Digital camera

I know AA batteries are the most convenient to get and cheap but here's my observation after owning many digital cameras. The propriatory batteries in my Canon S400 & S300 last a long time, maybe 200+ pictures but so do the AA batteries on my other digital camera, the difference is that the AA batteries drain on their own, a fully charged battery seems to lose it's charge in 2-3 weeks but the propriatory batteries on my Canon's stay charged for months and this is important as I leave the camera in my car and I don't want to charge it every week, I can leave it in there and I see something I want to take a picture of, it's ready to go. I've tried different brands of NiMh AA batteries and they're all the same.
 
buellwinkle said:
You never know with electronics if it will last 1 day or 12 years. For my more expensive cameras I get extended warranties as $30 for 5 years brings piece of mind. Mack is the nations largest extended warranty company and many stores resell it for way more but compuplus sells it cheap and it's the same warranty. I posted the link above.



Look at the bright side, that camera is obsolete anyway and now you can get the S60 for half that price or go for their new small cameras, the SD series are so tiny that it makes my S400 look huge.
Click to expand...



Canon says that if the repair costs over $250, I can upgrade to their 7.0 megapixel camera (refurbished) and get 6 months of warranty with it.



I really don't want to spend a penny on it though. Mailing it to Canon tomorrow. Takes about 2 weeks to get the free estimate.
 
tdekany said:
Canon says that if the repair costs over $250, I can upgrade to their 7.0 megapixel camera (refurbished) and get 6 months of warranty with it.



I really don't want to spend a penny on it though. Mailing it to Canon tomorrow. Takes about 2 weeks to get the free estimate.
Click to expand...



wow, so are you saying taht if it's over $250, if you just pay the $250 they will give you a refurbed s70? I would jump on that deal, but if it came to anything between $100-$249 I would probably just take the loss. maybe someone would buy it for parts/battery/charger/flash card....
 
grimmster said:
wow, so are you saying taht if it's over $250, if you just pay the $250 they will give you a refurbed s70? I would jump on that deal, but if it came to anything between $100-$249 I would probably just take the loss. maybe someone would buy it for parts/battery/charger/flash card....
Click to expand...



Yes, for $250.00 I can purchase a refurbed S70



I really like my S50 though. Would I see a big enough difference with the S70?
 
from what I have read, besides the higher mega pixel, it is slightly smaller/lighter and it takes care of the purple fringing if you have seen that at all (I have on some pics) although unless you print out 8*10 or bigger, the higher mp probably is no big deal in itself.



It still sucks that your s50 stopped working though. what exactly does not work?



I dont want to highjack the thread, so feel free to pm me
 
grimmster said:
from what I have read, besides the higher mega pixel, it is slightly smaller/lighter and it takes care of the purple fringing if you have seen that at all (I have on some pics) although unless you print out 8*10 or bigger, the higher mp probably is no big deal in itself.



It still sucks that your s50 stopped working though. what exactly does not work?



I dont want to highjack the thread, so feel free to pm me
Click to expand...





I was taking pictures and everything went blank/stopped



The lens wouldn't retract.
 
Althought I don't believe you would see much of a difference because the MP changed from 5 to 7, the rest of the electronics keeps getting better every year, for example response time between shots, time to power up, time to focus, color accuracy, exposure accuracy, ergonomics, battery life seem to improve with each itteraration as well as less flaws like purple fringing, lens barrelling. So I would take the newer camera. Also check out the Canon forum on dpreview.com and ask around how the S70 compares to the S50, it's not always better. In my case, I have a Fujifilm S602 and they replaced it with the S7000 but many people still sought out the S602 for a long time after the S7000 came out because it had better optics even though the newer camera had double the megapixals.
 
buellwinkle said:
Althought I don't believe you would see much of a difference because the MP changed from 5 to 7, the rest of the electronics keeps getting better every year, for example response time between shots, time to power up, time to focus, color accuracy, exposure accuracy, ergonomics, battery life seem to improve with each itteraration as well as less flaws like purple fringing, lens barrelling. So I would take the newer camera. Also check out the Canon forum on dpreview.com and ask around how the S70 compares to the S50, it's not always better. In my case, I have a Fujifilm S602 and they replaced it with the S7000 but many people still sought out the S602 for a long time after the S7000 came out because it had better optics even though the newer camera had double the megapixals.
Click to expand...



thank you, & I'll ask on the site you suggested.
 
animes2k said:
Mocha - I hear what you're saying and it certainly applies to most consumer-level cameras that we're talking about here... However, many - if not most - DSLR cameras are quite capable of taking low-light / high-ISO / long-exposure photos with great clarity and detail - outperforming the resolution of film of comparable speed in some cases (significantly less grain/noise, less "reciprocity failure").
Click to expand...



Thank you for the information, just one more favor, please, name some brands and models for me to check out. I am in the market for a digital in the under $1000.00 range. I am really not satified with the results of my wifes current camera. Mine is about 5 y/o, has problems and is really unsuited for low ambient light photo's ( as is hers) . Please PM me if you dont want to post here.:xyxthumbs
 
So, do you want true point and shoot, something point and shoot but with some manual controls or on all out digital SLR?



