Digital camera

[Clippy]

Am in the market for a compact digital camera.

Thought I would canvas the congregation for recommendations.

Looking for something that slips into the pocket easily on a night out, stylish, has image stabilisation, good optical zoom, good in low light conditions and fast response times between shots.

Best way to sum up is small in size with a good set of features as research so far seems to suggest that as the size shrinks the quality of features seems to drop as well.

So far, thinking of:

Casio Exilim EX-S10
Ideal size and style wise, but seems to get average reviews.

Fuji Finepix Z100fd
Bigger than the Casio but has had some good reviews.

[realityhack]

As with any camera purchase - depends what you want it for:

You do compromise features and quality against size.

My thoughts: The absolute best camera in it's class, for size, features and price, is the Canon Powershot G9. It's probably a little too bulky for what you want - and probably overspecced for your needs - but this is the pro's compact of choice.

You would do well to visit dpreview.com and take a look at the top cameras out there, or this page to check out the ultra compacts - I've heard good things about the Canon Powershot SD870 IS.

Feel free to msg if you see something in particular you like the look of and want a second opinion. I wouldn't go for the Exilim - have had 2 in the past and I wasn't impressed. The Finepix seems to be style over substance.

[Clippy]

Thanks RH.

Popped into Jessops in the afternoon and spoke to a helpful saleswoman who seemed to pinpoint the following cameras:

Nikon Coolpix S210

Panasonic DMC-FX33EB

She said the Panasonic was the better one to get but the Nikon was not far off.

Got home and thought I had made my mind up on the Nikon then read a review which said it was quite weak so am now thinking of the Panasonic but it is a little bulkier than the Nikon.

The Nikon felt better in my small sweaty hand but that is not a good enough reason to choose it.

Read a review of the Panasonic which seemed to highlight the only real weakness as being a lack of manual override. Not sure if this would really affect me as I am no David Bailey. Can you explain in real world terms how this may be an issue.

Also, what are your thoughts on these two?

P.S. I believe the Panasonic is a re-badged Leica C-Lux 2 at a much cheaper price. So if I go for the Panasonic, I can buy the gorgeous Leica brown leather case to go with it!

[realityhack]

On a choice between these two - I'd definitely go for the Panasonic. You're right about it effectively being a re-badged Leica - and with Leica optics you can't go far wrong.

For me the most important thing here is the lens speed and range. I prefer a wider lens in digital, and the faster the lens, the better. The Nikon is 3.1 and the Lumix 2.8 - which is as good as it gets with a compact telephoto (a lower number means a wider possible aperture, and more light through the lens).

In real world terms, this means better shooting in low light levels, and a wider angle (getting more people in to that tight shot in a crowded bar). It also means the Lumix will be better at shooting macro - or close-ups - with an object focused at merely 5cm away from the lens - and in normal shooting your minimum focal distance is 10cm - very handy.

You won't have all the features like aperture or shutter priority, depth of field preview and so on that you might expect with an SLR - but it's a pretty good camera for the money, and not that much heavier or larger than the Nikon.

Basically - the Lumix has more CCD pixels, captures more light, has a better zoom factor (and a wider angle), better image stabilisation, Through-the-lens focus, better focal length, truly manual white balance and better optics than the Nikon. No contest really, especially as there's only a couple of quid difference between them.

Edit: To answer you re manual settings - basically, you won't be able to manually set the shutter speed or aperture independently, and therefore won't be able to truly get to grips with the relationship between these two. But you'll still be able to bracket, experiment with over and under exposures, 'simulate' the ISO (which effectively adds gain - watch the grain when you do this), and there'll be presets like 'twilight mode' or 'sports mode', for instance, that hold the shutter open for longer or shorter, add digital filters and so on.

If you find you really want to experiment - in my experience it's not usually on a night out with your mates (when you need a small camera on auto mode - after beer!) - it's on those long weekends while walking the dog, or on a drive out in't sticks. For that, a cheap Zenit E on a second hand tripod with a meter (total cost under £40) is ideal. Completely manual, relying entirely on working out the meter reading against an exposure chart - until you suss it out and understand photography at basic principles, the hard way. Rewarding though.

[Clippy]

On a choice between these two - I'd definitely go for the Panasonic. You're right about it effectively being a re-badged Leica - and with Leica optics you can't go far wrong.

For me the most important thing here is the lens speed and range. I prefer a wider lens in digital, and the faster the lens, the better. The Nikon is 3.1 and the Lumix 2.8 - which is as good as it gets with a compact telephoto.

That's right, that's what the Jessops saleswoman said - apologies couldn't remember this at the time of my last post.

I think you have confirmed what I suspected and also what the salewoman in Jessops said which is much appreciated.

TBH, I want a good camera for party nights out which I can occasionally use more in depth for holidays and other more civilised social events where maybe I can use it's more advanced features.

Therefeore, the main driver was size, but I think I can live with the very-slightly bulkier nature of the Panasonic bearing in mind all the additional functionality you get. Especially as it can be had for about £150 online.

If you find you really want to experiment - in my experience it's on those long weekends while walking the dog, or on a drive out in't sticks. For that, a cheap Zenit E on a second hand tripod (total cost under £40) is ideal. Completely manual, relying entirely on working out the meter reading against an exposure chart - until you suss it out and understand photography at basic principles, the hard way.

That's the next step. Planning on doing a simple photography course first though.

Appreciate the advise RH - can't wait to buy it now.

[realityhack]

Just in case anyone thinks I work for Panasonic or Canon - or I have shares with either... Nope, honest, really. Guv.



HTH Clippy.

[Cowboy Bob]

Rule number one on digital cameras is to always buy from a manufacturer that makes regular 35mm cameras.

[G8_Summit]

I've got a Nikon P5000 - top end compact, 10MP. I'm very impressed with its ease of use and great features.

Review here

[BoredBloke]

I got my wife one of these

http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/consumer/d...pix-f50fd-9915

It is supposed to be quite good but I wouldn't know as she never uses it. I got it here for Christmas and all it has done since is age in its box.

[Ardesco]

Just in case anyone thinks I work for Panasonic or Canon - or I have shares with either... Nope, honest, really. Guv.



HTH Clippy.

Out of interest what would you recommend as a good entry level SLR? My wife has been getting quite into photographing our boys and is now a dab hand at cleaning and cropping the photos in Photoshop as well. She has basically hit the limits of our old Sony point and shoot and has been hinting that she would like an SLR for a while.

I'm looking for something that isn't going to cost an arm and a leg (i.e. I don't want to blow £3,000 on the latest uber pro kit) but has most of the bells and whistles. It would be perfect if you can buy add-ons at a later stage as she keeps improving.

Unfortunately I know nothing about cameras

Had a look at a couple of cannons and they seem to get quite good reviews but I have no idea what i'm looking for really.