[Cubeoid]

This new cybershot is hawt! 8.1 megapixels. That's awsome. It looks beautiful.

[G4ME]

its not how many mega pixles you have, its how you use it.

[Cubeoid]

Get a load of the giant touch screen.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by G4ME

its not how many mega pixles you have, its how you use it.

True, however.

I do demos and sales for digital cameras during the holiday season, and I'm amazed at how many people will buy a camera just because it has more megapixels, when in reality that's just a part of the picture.

[Randman]

Hate Sony's memory cards though.

[rickey939]

How much?

[RAILhead]

Too bad it only has a crappy 3x zoom.

=(

[Randman]

Originally Posted by rickey939

How much?

Oh, I hate them about 93%.

[Goldfinger]

[Cubeoid]

Originally Posted by rickey939

How much?

500 US.

[Cubeoid]

Originally Posted by Goldfinger

Here! This just came for you.

[andreas_g4]

My three years old Cybershot (3.1 MP) still has superior imagequality compared with current comsumer non-Sony 4 or 5 MP cameras. My digicams will most likely be Sony for while in the future.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Cubeoid

Here! This just came for you.

Betamax was a great format, my parents still have a betamax vcr!

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

I loathe Sony digital cameras.

[d4nth3m4n]

i <3 my sd400. what can you really do with 8.1mp with those optics anyway?

[paul w]

Can't You Reed?? Its A Carl Zeiss Lens Omg !!!1!!1

[Kerrigan]

Gee whiz Zeiss is such a posh name, must be good.

[d4nth3m4n]

no really, there is a serious question here. there has to be a limit to this. digital cameras are sold by megapixel whereas that was the one thing that was relatively constant in the film days. seems like there will come a time when the MP rating becomes obsolete and thing that mattered in the film days- flexibility, control, size and image quality will become the paramount marketing tool.

and to add to this, does anyone have a rough idea of the MP equivalent of film? we have to be approaching that by now.

[paul w]

It's ultimately hard to compare, as there are different variables. Not all 35 mm film has the same richness.

But I've heard that from 6 mp up approaches good 35 mm quality. However the pro standard is much higher, like 10-12 megapixles. This is because the high end color films are much richer and thus enlarge bigger and better than some of the mainstream ones. The same can't really be said for different cameras' sensors. a megapixel is a megapixel, no?

[Mediaman_12]

Originally Posted by Cubeoid

Here! This just came for you.

That is a pretty good comparison, Betamax was used for years in the Pro (TV) sector, years after it was considered 'dead' in the consumer market.

[insha]

Originally Posted by andreas_g4

My three years old Cybershot (3.1 MP) still has superior imagequality compared with current comsumer non-Sony 4 or 5 MP cameras. My digicams will most likely be Sony for while in the future.

In my experience Canon digi cameras have better quality than Sony digi cameras*.


* I don't have anything to back this statement up, it's just my personal opinion.

[TailsToo]

[Magicite]

Originally Posted by insha

In my experience Canon digi cameras have better quality than Sony digi cameras*.


* I don't have anything to back this statement up, it's just my personal opinion.

Ditto

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by Magicite

Ditto

Ditto. I buy my digi cameras from the company who has always been in the camera business (Canon). I refuse to buy a digital camera from a company who also makes a video game machine and A/V stuff.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by insha

In my experience Canon digi cameras have better quality than Sony digi cameras*.

* I don't have anything to back this statement up, it's just my personal opinion.

Originally Posted by Magicite

Ditto

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa

Ditto. I buy my digi cameras from the company who has always been in the camera business (Canon). I refuse to buy a digital camera from a company who also makes a video game machine and A/V stuff.

OK. What would you guys recommend in a mid-range ($300-$500) Canon digi-cam that is not dumbed down but at the same time doesn't have all the bells and whistles? I want some manual controls and a decent zoom lens but not have to do everything manually to get decent shots.
Suggestions?

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

OK. What would you guys recommend in a mid-range ($300-$500) Canon digi-cam that is not dumbed down but at the same time doesn't have all the bells and whistles? I want some manual controls and a decent zoom lens but not have to do everything manually to get decent shots.
Suggestions?

SD500

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...02394&v=glance

A620

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...activeda232-20

[Salty]

Never gona buy anything Sony.

By the way I was looking at the Canon SD550 at work. Sexy camera. I'd love to get it. That said what the frick is with these 3x optical zooms!? We can get a 7MP sensor but we can't put in a freaking nice zoom!? Come on! Anyway, I think my next camera is going to be a super compact one like the SD550 with a big screen and then after that a DSLR.

