I'm looking for a compact 'point and shoot' camera to take walking as my
Canon A620 is a little bulky. Looking for around 6 MPX upwards, standard 3x
zoom or better but want a good sharp picture, minimal colour fringe.
It needs to be large enough to be useable i.e. not too small, but not bulky.
I get the impression that Lumix models are good and also Fuji for low light
(big advantage for me), but what can YOU recommend - whats the word on the
street?!
In article <1%4ck.95352$ft1.52477@newsfe14.ams2>,
"Old Strebuggart" <xsx2000x@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm looking for a compact 'point and shoot' camera to take walking as my
> Canon A620 is a little bulky. Looking for around 6 MPX upwards, standard 3x
> zoom or better but want a good sharp picture, minimal colour fringe.
>
> It needs to be large enough to be useable i.e. not too small, but not bulky.
>
> I get the impression that Lumix models are good and also Fuji for low light
> (big advantage for me), but what can YOU recommend - whats the word on the
> street?!
All the major digital camera companies offer a camera that fits your
modest needs. Sony, Canon, Casio, Panasonic, Nikon, Pentax, and Olympus
all make excellent point and shoot cameras that fit in a pocket.
Try out a few cameras at a nearby photography store and I am sure you
can find a good camera and/or check http://www.dpreview.com
> I'm looking for a compact 'point and shoot' camera to take walking as my
> Canon A620 is a little bulky. Looking for around 6 MPX upwards, standard 3x
> zoom or better but want a good sharp picture, minimal colour fringe.
>
> It needs to be large enough to be useable i.e. not too small, but not bulky.
>
> I get the impression that Lumix models are good and also Fuji for low light
> (big advantage for me), but what can YOU recommend - whats the word on the
> street?!
I'm quite happy with my glove box Fuji A820. Based on it, my buddy got an
A920. I don't know if that series has been expanded. Oh...4x optical
zoom, which was one of my criteria when I was shopping. As was
nonproprietary battery usage (4 x AA).
In article <pan.2008.07.06.17.16.15.192639@thurston.blinkynet .net>, Blinky the Shark <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote:
>Old Strebuggart wrote:
>
>> I'm looking for a compact 'point and shoot' camera to take walking as my
>> Canon A620 is a little bulky. Looking for around 6 MPX upwards, standard 3x
>> zoom or better but want a good sharp picture, minimal colour fringe.
>>
>> It needs to be large enough to be useable i.e. not too small, but not bulky.
>>
>> I get the impression that Lumix models are good and also Fuji for low light
>> (big advantage for me), but what can YOU recommend - whats the word on the
>> street?!
>
>I'm quite happy with my glove box Fuji A820. Based on it, my buddy got an
>A920. I don't know if that series has been expanded. Oh...4x optical
>zoom, which was one of my criteria when I was shopping. As was
>nonproprietary battery usage (4 x AA).
Hmm anobody got a best budget camera with a decent WIDE range. Like
less to 35 mm, perferably 28mm ??
GregS wrote:
[]
> Hmm anobody got a best budget camera with a decent WIDE range. Like
> less to 35 mm, perferably 28mm ??
>
> greg
I went for the Panasonic TZ3 with its 28 - 280 mm (equivalent),
image-stabilised, Leica lens, and I've been very pleased with it. It may
not meet your definition of "budget" or "compact", though.
David J Taylor wrote:
> GregS wrote:
> []
>> Hmm anobody got a best budget camera with a decent WIDE range. Like
>> less to 35 mm, perferably 28mm ??
>>
>> greg
>
> I went for the Panasonic TZ3 with its 28 - 280 mm (equivalent),
> image-stabilised, Leica lens, and I've been very pleased with it. It may
> not meet your definition of "budget" or "compact", though.
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz3/
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
>
The Panasonic TZ3 is a very good camera. My wife and I each have one. I
use mine when I don't want to carry the DSLR. Small enough to fit in a
shirt pocket, but a 10x zoom. Has some focusing/exposure issues but
that is to be expected in any small P&S camers.
Recently Panasonic replaced the TZ3 with the TZ5, but you can still find
the TZ3 for about $200. If you have the money look at the TZ5.
