Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

bentoon · Aug 10, 2004, 09:19 PM

I will be buying a camera soon,
(The output is larger scale prints)

Because of how I photograph, and always carry it around, I want smaller, stashable cam.
At least 4, probably more like 5 plus Megapixels.

However, as noted on a similar thread, one of the most important things is to lessen the lag time between when you 'click' to capture and the camera actually takes the picture.

I have an older Canon Powershot and it's a serious issue.

I am looking at :
~ Sony Cybershot DSC-P120 Digital Camera (super small, good lens)
~ canon PowerShot S60 (evidently low lag)
~ That multi clored supersmall Canon PowerShot SD10

Any suggestions? Tell me what you Love and Why...
Thank you, Thank you,
~ J

bentoon · Aug 10, 2004, 09:22 PM

oh yeah, the last canon SD10 only has 4MP's but it looked cool, that's why it made the list.

aaanorton · Aug 11, 2004, 10:52 AM

A friend of mine has a SD10. I'm not impressed. It's definitely cool looking, but image quality isn't as great as Canon's other cameras. It has less features and is pretty slow too. Plus it (obviously) uses SD cards, which I don't like as much.
The Sony will mean Memory Sticks. I really prefer CF cards.
I think the S60 is one of the finest digicams on the market.

bentoon · Aug 11, 2004, 08:27 PM

yeah, that's good advice,
The one I wonder about is the Sony Cybershot DSC-P120
it seems too small and sleek to take great Pixs but it has a
Carls Ziess lens and 5 MP

davecom · Aug 11, 2004, 10:45 PM

I actually own an SD-10 and can tell you from first hand experience that it's a quality camera.

It's just about the smallest 4 megapixel camera you can get. The image quality is not spectacular but it's not terrible either. Also it has no optical viewfinder, only the LCD screen for doing everything. However having something that fits easily in a pocket is quite a boon.

Bottom line: If you're looking for something as small as possible with still solid image quality, it's the way to go. If size is not your #1 concern, you may want to look elsewhere.

bentoon · Aug 12, 2004, 10:13 AM

Smaller is definately the boon. fiting in to a pocket is where it is at.
I own an old canon powershot and have been totally spoiled by the fact that it is so small!
However, Lag time between your "click" and when the actual picture is taken is a huge issue too

davecom · Aug 13, 2004, 01:14 AM

Lag's not bad at all, especially if you set flash settings yourself.

yodacai · Aug 13, 2004, 02:06 AM

My wife and I just bought a new Pentax Optio S40 . It replaced an aging Olympus. I do not know a whole lot about digital cameras, but I do know that this device is small, easy to use, and takes very nice photos.

bentoon · Aug 15, 2004, 02:02 AM

yeah the Pentax is a great camera,
I think that it resembles the Canon Powershots and I think for the price I would go with the Canon 5 mega Pixel...

& Lagtime isn't bad if you set the flash? I don't comprehend. It seems to me that it is the same time. I don't use the flash much anyway, so I'm out of luck...
Maybe that's part of my problem...

~ J

davecom · Aug 15, 2004, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by bentoon:
yeah the Pentax is a great camera,
I think that it resembles the Canon Powershots and I think for the price I would go with the Canon 5 mega Pixel...

& Lagtime isn't bad if you set the flash? I don't comprehend. It seems to me that it is the same time. I don't use the flash much anyway, so I'm out of luck...
Maybe that's part of my problem...

~ J

Just about all cameras have two modes. Auto- where it determines whether or not to use flash for you based on its light meter, and then they also have manual settings where you can force flash on or off. Auto is slow. If you determine the setting yourself it reduces lag.

G4ME · Aug 17, 2004, 10:35 PM

also i find that you use the primary then secondary firing on the camera theres no lag, you just have to set your self up and let the AF and cap charge up (for a flash) then you should be all set.