Hi,


I am a newbie to Digital photography, or rather photography for that matter. I am currently a MBA student and travel internationally during my vacations.

Basically I want a camera that is sturdy, ease to use and has good features, e.g good clarity, storage capacity, battery life, flash, stabilization. I will be taking pictures of scenery, monuments, friends, random people, thus am likely to be in various lighting and movement conditions. I would also like a nice zoom feature if possible.

I have been recommended the Canon A640 and the Canon G7, I was wondering which is the best compact camera?...one that is easier to carry around than the A640/G7

Thanks,
Andy

I love my Canon Sd500. It's small, light, takes awesome pictures. I traveled with it through asia and central america, hiked through the really humid jungle, walked long distances in pouring rain (had it under my jacket), and it's still functioning just fine. It's fast enough so I can pull it out and take a quick picture without having to wait for it to warm up. I actually prefer the 400 and 500 series to the 450 and 550, which have bigger screens, because a bigger screen means more screen to scratch up.

Actually, here's a link to some pictures I took in Central America with my Canon Sd500 a few months ago, to give you an idea of what this camera's pix look like:

http://picasaweb.google.com/karenluo...ricaSummer2006

I've been experimenting a bit of late. First a Sony that I was unhappy with and then a Panasonic Lumix that I'm seriously happy with but......... IMHO you can't go wrong with a Canon. My first two digital cameras were compact Canons (they go under the Ixus brand outside of the US/Powershot inside the US) and both were excellent.

I would say the Canon G7 is good if you are i) happy to spend the money and ii) actually want to learn about photography as opposed to simply wanting to point and shoot (it's a nice stepping stone between the point and shoot world and planet DSLR).

However, there are also some seriously good value cameras from the likes of Fuji and Casio (including one FinePix camera mentioned on this forum recently that has class leading low light performance).

Before you go and spend lots of cash on a shiny new camera, I recommend reading this article:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-...lar-camera.htm

I enjoyed the article posted by Internaut - and the idea of knowing how to take a good shot being more important than what camera is used.

At the current rate of progress, your next phone might be your next compact camera. Nokia's new N73 is promoted primarily as a camera.
With optical zoom lenses of good quality and 3+ megapixels, maybe we can leave the compact at home

Coincidentally, david pogue just wrote article for new york times today on compact cameras:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/07/te...gy&oref=slogin

Ken Rockwell makes a lot of sense about the photographer being more important than the tool, but unfortunately you have to already know something about photography before you can tell where he is posting tongue-in-cheek.

His article makes just as much sense if you substitute $5.00 disposable camera vs. $150 point-and-shoot, for the point-and-shoot vs. $5,000.00 camera he describes.

I don't like Mr. Rockwell's articles because he is dishonest. The image he asks us to compare at the top of the referenced page is a web-friendly reduction of two vastly different original images.

Now if he started with this image. . .

That said, I like the canon P&S, but recently bought a Sony T10 because of the more compact size and excellent screen. It replaced a Canon PowerShot S400 which was also an excellent device.

I am a camera freak so I could go on and on and on about what you need to know about compact, point-and-shoot cameras, but I am studying for finals so I'll make it short.

Check out Canon SD600, or SD630. (SD630 is the same one as SD600 with 3.0 inch LCD rather than 2.5 inch on SD600.)

These are the best deals on the market in my opinion:

SD600 COMBO DEAL: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830120044

SD630 COMBO DEAL:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830120045

Both come with a bonus 1GB 60X rapid SD card AND a carrying case.

A series are not the lightest cameras, but IMHO they are excellent.
i have one A610 and i took hundreds of picture over 9 days period on a
single set of 4 AA batteries.

quality is excellent and very fast. i would say go with any camera, but stay with Canon brand.


also check out www.dpreview.com

The Casio Exilim's are bar far the best bang for the buck however with the 7.2 MP being the best in its category. The 10.1 is just okay.

I would agree with the recommendations for Canon SD 600 (any of the SD series are good). I have the SD 450 and the 600. Both work great and are one of the more compact, high quality cameras I could find. And, there are some good deals running on the SD 600 right now ($200).

As a frequent traveler, I also like the Canon for another reason: the accessories.

- the data cable is a standard mini USB type (so it can be used with other devices like Motorola cell phones, Blackberry, travel mouse, etc and is easy to find in any electronics store if you need to replace it).

- the battery charger is pretty small and doesn't need a line cord (another thing to carry!) to plug in.

I couldn't find any other super compact with this combination of features, price and perfomance.

YMMV

On woot. com today's item is a Samsung Digimax L85 8 MP for
$199.00.

I've noticed that DSLRs typically have that special "DSLR" quality to them, if anyone knows what I'm talking about. It's not even the photographer, or the use of a special lens, or the post-processing -- pictures taken by DSLRs just have that feel to them that most compact digital cameras do not.

When will compact digital cameras gain the ability to take pictures like that, and what is it exactly about DSLRs that allow them to take such nice pictures?

DSLR's are SLRs, they have a shutter which many digital point and shoot dont
have. you have a choice in the lenses you choose.. and the SLRs in general
have a better quality of lens available and a better control over the
aperture/exposure/focus etc.. etc.

I think it is because the compact camera always/often have infinite depth of field. Everything in the exposure is in focus and commands equal attention. SLRs often do not have infinite depth of field - you have to work to get it.

IMHO that is the standout difference between a collection of compact shots vs. SLR images shot in the full auto mode.