Surrey Expat

For the most part, in the leading manufacturers you are not going to find a duff camera. Make a list of the features you want and find one to fit that. Personally I don't like cameras that take AA batteries, much prefer Lithium cells, although they cost more to replace, they don't have a memory and can be recharged at anytime and last a long time. I usually carry a spare (generic make as they cost less). The SD1000 has a viewfinder, like you, I would never buy a camera without one. Would not worry about the 'image stabilisation' unless you plan on lots of lo light shots and MP above 7.2 is pretty pointless for most users of compact cameras.

As a sidebar, if you are looking for a neat piece of software for your pics, take a look ad ProShow from Photodex. We use it to create DVDs of images with a sound track to send back to relatives.

Steve_P

NiMH batteries don't have a memory and can be recharged any time, also newer types will hold 85% charge for over a year.

Sanyo Eneloop was the first of this type on the market others have since followed.

iaink

My 620 (with the flip screen) takes AA, its an advantage if you are out and about and your rechargables die, as you can just buy some AAs and carry on.

However, all the small format cameras, like the SD1000, use proprietary batteries, in order to reduce size. As has been pointed out, there are no "memory" effects, so you can recharge whenever you like. The first thing you notice when they need a charge is that the flash takes longer to charge, bit to be honest they are pretty good, and you can always buy a spare if that bothers you.

My dads Digital SLR has proprietary cells too, and that was a problem on the cruise we went on as he forgot to bringthe charger and couldnt charge the camera while he was there, after taking alot more pictures than he planned on! He wont do that again.

Anything with a larger optical zoom is going to be a larger camera out of necessity, (The Ixus/ Elph is x3 before it goes into the nonsense of "digital zoom" so I guess you need to decide what is important to you, zoom, or small size...and if it both, then why not get one for each occasion

I agree with others about the optical viewfinder. New screen might be better, but sometimes you still need the optical option. I also cant see the point in more than 7Mpixels... it just makes the files bigger and clogs up that hard drive that much faster with little or no benefit.

On a side note, I was given a big digital picture frame for Fathers Day...what a great thing that is...finaly all those old family pictures languishing hidden on the PC make it to the bright light of day. If I resize them just for that screen size I can fit thousands on the internal memory. Its just a shame the angle of view isnt a bit wider, but I was a thoughtful gift.

Purley

OK. That is a good point about the lithium batteries. I hardly ever travel and so its not really an issue with me needing spare batteries. So if I bought the camera with the lithium battery and just stuck it on the recharger all the time, I wouldn't run out of batteries. Thanks for the info.

I had given consideration to Sony Cyber shot DSCH-10B which they have at Best Buy for $329. However, the review on DP Review is not terribly keen on some aspects of the camera. And it doesn't have a viewfinder. I thought the Carl Zeiss lens would be a good feature.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec...ony_dsch10.asp

I'll probably go with a Canon in the end.

My Nikon 4100 is probably four years old. I tried several of the cameras at Best Buy and was totally surprised at how much faster they are. My camera screen is postage stamp size and it goes black for maybe 10-15 seconds after you take a photo!

Steve_P

The main benefit to more megapixels is it gives you more room to crop and still get a half decent print if you are big into post processing.

As for the digital photo frame the more expensive the screen the better the viewing angles.

I had two of them given to me for Christmas last year one a relatively cheap one (no name type) and one that cost twice as much as the first one (Kodak). The Kodak one is excellent the other you have be just at the right angle or you get all sorts of weird effects.

iaink

I certainly agree that more MP is better for an SLR where you are likely to be an enthusast and get into all that, but for me, 7MP is more than enough with a point and shoot camera to severely crop (like cut out 2/3rds) and still have a decent image left to print out 6x4 for an album, or to display on the 1024x768 frame.

Steve_P

I agree with you totally Iain.

For the average photographer who is never going to print anything larger than 8 x 10 three megapixels is more than enough, but you can't buy a three megapixel camera these days.

iaink

The frame was a "Digisonic" I think, from the Mal-Wart. Im pretty sure it was the cheapest largish one they could find

In an ideal world the viewing angle could be better, but Id rather have a large 15" frame with a narrow angle, than a smaller frame with a wide angle.

It is certainly something to be aware of though, not all these frames are created equal by a long way. Image quality when looking head on is very good though...better than some Ive seen.