New Camera suggestions

[Al]

I'm aware we have a few photography nuts here so i'm looking for a bit advice. My inlaws are looking for a new camera to take on a trip to antarctica in Feb and asked me to suggest one. Heres what they have asked for what they want, in order of importance.

* compact size
* good zoom
* decent brand
* around $300 i guess
* i guess i'd like to add not a model that has been out for a long time and about to be replaced.

Anyway in my uninformed guess good zoom must mean be like over 10x? and compact size is well compact. I've done a little looking on this website. http://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/store/index.asp
Damn cheap, grey import i believe but very good reviews on their service.

I've jotted down maybe
Canon SX230HS, Nikon Coolpix S9100


But do they need 10x or more in zoom, is 5x plenty, i mean theres no bear or shit to take pics of down there, just snow lol. Can anyone suggest what to buy or where to buy?

 

[goldy]

G'day Al

You might throw another brand in the pot there.

Panasonic compact cameras have a great reputation.

They have good lenses, processors and seem to be tough. Among others that have them, my brother in law recently bought one with 16 times optical zoom. Personally, you can't have too much optical zoom.

It sounds like your in-laws are not "into" cameras. Don't go too fancy. Most digital cameras now days will take a reasonably good pic in good light.

Whatever they get, make certain that they DON'T need to take the instruction book with them. they need to be able to use all the controls quickly. Let them have some time with it before they go.

Good luck Al, I hope they have a good trip. Goldy

 

[justdrinkbeer]

As long as they are aware that they won't be getting national geographic shots with it then any of those will be fine, thet being said, they still take a bloody good pic. I have a Nikon DSLR, can't fault it.
Something with a high resolution (+10Mpixels) if they want to enlarge & print their photos when they get home

 

[KraftyPg]

Concentrate on the lens more than the camera, because it's the lens that does the work. I don't know what's in the $300 price bracket but without a good lens the camera is just another camera.

I also wouldn't be too worried about megapixels, not many cameras are under about 3 meg these days and even a 3 meg image can be upsized to A1 without too much loss of quality on a standard pc.

 

[wade193]

I bought a Panasonic TZ-20 in November. It has a Leica lens, takes panoramic photo's and even 3D (although yet to use that)
It's compact and has a great zoom. It's also touch screen if that matters to them.

 

[Al]

thanks, would the tz20 be a better choice then the cannon they are heading towards at the moment. I think the mother in law likes it because it comes in pink.

 

[goldy]

G'day Al

If the Panasonic is near in price I'd definitely go that way.

A Nikon SLR is the only way, Cannon are a good reliable camera but Panasonic has, from what I hear, the best rep in that compact format. Leica lenses have been a high end standard since Adam was a boy.

I reckon you can't go wrong With the Panasonic TZ-20

Goldy

 

[Krankin]

I will recommend Nikon personally, though Canon camera's are choice also

in the compact arena, nikon, canon, panasonic, kodak all make really great compacts that have all the features like the slr's just not the lens interchangerbility....

and olympus...

 

[goldy]

Oh, and forget the pink, some large animals like to eat things that are pink. Usually what is holding it as well !!!! LOL

 

[KraftyPg]

Given RRP seems to be about the same I'd by either but I'm a Canon reseller so I'd lean towards the Canon.

Panasonic make decent cameras and they will both work as well as each other for what you describe, I just prefer Canons because their after sales and support has always been shitloads better than Panasonic when it's come to other PC stuff.

 

[Krankin]

Oh, and forget the pink, some large animals like to eat things that are pink. Usually what is holding it as well !!!! LOL

hehehe..yeah i have a liking for eating pink too!!!

 

[KraftyPg]

hehehe..yeah i have a liking for eating pink too!!!

Edit...

Second thoughts even I'm not going there

 

[goldy]

Actually, I thinking more crocodiles, but, if the cap fits ?????

 

[Krankin]

Edit...

Second thoughts even I'm not going there

clearly I'm not gay.......imagine what the post might have been

 

[KraftyPg]

I am imaging another poll

And I'd still go with the canon, pink bits or not

 

[Krankin]

i am imaging another poll

And i'd still go with the canon, pink bits or not

no......no.....no....


nikon

 

[KraftyPg]

Starting a stand up fist fight with you over this would be off topic so I wont do that!

For an SLR maybe I'd go a Nikon but not for a toy.

 

[Old.Tony]

The lenses are indeed everything.

Canon optics were better suited to higher frequency light, so blues and greens - if you're taking nature shots, you simply don't get better than a good Canon SLR. I still find that my Canon EOS takes excellent nature shots (and movies) but since I don't do a lot of red shots I'm unable to say if they've changed this.

Nikon used to be better tuned to the lower frequencies, so reds and oranges. For photographs in the snow, this is the camera that I would choose.

While chromatic aberration is usually only discussed in astronomical circles (when you look at a star through a telescope with a single-layered focusing lens you see blue on one side and red on the other) it does come into play when trying to photograph detail in a mass of colour (eg crayons make a perfect example).

Most cameras do white well. I don't know how Panasonic fairs with cameras but they do make good microwave ovens.

I wouldn't spend $300 on something that I intend to record images of the trip of a lifetime. If they intend to go back again and again then feel free to pick up a $49 camera from The Reject Shop, but if you're going to go just once, and never return, then spending $1,000 - $2,000 on a decent recording device would be justifiable.

How much is the trip costing, and are they going regularly?

In any case, optical zoom is far superior to digital zoom. With optical zoom, the light itself is manipulated through the lens onto the CCD. With digital zoom, the information from the CCD is interpolated and expanded so that the image looks bigger, but it'll be pixelated and print production will be shitty.

 

[Al]

trip cost? i think is maybe 7-10K each. but they trip all round the world 1-2 times a year, they have been using an old basic 5mb sony. I'm gonna talk to them about the panny and they already have crossed the nikon off they list. so it'll either be the cannon or panny, sounds like they both have the boxes ticked so really won't worry me which they go for.

Might of been a good thing though as my mrs seemed to nod her head at me getting a decent camera. I'm thinking decent entry SLR as long as i can understand it. My current 60$ samsung is well lets say ordinary.


And thanks for all the info everyone.

 

[Krankin]

* good zoom

* around $300 i guess

^well.....not gonna happen



I think they need a decent SLR and a couple of lenses.