_36:10000-15099&bbn=330405011&sort=pmrank
|
What camera would someone with a bit of experience recommend for a low Light situation (Blizzcon). My camera Last year definitely wasn't up to the job, and I had to delete 95% of my pictures because it was impossible to make them out (luckily my picture with sAviOr was of acceptable quality). Looking at various reviews, the Fujifilm FinePix F100fd seems to be recommended, and would be within my price range, however, they say there are better overall cameras, and this one just excels in low Light situations, and also that the interface is a bit confusing.
Does anyone have any experience with it? Or know of another camera that would be decent in low Light at around a $300-400 maximum price Point?
And sorry for the potential thread hijack, just figured putting a semi-relevant question in the topic is better than creating a new blog.
TLPDized my post for fun. :D (And if the hijack bothers you that much, I'll edit it out )
|
|
United States17042 Posts
On May 23 2009 00:48 So no fek wrote:What camera would someone with a bit of experience recommend for a low Light situation (Blizzcon). My camera Last year definitely wasn't up to the job, and I had to delete 95% of my pictures because it was impossible to make them out (luckily my picture with sAviOr was of acceptable quality). Looking at various reviews, the Fujifilm FinePix F100fd seems to be recommended, and would be within my price range, however, they say there are better overall cameras, and this one just excels in low Light situations, and also that the interface is a bit confusing. Does anyone have any experience with it? Or know of another camera that would be decent in low Light at around a $300-400 maximum price Point? And sorry for the potential thread hijack, just figured putting a semi-relevant question in the topic is better than creating a new blog. TLPDized my post for fun. :D (And if the hijack bothers you that much, I'll edit it out )
I doubt you'll be able to find anything that helps a huge amount in low light. dealing with low light really depends on the sensor size, and for that you need a dslr. Interestingly enough, on sale, the D40 meets your requirements (shop around, you'll find one).
+ Show Spoiler +I also didn't even know that there was a player with the name Point, or Last
Looks fine, (imo, all the cameras around your price range are about the same). If you wanted to have a backup for batteries, get rechargeable AA's (10 USD maybe?). That should allow you to deal with finding batteries/plugs. One thing you might want to think about is how you're backing up your data (the SD card). When i'm traveling, I usually have a laptop on me, so i'll backup to my home server, my laptop, and i'll keep all my pictures on the sd card inside the camera. That way if something happens, i've only lost the pictures i've taken that day (home server fixes a lot).
|
United States22883 Posts
|
On May 23 2009 03:35 GHOSTCLAW wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2009 00:48 So no fek wrote:What camera would someone with a bit of experience recommend for a low Light situation (Blizzcon). My camera Last year definitely wasn't up to the job, and I had to delete 95% of my pictures because it was impossible to make them out (luckily my picture with sAviOr was of acceptable quality). Looking at various reviews, the Fujifilm FinePix F100fd seems to be recommended, and would be within my price range, however, they say there are better overall cameras, and this one just excels in low Light situations, and also that the interface is a bit confusing. Does anyone have any experience with it? Or know of another camera that would be decent in low Light at around a $300-400 maximum price Point? And sorry for the potential thread hijack, just figured putting a semi-relevant question in the topic is better than creating a new blog. TLPDized my post for fun. :D (And if the hijack bothers you that much, I'll edit it out ) I doubt you'll be able to find anything that helps a huge amount in low light. dealing with low light really depends on the sensor size, and for that you need a dslr. Interestingly enough, on sale, the D40 meets your requirements (shop around, you'll find one). + Show Spoiler +I also didn't even know that there was a player with the name Point, or Last Looks fine, (imo, all the cameras around your price range are about the same). If you wanted to have a backup for batteries, get rechargeable AA's (10 USD maybe?). That should allow you to deal with finding batteries/plugs. One thing you might want to think about is how you're backing up your data (the SD card). When i'm traveling, I usually have a laptop on me, so i'll backup to my home server, my laptop, and i'll keep all my pictures on the sd card inside the camera. That way if something happens, i've only lost the pictures i've taken that day (home server fixes a lot).
All right, thanks for the advice. I also partially think it may be my camera. It was a cheap thing I picked up for $90 a few years back, and I've been nothing but unhappy with it since I've got it. I'll definitely look up the D40, but could I also ask your opinion on the Canon Powershot SD990 IS? It has gotten decent consumer reviews, though I know to take all of those with a grain of salt, and also was recommended for lower light situations.
|
United States22883 Posts
What kind of shots are you taking? If it's a still shot and you can keep it steady with a tripod or ledge or something, you can just get something with image stabilization (the IS) and drop the shutter speed. That was the main reason I got the 720IS for my p&s camera - it has full manual controls and image stabilization so I can take otherwise impossible low light shots. It definitely adds some grain, but I don't think there's a better option for a point-and-shoot, which is what you want if you're traveling around a lot.
The other option is a DSLR, like Ghostclaw said, and the D40 is definitely a solid choice, but $400 might be the lowest you can get it.
|
Well, I'd like to have a camera for Blizzcon, but other than that, I don't see myself using a camera all that much. Maybe if relatives come into town/I take another trip, or something along those lines. I'm not really into photography at the moment, however, if I purchased a decent camera, maybe it would interest me enough to take more pictures.
As for the type of pictures I'd be taking, it would be quick shots of interesting things I come across at Blizzcon. Pictures of/with progamers, the TL people I meet, StarCraft II displays, anything that catches my eye in Anaheim, etc.. Nothing too special, and almost any camera would do, if not for the fact that the lighting in the convention center was a little less than optimal.
Edit: My lack of sleep definitely made me misinterpret what you were trying to say on the type of pictures I'd be taking. :p Yeah, it would probably be still shots for the most part, however, I would be moving around a lot, so I'm not sure how viable a tripod would be. And a lot of it would probably be spur of the moment, so I'm not sure if the objects I'm taking pictures of, would have the patience for me to set up (for all living objects, anyhow ).
|
United States22883 Posts
The nice thing with image stabilization is that it does a pretty decent job of substituting for the tripod. I've taken some shots just holding it that you really should not be able to get. Manual settings do take a bit of playing around with though, but usually I keep it on automatic (with the flash off) and it does fine. Your best bet is to go to a store and get a feel for what the pictures will look like in low light.
|
Thanks for all the advice, and yeah, you're right. I should stop by Fry's or something to check out some cameras. I've just been so accustomed to shopping online over the last few years that I don't generally try a product out before I buy it. And looking back, even though it was meant to be a budget camera, I'm not sure I would have purchased the camera I have now, if I had tried it out first.
|
|
|
|