[MacMan4000]

Wow, too may people here think they know what they are talking about... i can't correct them all... Im just gonna stay out of it. all I have to say is this: 8mp = overkill for consumers. 8mp = good for pros, but only when paired with a decent lens. for example the canon digital rebel is 8mp, but the kit lens (18-55) is pure crap. worthless.

more megapixels doesn't mean better picture. people need to learn this before it gets out of hand.

A friend of mine shoots sports (mostly basketball) for the associated press with a Nikon D2H. thats a 4 megapixel camera that makes better prints than my D70 (6 megapixel) I have seen 3' x 4' posters from that D2H that look pristine, but if you try that with any other 4mp camera it would look like sh!t. A lot more goes into the equation besides megapixels. The physical size of the image sensor for example can make a huge difference. Lenses are also critical.

On the other hand, consumers dont usually make posters... my recommendation to the average consumer is 5 megapixels for novice shapshot people and a 6 or 8 mp SLR (NOT A POINT AND SHOOT) for the more advanced customers (pro-sumers) who want more control and responsiveness.

6+ megapixels in a point and shoot camera is pointless. IMO


EDIT:
I forgot to mention... if i take the same picture with a 5mp camera and with a 12 mp camera they will both look the same at 8"x10" size... the only advantage to more megapixels is bigger enlargements. I know from experience that a decent 5mp camera can make excellent 20"x24" prints. unless you wan

[JoshuaZ]

Yeah, I concur with that. No consumer needs 8 mp in a small digicam. I can`t believe people buy high MP cameras just for the high MP. I see a lot of people with horrible cameras, horrible cheap ones, that they only bought because some sales person said that they had a high MP.

Lame.

[MacMan4000]

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa

Ditto. I buy my digi cameras from the company who has always been in the camera business (Canon). I refuse to buy a digital camera from a company who also makes a video game machine and A/V stuff.

excellent advice, listen to this man!

[bad_quote]

Originally Posted by insha

In my experience Canon digi cameras have better quality than Sony digi cameras*.


* I don't have anything to back this statement up, it's just my personal opinion.

Ditto. Pics from a sony always look dull and lifeless to me. Canons are usually much more vibrant. Even without vivid mode.

[isao bered]

Originally Posted by Salty

We can get a 7MP sensor but we can't put in a freaking nice zoom!? Come on!

my experience is the more you zoom the steadier you have to be. little shakesz don't good picturesz make. so you get your 3 oz. ultra-thin, ultra-compact camera and have to put it on a tripod to use the zoom? (not to mention the lens would probably extend out and obstruct the teensi eensi built-in flash...)

be well.

laeth

[MacMan4000]

for loads of zoom and good picture quality I recommend the Canon S2 IS. it is 5mp and has a great quality glass lens with a 12x optical zoom. (its about 35-430mm I believe). And too keep all that insane zoom steady it has a built in Image stabilizer that works wonders.

The Nikon S4 looks promising, but it doesn't have an image stabilizer. We just got them in at work yesterday so I haven't had much time to try it out. It's a 6mp camera with 10x optical zoom. Its a weird sape though. i'll have to try it out before i recommend it.

[vexborg]

Originally Posted by MacMan4000

for loads of zoom and good picture quality I recommend the Canon S2 IS. it is 5mp and has a great quality glass lens with a 12x optical zoom. (its about 35-430mm I believe). And too keep all that insane zoom steady it has a built in Image stabilizer that works wonders.

The Nikon S4 looks promising, but it doesn't have an image stabilizer. We just got them in at work yesterday so I haven't had much time to try it out. It's a 6mp camera with 10x optical zoom. Its a weird sape though. i'll have to try it out before i recommend it.

Or get a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20 - excellent camera with 12x optical zoom (36-432mm), 5mp, full manual mode, flash hot shoe, built flash and a lot of other goodies

More info can be found here .

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by d4nth3m4n

and to add to this, does anyone have a rough idea of the MP equivalent of film? we have to be approaching that by now.

Depends but some really good slide film (like Velvia) would be up to 30-35MP.

[Obi Wan's Ghost]

Originally Posted by KarlG

True, however.

I do demos and sales for digital cameras during the holiday season, and I'm amazed at how many people will buy a camera just because it has more megapixels, when in reality that's just a part of the picture.

I once heard a conversation between a man and his son in a store. The son says 'This camera is seven megapixels dad. We have to get it!' The dad ased what a megapixel was. The son said it was the speed of the camera as in the more megapixels it has the faster the speed of the lens.

Most people don't use monitors with resolutions over 2.3 megapixels and have no need for images bigger than that.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost

I once heard a conversation between a man and his son in a store. The son says 'This camera is seven megapixels dad. We have to get it!' The dad ased what a megapixel was. The son said it was the speed of the camera as in the more megapixels it has the faster the speed of the lens.

Most people don't use monitors with resolutions over 2.3 megapixels and have no need for images bigger than that.

Um,...most people don't print their pictures on a monitor.

