Would you buy a Sony Cybershot P-92 digital camera?
N.J. Hillary
I find SLR digital cameras are heavier than point and shoot and do not have
built in flash. What are the pros and cons of a SLR digital vs. point and
shoot digital like P-92?
GamePlayer No. 1058
the circumstance. I like a bigger camera, something that feels like Im
holding a SLR in my hands. Point and shoot is just that, you point and
shoot, whereas if you want to add any creativity, you probably wouldnt be
happy with the P92, but if you truly just want to point and shoot then
perhaps the p92 is right for you.
I just picked up a slr type digital camera (The Fuji Finepix 4900Zoom [used
ebay]) and it's great, allows me manual control as well as point and shoot
and it does have a built in flash as well as a regular hotshoe. Certainly
SLR digital type cameras are heavier, because they are usually larger in
size.
"N.J. Hillary" <josih...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:erCWa.7720$5f.5416@lakeread05...
Tesselator
Read this that I have pasted from another message for you here:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Try to stay away from the Japanese and Korean Electronic "junk"
manufacturers if at all possible and go with a maker that has
produced a line of 35mm SLR cameras in the past. The reasons
for this are GENERAL QUALITY and SUPPORT. (Notice how one begats
the other.)
1) Companies like Nikon, Olympus, Canon, Minolta, Lecia,
Contax, Pentax, Fuji, (Kodak?, Polaroid?) offer products
of excellent to good quality manufactur and staff an
excellent to good support team with customer friendly
policies.
2) Companies like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, Casio, Toshiba,
Fujitsu, Epson, Kyocera, Ricoh, and Sharp, usually
offer products engineered to fail rapidly (ie. fair
to poor quality) and thier support teams /almost/ always
follow a policy set up under the theme: The Company
Must Always Profit -- Customer Satisfaction comes second!
This is not really just opinion as I got to work with alot
companies from both groups inside various sections as an
independant contractor not all that long ago. IMO, the only
reason you would buy a digital (snap) camera from group 2)
is if you were a Japanese Nationalist _and_ didn't care that
much about quality or product life cycles. This defines
the majority of Japanese citizens btw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
N.J. Hillary
>
> 1) Companies like Nikon, Olympus, Canon, Minolta, Lecia,
> Contax, Pentax, Fuji, (Kodak?, Polaroid?) offer products
> of excellent to good quality manufactur and staff an
> excellent to good support team with customer friendly
> policies.
>
>
> 2) Companies like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, Casio, Toshiba,
> Fujitsu, Epson, Kyocera, Ricoh, and Sharp, usually
> offer products engineered to fail rapidly (ie. fair
> to poor quality) and thier support teams /almost/ always
> follow a policy set up under the theme: The Company
> Must Always Profit -- Customer Satisfaction comes second!
>
I am really struggling with the question above. I am convinced SLR cameras
offer you more options and the more you are willing to pay the better
features you will have. I have to really come to terms with the issue: Am I
a lazy photographer or am I willing to learn from mistakes and become an
informed photographer.
This is the context where I am looking for an SLR camera that will give me
the best value for the money I am willing to spend. Your comment is I won't
get that from Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, Casio, Toshiba, Fujitsu, Epson,
Kyocera, Ricoh and Sharp.
Tesselator
"N.J. Hillary" <josih...@cox.net> wrote in message news:guBXa.20806$5f.206@lakeread05...
Yes correct.
But olny IF you consider "value" to include: Quality Manufacture, Good
Customer Support policies and facilities, Longer term of engineered
obsolescence and failure, etc. If you plan to buy a new camera every
two years (3 max with light use, 1 year w/heavy use) then the companies
in paragraph "2)" may be a consideration. If however, you would like to
retain the option of /keeping/ your camera for 5 or 10 years (or longer)
then it is my suggestion to consider only models manufactured by the
companies listed in paragraph "1)".
This holds true for Digital Still Cameras ONLY. Other sections of the
companies listed above may differ vastly. For example I own a $60,000 (US)
video camcorder (last years model) two $55,000 edit decks and one $40,000
PB deck (last years model) made by Sony and I know they are of the best
quality in the industry. I also have similar equipment from Panasonic
and Sony that is over 10 years old but is still in good working condition
and remains servicable. So again to be fair and true, this only applies
to Digital Still goods that I know of. It may apply to other areas of
consumer/prosumer goods like computers and Hi/Fi sets but I have no direct
information and so cannot comment.
Tesselator
By the way this is true for both SLR and snap Digital Still cameras
whichever you decide to get. If you are vexing about which type
to purchase get one of these used:
Nikon: 885, 880, 950, 900
Minolta: F-100, F-200, F-300, S304, S404
Oltmups: 3020, 3030, 3040, 4040
Pentax: 330, 430
From your local camera shop or off of ebay and see how you like it.
If you're often wishing you had more control, bigger selection of
add-ons, and higher deeper files sizes then sell it back and invest
in an SLR type. You'll lose $50 to $75 in the process (maybe) but
that ain't bad for a 3 to 6 month usage fee.
O :-)