Clair Johnston wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> GregS wrote:
>> []
>>> Hmm anobody got a best budget camera with a decent WIDE range. Like
>>> less to 35 mm, perferably 28mm ??
>>>
>>> greg
>>
>> I went for the Panasonic TZ3 with its 28 - 280 mm (equivalent),
>> image-stabilised, Leica lens, and I've been very pleased with it. It
>> may not meet your definition of "budget" or "compact", though.
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz3/
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David
>>
> The Panasonic TZ3 is a very good camera. My wife and I each have one.
> I use mine when I don't want to carry the DSLR. Small enough to fit
> in a shirt pocket, but a 10x zoom. Has some focusing/exposure issues
> but that is to be expected in any small P&S camers.
>
> Recently Panasonic replaced the TZ3 with the TZ5, but you can still
> find the TZ3 for about $200. If you have the money look at the TZ5.
>
> Clair
The main drawback to most Panasonic camera is either increased noise at
lower ISOs. They compensate for this by heavier processing and that
creates some artifacts and what is known as smearing. This looses some
of the fine detail to compensate for the noise. Thats why many feel
that the Canon compacts produce better image quality. The color is
better, the noise is less, and the in camera processing is lower
resulting in better image quality as many ISO settings.
measekite wrote:
[]
> The main drawback to most Panasonic camera is either increased noise
> at lower ISOs. They compensate for this by heavier processing and
> that creates some artifacts and what is known as smearing. This
> looses some of the fine detail to compensate for the noise. Thats
> why many feel that the Canon compacts produce better image quality. The
> color is better, the noise is less, and the in camera processing
> is lower resulting in better image quality as many ISO settings.
You should try actually using Panasonics such as the TZ3 at ISO 100. Yes,
the trade-off between noise and resolution is different to the Canon, but
you might actually prefer the slightly sharper images from the Panasonic
which have a little more noise (grain) than the more blurred images from
the Canon which have a little less noise. In the cameras I've compared,
the Panasonic has a better lens producing sharper images, and the camera
can take advantage of that.
But, as I say, it's what you prefer which matters, and it's a somewhat
subjective measure.
David J Taylor wrote:
> measekite wrote:
> []
>
>> The main drawback to most Panasonic camera is either increased noise
>> at lower ISOs. They compensate for this by heavier processing and
>> that creates some artifacts and what is known as smearing. This
>> looses some of the fine detail to compensate for the noise. Thats
>> why many feel that the Canon compacts produce better image quality. The
>> color is better, the noise is less, and the in camera processing
>> is lower resulting in better image quality as many ISO settings.
>>
>
> You should try actually using Panasonics such as the TZ3 at ISO 100. Yes,
> the trade-off between noise and resolution is different to the Canon, but
> you might actually prefer the slightly sharper images from the Panasonic
> which have a little more noise (grain) than the more blurred images from
> the Canon which have a little less noise. In the cameras I've compared,
> the Panasonic has a better lens producing sharper images, and the camera
> can take advantage of that.
>
> But, as I say, it's what you prefer which matters, and it's a somewhat
> subjective measure.
>
> David
>
>
Based on the results I have seen the additional sharpness of the Leica
lens is offset by the loss of detail due to smearing in the in camera
processing of the Panasonics. Overall the Canons appear to have more
detail, better color and overall better image quality.
While I prefer my Canon S5 IS using many of its features the Canon A720
IS appears to produce image quality about the same when used under
similar conditions.
measekite wrote:
[]
> Based on the results I have seen the additional sharpness of the Leica
> lens is offset by the loss of detail due to smearing in the in camera
> processing of the Panasonics. Overall the Canons appear to have more
> detail, better color and overall better image quality.
[]
Simply doesn't agree with what I've seen. Both cameras can produce
excellent, although different, results. But as we're obviously not going
to agree on which we prefer, I would suggest people test for themselves,
and see which they prefer.
Pixel-peeping at 1:1 zoom or greater will not accurately reflect the
impression of the overall image.
Best budget compact camera 
Linear Mode