There's a tremendous amount of misinformation and plain garbage being spread about digital cameras, just like there is about computers. Everybody thinks they're an expert because they own one. Macman4000 has the best replies on this subject here, but they aren't going to change most people's mind. When I do demos, I patiently explain to people why megapixels are just part of the picture quality, and how other factors apply as well. More often than not, I get a blank stare (because they're not really listening). Often, when they've brought their "expert" with them, they listen and then go look at a camera that has a higher megapixel rating, because the "expert" always knows best.

[ReggieX]

Originally Posted by Mediaman_12

That is a pretty good comparison, Betamax was used for years in the Pro (TV) sector, years after it was considered 'dead' in the consumer market.

There's a big difference between Betamax and Betacam.

[barbee]

Looks good and I love that they're going with Carl Zeiss now.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by insha

In my experience Canon digi cameras have better quality than Sony digi cameras*.


* I don't have anything to back this statement up, it's just my personal opinion.

Would you buy a Nikon stereo or a Pentax computer? I say stick with the major camera makers for cameras, even digital. Canons seem to have relatively easy-to-use interfaces, and they work great with OS X. I want me one of them digital rebels baaaad.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by barbee

Looks good and I love that they're going with Carl Zeiss now.

Not to denigrate this poster, but this is a good example of people saying that something is good, just because it has a "name" attached to it. Carl Zeiss lenses are good, on the high end, but they also make inexpensive lenses for inexpensive cameras. Just because they've gone with Carl Zeiss, which, BTW, they have been using for at least a year, doesn't mean much.

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by chris v

Would you buy a Nikon stereo or a Pentax computer? I say stick with the major camera makers for cameras, even digital. Canons seem to have relatively easy-to-use interfaces, and they work great with OS X. I want me one of them digital rebels baaaad.

I have the first Digital Rebel (not the newest one). I love it - it's a fantastic camera. Works perfectly with all the lenses from my old Canon Rebel S. 6 MP is PLENTY for the printing I need to do (4 x 6, 8 x 10).

[Mrjinglesusa]

Originally Posted by chris v

Would you buy a Nikon stereo or a Pentax computer? I say stick with the major camera makers for cameras, even digital. Canons seem to have relatively easy-to-use interfaces, and they work great with OS X. I want me one of them digital rebels baaaad.

I have the first Digital Rebel (not the newest one). I love it - it's a fantastic camera. Works perfectly with all the lenses from my old Canon Rebel S. 6 MP is PLENTY for the printing I need to do (4 x 6, 8 x 10).

[Stunt]

Damn, that cybershot is niiiiice! I like it! My uncle needs a new camera, I'm going to reccomend him that

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by KarlG

Not to denigrate this poster, but this is a good example of people saying that something is good, just because it has a "name" attached to it. Carl Zeiss lenses are good, on the high end, but they also make inexpensive lenses for inexpensive cameras. Just because they've gone with Carl Zeiss, which, BTW, they have been using for at least a year, doesn't mean much.

Indeed.

[the macimum]

Originally Posted By: Stunt.

Damn, that cybershot is niiiiice! I like it! My uncle needs a new camera, I'm going to reccomend him that

If I had the money, I'd forget my uncle, that thing is crazy awesome! I'd get it for myself!

[the macimum]

Originally Posted By: Stunt.

Damn, that cybershot is niiiiice! I like it! My uncle needs a new camera, I'm going to reccomend him that

If I had the money, I'd forget my uncle, that thing is crazy awesome! I'd get it for myself!

[Demonhood]

i'm into photography quite a bit, and i don't necessarily agree with the "buy from the company known for photography" line. i've used a few Sony digital cameras and they have been well made and taken excellent pictures. they've all (strangely) had oversaturated reds, but in general they weren't bad. of course, they don't make a DSLR, so they can't quite compete with the big boys.
i've also used a few Nikon digital cams that were piss poor. longevity in the field does not guarantee quality on every single product.

all that said, i do prefer canon both for the compact digital and the higher end. but that's a personal preference. my last film SLR was a Nikon, so things change.

[acadian]

Originally Posted by d4nth3m4n

no really, there is a serious question here. there has to be a limit to this. digital cameras are sold by megapixel whereas that was the one thing that was relatively constant in the film days. seems like there will come a time when the MP rating becomes obsolete and thing that mattered in the film days- flexibility, control, size and image quality will become the paramount marketing tool.

and to add to this, does anyone have a rough idea of the MP equivalent of film? we have to be approaching that by now.

Think of it in different terms, the high end medium format (commercial) market did not switch to digital until the D-Backs passed the 20 mp mark. With Canon offering a 16mp DSLR and (reportedly) working on a 22 mp Full Frame CMOS sensor, the DSLR market will soon put the final nails in the coffin of the medium format market.