Best $300 compact camera
davidmcw
disappointed with them. Can anyone recommend a good $300 compact
camera.
Stefan Patric
> I've always had Canon, (S300, SD450) but I've lately become is little
> disappointed with them. Can anyone recommend a good $300 compact camera.
"Good" in what respect? What's good for me most likely won't be good for
you. Without knowing a little about what type of pictures you want to
take (macro, scenics, vacation, etc.) and your own personal preferences,
any recommendation would be mostly useless. However, I've found the
following link a good starting point for an initial search:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp
Stef
David McWilliams
would be nice, no real need for exceptional macro. I like a smaller
form factor, good regular zoom, image stabilization would be nice.
David J Taylor
> Good point. I be taking vacation shots, some scenic stuff, night time
> would be nice, no real need for exceptional macro. I like a smaller
> form factor, good regular zoom, image stabilization would be nice.
For me, the best compact camera was the Panasonic TZ3. The TZ5 and TZ6
are the more recent versions.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz5/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmczs1.asp
David
bugbear
If you describe your "disappointment" with Canon
in a little more detail, we might be able to give better answers.
BugBear
GregS
I was just comparing my new camera against that. The Panasonic
has better resolution except for chromatic aberitions. The low light sensitivity
is much worse.. Its got the wide angle, but I kinda favor large cameras now.
My Fuji S2000HD was $195 at Circuit City.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
greg
David J Taylor
Like all compact, small-sensor cameras, the Panasonic will do better at
lower ISO than higher ISO. I think what you are saying is that when you
use a higher ISO, the Panasonic shows more noise. While this may be true,
in my experience Panasonic cameras also deliver sharper images, which
inherently mean that the noise will appear greater than in an image with
lots of smoothing. Just keep the camera on ISO 100 and use a tripod or
other support in very low light conditions when you need a longer
exposure.
If you favour large cameras, and you want excellent available-light
performance, get a DSLR with an f/1.8 lens. Even with the "kit" f/3.5
lens, a DSLR is streets ahead of the compact, small-sensor camera. (I
have both types of camera).
Cheers,
David
SMS
You're really going to be out of luck with that size camera with anyone
but Canon.
Go to "http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/cameraList.php"
and select:
Fixed Lens
3x-5x Optical Zoom
Proprietary Battery
Image Stabilizer
Optical/electronic viewfinder
and among the sub-compacts it's almost all Canon (one Sony).
The other manufacturers have decontented their products a lot more than
Canon.
The Panasonic TZ5 would be good if you can deal with the noise as well
as the fact that they forgot to include an optical or electronic
viewfinder. That super zoom would sure be nice, including the
wide-angle. If you don't care all that much about the best photo
quality, the TZ5 is hard to beat.
David J Taylor
[]
> The Panasonic TZ5 would be good if you can deal with the noise as well
> as the fact that they forgot to include an optical or electronic
> viewfinder. That super zoom would sure be nice, including the
> wide-angle. If you don't care all that much about the best photo
> quality, the TZ5 is hard to beat.
Your bias is showing again!
Do you possess and use a TZ5?
I own and use a TZ3, and I assure you that you can get some superb photos
from it. It does have an electronic viewfinder - most of the back of the
camera is a display which shows the image you are about to take!
But to take you at your word, yes, a DSLR is required for the best photo
quality. The TZ3/TZ5 is a very compact alternative for when the
circumstances demand it.
David
Stefan Patric
> Good point. I be taking vacation shots, some scenic stuff, night time
> would be nice, no real need for exceptional macro. I like a smaller form
> factor, good regular zoom, image stabilization would be nice.
Others have recommended the Panasonic Lumix DMZ-TZ5 and I concur. This
is a great little compact with an amazing 10X Leica zoom (28-280mm
equivalent). Overall, image quality is very good even at 800 ISO.
If you want to save a few bucks, check out the companion TZ4, which
pretty much has the same specs as the TZ5, but comes with a 2.5" LCD
instead of the 3". But believe me, get the 3" screen. Makes composing a
lot easier. Neither camera has an optical viewfinder.
Stef
SMS
> SMS wrote:
> []
>> The Panasonic TZ5 would be good if you can deal with the noise as well
>> as the fact that they forgot to include an optical or electronic
>> viewfinder. That super zoom would sure be nice, including the
>> wide-angle. If you don't care all that much about the best photo
>> quality, the TZ5 is hard to beat.
>
> Your bias is showing again!
As is yours.
> Do you possess and use a TZ5?
That's the great thing about the internet, you can find out the pros and
cons of products in advance of making a purchasing decision.
TZ3 cons:
-Still too much noise reduction, which smears details once the ISO
leaves 100
-No optical or electronic viewfinder
-No USB 2.0 High Speed support
TZ5 cons
-Images on the noisy side, especially in shadows; still some noise
reduction artifacting
-No optical viewfinder
> I own and use a TZ3, and I assure you that you can get some superb
> photos from it. It does have an electronic viewfinder - most of the
> back of the camera is a display which shows the image you are about to
> take!
That's not the same thing. Try using the LCD in bright sunlight, which
is where you'll mostly be using these cameras because of the noise at
ISO over 100.
> But to take you at your word, yes, a DSLR is required for the best photo
> quality. The TZ3/TZ5 is a very compact alternative for when the
> circumstances demand it.
There are some very good sub-compact cameras that don't suffer from
noise nearly as much as the Panasonics, plus that have optical or
electronic viewfinders. However for a wide range lens, the TZ series is
about it.
David J Taylor
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> SMS wrote:
>> []
>>> The Panasonic TZ5 would be good if you can deal with the noise as
>>> well as the fact that they forgot to include an optical or
>>> electronic viewfinder. That super zoom would sure be nice,
>>> including the wide-angle. If you don't care all that much about the
>>> best photo quality, the TZ5 is hard to beat.
>>
>> Your bias is showing again!
>
> As is yours.
>
>> Do you possess and use a TZ5?
>
> That's the great thing about the internet, you can find out the pros
> and cons of products in advance of making a purchasing decision.
No, it's not bias, it's experience. I'm talking about cameras I have
owned and used, not simply regurgitating what some "reviewer" who may
never have even touched the camera has written.
Good luck!
David
Stefan Patric
> Good point. I be taking vacation shots, some scenic stuff, night time
> would be nice, no real need for exceptional macro. I like a smaller form
> factor, good regular zoom, image stabilization would be nice.
Others have recommended the Panasonic Lumix DMZ-TZ5 and I concur. This
is a great little compact with an amazing 10X Leica zoom (28-280mm
equivalent). Overall, image quality is very good even at 800 ISO.
If you want to save a few bucks, check out the companion TZ4, which
pretty much has the same specs as the TZ5, but comes with a 2.5" LCD
instead of the 3". But believe me, get the 3" screen. Makes composing a
lot easier. Neither camera has an optical viewfinder.
Stef