Brands I would only recommend are Canon and Nikon, but thats just the snob in me I guess.
 
I would recommend the Canon A95. It has great reviews. Also some important things to think about are batteries and memory. The A95 uses standard AA's. You can get batteries anywhere or even use rechargables. It uses compactflash for memory which I believe is the major memory out there. Usually the market leader is the cheapest to buy.



It can also be found for a great price:

Canon PowerShot A95 5M digital camera for $209 shipped + padding

At Dell Home, the Canon PowerShot A95 5-megapixel digital camera costs $299 with free shipping. Pad your order with anything that costs $1 or more (this Digital Vinyl CD-R 10-pack is $10.95). Coupon code "?SX20D87GHZN9D" drops it to $209.15, not including the padding. (Shipping may be charged for the padding item.) That's $15 over our last mention but still the lowest total price we could find by $43. Features include 3x optical zoom, 1.8" LCD, 32MB CompactFlash, and USB connectivity. Coupon ends June 14 at 7 am ET.



From Techbargains.com - a deal site I frequent. I have been helping my sister find a camera.
 
mochamanz said:
Thank you for the information, just one more favor, please, name some brands and models for me to check out. I am in the market for a digital in the under $1000.00 range. I am really not satified with the results of my wifes current camera. Mine is about 5 y/o, has problems and is really unsuited for low ambient light photo's ( as is hers) . Please PM me if you dont want to post here.:xyxthumbs
Click to expand...



If you're looking in the sub-$1000 range, there's only one option:

The Canon Digital Rebel 350XT (the latest version of the Digital Rebel).

It is basically a pared-down version of the 20D and they both have some really amazing low-light/high-iso capabilities. Of course, it helps to match it with a fast lens and if you still need to be shooting at f/8, you might still need a tripod or an IS (image-stabilized) lens.



I'd definitely look into that camera. I believe it comes with a decent -- not great, but decent -- 18-55mm lens (29-88mm equivilent on a 35mm film body, thanks to the crop factor of the digital sensor).



This is an even more dangerous hobby/profession than detailing. That $200 you spent on a Makita? Pshaw! That'll barely buy you a decent lens :D However, if you want a good FAST lens, Canon's 50/1.8 is a steal at around $70 new... you'll just have to back up a ways to get a whole car in the frame :)
 
All this talk about digital cameras caused me to spontaneously get another for my kid, Dell, with the right coupon code has the Canon S410, a great compact camera for $226. I wanted to get her the smaller SD300 but there's so many complaints of the LCD cracking, purple fringing, poor focusing and soft edges that I passed.



As for the Digital Rebel, it takes great pics but doesn't feel right, looks cheap and the lens focus ring does not have a quality feel. The Nikon D70 looks like a better choice. Personally, at that point, I would take the step up to a Fujifilm S2 for a few hundred more. Why, because if you are getting an SLR, it's because you want a set of lenses and a small set is going to cost more than the camera anyway, why not start with a pro level camera. I know the brand name Fujifilm doesn't sound as familiar as Canon or Nikon but consider that Fujifilm makes some of the most expensive profesional lenses for Hasselblad. Now that's a serious digital camera -







0803hasselbladi01.jpg
 
buell,

good point on the camera, but for $1000, the rebel xt is THE choice. If you want a cheaper option (but lower performance), the original Rebel is a decent choice and you can find them used alll over the place for even cheaper.



The S2 pro is not a bad camera, but I used one and didn't much care for the way IT felt... it can take great pictures, but it's light and plastic, the battery system is sort of odd, and it was REALLY slow writing and reading those huge files. It's not very good with the noise on anything but the lowest ISO settings. It's got a standard Nikon mount, as well. I'm sure their Hasselblad lenses are great. Of course, it's a Hasselblad :) Give me a 22mp back for one of those!
 
Haven't tried the new Rebel, has it improved much over the original Rebel. Also, the Nikon D70 is in the same price range as the Rebel, about $1K but just felt better in my hands, still not ideal but looked better.
 
Ah! The D70 has come down in price. Still, the XT has better high-iso/low-light noise properties, which was one of the original requirements brought up by the poster I was responding to.



The XT is basically the 20D, pared down while the original rebel is the 10D pared down - the Rebels have the same sensors as their "pro" counterparts. Both rebel versions have plastic cases, whereas the 10D/20D both have magnesium bodies, definitely more rugged. The D70 also has more rugged construction. Canon and Nikon are comparable, each has its strengths and weaknesses and if you're serious about it, consider what kind of photography you want to focus on and then consider the lenses each company offers, as you're buying more into the lens system than the body (to an extent). Nikon exceeds in their wides and some primes, while Canon exceeds with the image-stabilized telephotos and some of their primes.



Either way, it's a bit more than most of us need for web and small print use, where a good point and shoot can do quite well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top