brissybee

I'd like to look around for a user-friendly camera which will create nice images without costing a fortune.

I'd like the option of auto and manual settings with options for wide-angle, zoom and macro photo's.

Preferably not a huge camera to cart around - but not a dodgy little one.

I haven't had a decent camera for years so could do with some advice please on what's about, if anyone knows?

GarryP

How long is a piece of string? You're going to have to narrow things down a fair bit before you home in a good bet.

First off, a lot of the cheapy point and shoots have been subsumed by using the camera on your smartphone. Although they only have imaging units the size of the tip of your little finger, they have been dumping more and more into them to make them deliver decent pics (optical image stabilisation is latest).

In consequence, the compact cameras have had to focus on bigger lenses and longer focal lengths to maintain relevance. Thus they tend to have got 'chunkier', though still something that will fit in a pocket. The DSLR and 'bridge' markets have also picked up.

Image processing, wifi, gps, HD video shooting, etc. are the order of business.

I'd look through this for some review/suggestions/etc. I tend to trust the site.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/best-cameras.html

I've always been partial to the Panasonic TZ compact cameras, for the focal length range :
http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...mc_tz40_review

If you want to see the type of thing that's around at the moment, this is not a good, very new, example :
http://www.gizmag.com/olympus-stylus-1/29635/

brissybee

Thanks for your reply.

I feel a bit blinded by science (technology actually).

Hopefully after checking out the links you supplied I will be better informed.

Amazulu

I'm a fan of the Panasonic Lumix TZ range. We have the TZ-10 but the TZ-40 is now available. Beautifully built (Japanese), simple controls, fast on, great value, built in wifi and GPS, shoots full HD video etc. The TZ-40 can be had for under $300 online

If you want a compact camera with interchangeable lenses then there are loads on the market but from what I can see, Sony and Nikon offer the best value

We really are spoilt for choice when it comes to cameras and they one of the things that Australia is not too expensive at - generally cheaper than the UK anyway

keel

Have a look at the Canon G15. It's the best small camera I've used. It just about fits into your pants pocked but I wear mine on a pouch on my belt. The quality of the photos is not that far from my DSLR and has full manual controls.

Look at it here:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-g15/

There is now a newer modal out called the G16 but there's hardly any difference. I saw the G15 for about $400 today in JB HIFI.

Keel

GarryP

It's worth noting that nowadays half the photo is what happens in the editing package, rather than the camera. What you see through the viewfinder (or rather, on the screen) is only half the battle - RAW material for further work.

That's kind of why you get the modes, the wifi, etc.

It's also why you get HD video recording (which can then be fed into your NLE package).

Might be worth working out exactly what result you are after and picking appropriately - whilst remembering, you'd going to need to edit as well.

Amazulu

Can't really go wrong with Canon. My first digital camera was a Canon IXUS - what a beautiful piece of tech. I still have it

I also have a Canon 50D DSLR - another great camera

keel

Never had the time or the patience to edit.

That's why I like this camera as much as I do. Very rarely take it out of auto mode as it's usually shots of the kids. You try framing the shot and changing ISO settings and aperture controls, when you've done all that the kids are in bed.


It all depends what Brissy bee is after.

Keel

OzTennis

The camera I've used very successfully over the last few years (but too big for OP I'd think) is a Fuji Finepix S4000.

There are later models but the important thing for me is that it has an optical viewfinder which is a very rare occurrence on digital cameras these days. No struggling to see the image on the LCD screen in sunlight, no charging of batteries every 100 or so shots if using the LCD screen. It takes very good quality HD clips as well as superb photos and with a decent sized card (16 Gb) you can take thousands of shots literally. There are manual controls if needed but the results on auto and auto scene detection are hard to beat; dual image stabilisation etc, etc.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fujifilm-Fin...+finepix+s4000

I would add that results, as well as depending on Photoshop type manipulation very much depend on the quality of your printer if printing and monitor on your 'puter when viewing. So, terrific results for me with the above camera, 5 cartridge Canon printer and Photoshop Elements 11.

Does anyone have a recommendation for a pocketable compact WITH optical viewfinder?

Kim67

We have the Canon EOS DSLR and it's a great camera but I find myself carting the iPad around a lot of the time now because it's not heavy, slips in my bag and the quality of photos and video is pretty good.

Amazulu

I use my phone a lot for taking photos and videos - and I suspect that's the case for many people

lesleys

I like a challenge

http://www.dpreview.com/products/sea...=OpticalTunnel

I've almost given up on PS Elements and now use Adobe LightRoom most of the time.

keel

The quality of camera phones is probably on a par with compacts about 5 or 6 years ago I reckon in about 2 to 3 years they will be equal to most compacts in picture quality. But the drawback is lens to zoom in with.

Camera manufactures will have to keep upping their game or no-one will bother buying a point and shoot. They are trying with bigger sensors but this makes the lens to big to be pocketable.

I think they will improve the quality of the smaller sensors even more to keep ahead of the game.

Keel

lesleys

The sensor and number of pixels cannot compensate for an inferior lens.

You only need 5 or 6k pixels to get a good quality photo up to A4 if the lens, focus and exposure are good. If you only want to post stuff on FB then don't spend money on pixels and features you don't need.

brissybee

There is a lot of good advice here, thank-you everyone. It makes me realise how much I need to consider. I miss having a good camera and will probably annoy everyone in sight, taking photo's, when I get one.