Cameras

[chocky909]

Was there an existing thread for techy advice for cameras? Anyway, for purely selfish reasons as usual I've started this thread to ask for advice about cameras, specifically...

... a good, simple to operate, point and shoot for under £100. Good indoors and low light important. Decent video/sound would be good too. Apart from that I'm just interested to hear who makes the best digital cameras these days as it's a fast moving technology.

[presta didwicks]

I'd recommend a Canon, go for a large screen too.

£125 IXUS 115  http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-IXUS-115-Digital-Camera/dp/B004M8S21K/ref=dp_ob_title_ce

Buying guide    http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/02/uk-electronics/shops/canon/buyingguide/PowerShot_IXUS_Buying_Guide_v2.pdf

[Eight Taiwanese Teenagers]

 unless you are going to spend several hundred on a DSLR or one of the fancy new micro 4/3 cameras,  I would recommend getting/using the one on a modern smartphone

[mobias]

Sony and Panasonic make very good sub 100 quid cameras. The problem with just using a smart phone is they have shit lenses, dreadful inbuilt flash's and are notoriously bad at dealing with any movement. There's usually really bad latency between pressing the button and taking the actual photo too.   

[hoverdonkey]

This would be the best place to ask about entry-level DSLRs then. Please. £500 max I think (hope)

[chocky909]

I think I'll get a Canon then. I already have a Nikon DSLR but it's too big for most occasions and the camera on my Galaxy S2 isn't good enough. Like mobias said, they take too long, don't work indoors that well, have shite lenses and I don't even have a physical button.

[mobias]

You're not going to go far wrong with a camera from any of the top manufacturers. It's six and half a dozen, they all end up doing the same thing. With compacts Sony are known to include better than average quality lenses in some of their cheaper compacts, something which might be worth considering.

With regards to entry level DSLR's again anything from Canon, Nikon or Sony isn't going to disappoint you too much. Both Canon and Nikon have amazing back catalogues of lenses to choose from which is important, especially if you want to buy second hand. Sony less so but Sony have image stabilisation built into the camera body and not the lens which is a useful feature to have.

[The Duck Man]

This would be the best place to ask about entry-level DSLRs then. Please. £500 max I think (hope)

Would just like to bump this because I too am looking at entry-level DSLRs. Just browsing Jessops, and this is the cheapest Nikon for £449.95 and they have various Canons for under £400.

My friend who is into photography essentially said "Yeah, any of them will do." His only pointer was that Canons are thought to be better for video, and Nikons for low-light. Would prefer some other opinions, as it's quite a lot of cash.

[Ignatius_S]

....My friend who is into photography essentially said "Yeah, any of them will do." His only pointer was that Canons are thought to be better for video, and Nikons for low-light. Would prefer some other opinions, as it's quite a lot of cash.

Actually, I believe the Canon 1100D isn't meant to be that good for video - however, that aside, either of those two would be great as an entry-level camera; the D3100 is probably a little more user friendly. From what I've read, the 1100D isn't a huge step up from the 1000D - that can be had for under £300, which means that you've got some dosh to spend on an extra lens.

Personally, I like Canon so I would be inclined to go for that - but really, I would rather go for the 550D, which is a little over the £500 mark.

Something I would really recommend is have a look online at reviews and forums - dpsreviews and stevesdigicams - there are some incredibly detailed resources online and they can give some great pointers. Just in case you haven't stumbled across it, do visit http://www.camerapricebuster.com/ - it's superb for checking prices and how much they change.

Sorry if it's stating the obvious, but do try them in a shop as the physical feel can be such a personal thing.

[Neomod]

I'm looking to buy an HD camcorder for about £200. Last time I bought a camcorder it was mini DV tapes so I haven't got a clue what's new and good value. A manual focus and optical zoom option is a must.

Does anyone have any recommendations or know of any good review sites?

 

[Ignatius_S]

I'm looking to buy an HD camcorder for about £200. Last time I bought a camcorder it was mini DV tapes so I haven't got a clue what's new and good value. A manual focus and optical zoom option is a must.

Does anyone have any recommendations or know of any good review sites?

I'm rather a Sony man, so perhaps a bit biased but they're normally solid.

If you can stretch about fifty quid more, then the Sony HDR-CX130 is worth considering - also, there's the Sony HDR-CX115 and would give you a fair bang for your buck. They're not too new, but not too old - and to be honest when new kit comes out, you're paying a premium to have the latest - both cost a fair bit more when they came out. Both have manual focus, but nothing too advanced.

I take it you don't need a mic input?

[hoverdonkey]

Thanks for the SLR advice Ignatius

[mobias]

If you're wanting an SLR that also doubles as a video camera then I would definitely recommend Sony. Their lower end SLT cameras are very capable little things though they do have what feels like slightly dubious build quality, quite light and plastic-y. They give very good results though and their HDR (high dynamic range) is impressive.   

[Ignatius_S]

Thanks for the SLR advice Ignatius

A pleasure – sorry, I would have replied earlier but I didn't spot the thread.

One thing I should have also mentioned, type the name of  a model that that you're interested into Google and start typing in 'versus' to get a lot of useful suggested searches. So many people start threads about 'Should I get X or Y camera', this is a really quick way to get various pros and cons.

BTW another good reason to visit Camera Price Buster is that it has discount codes and special promotions that manufacturers or sellers are doing. Often these are just for accessories and lenses, but it usually does a good job showing what deals are around.

Incidentally, I saw that the Canon 550D and standard lens kit could be had for £470 three days ago, which is a great deal – at the moment, it's from £500 (which is pretty good).

If you're wanting an SLR that also doubles as a video camera then I would definitely recommend Sony. Their lower end SLT cameras are very capable little things though they do have what feels like slightly dubious build quality, quite light and plastic-y. They give very good results though and their HDR (high dynamic range) is impressive.

Out of interest, what have you got?

Most DLSRs have decent video recording but always good to get some hands-on feedback! Was it something that you were looking for specifically or more of a very nice bonus?

[mobias]

Out of interest, what have you got?

Most DLSRs have decent video recording but always good to get some hands-on feedback! Was it something that you were looking for specifically or more of a very nice bonus?

I've got a Sony A700 plus a brand new Sony A77. I actually work as a professional photographer specialising in botanical photography. I was a big Minolta devotee in the 80's and 90's prior to the digital revolution and Sony bought over the Minolta camera division in 2005. Minolta were, in their day, a bit like the Apple of photography. They had a unique approach and thought outside the box when it came to camera design and features. They where the manufacturer that introduced and pioneered the use of autofocus lenses in the SLR market in the mid 80's. Sony maintained they would continue Minolta's approach to photography and they seem to have honoured that. A fair few pro photographers were fairly sceptical of 'the Playstation company' getting into photography but they forget that Sony are a massive player in the very high end digital movie camera market so have a lot of skill and knowledge to pass down to their consumer camera's.

So all that being said there's a few very practical reasons why I would choose a Sony DSLR camera now if I was getting into photography. The Sony range of DSLR's aren't strictly speaking SLR's they're actually SLT's (Single Lens Translucent) which means there's no moving mirror inside the camera. This has a few benefits. Firstly it means the cameras can shoot ultra fast. My A77 can shoot in bursts of 12 frames per second. The cheaper Sony SLT's shoot less than that but are still very fast for the money. Secondly, and this is a major benefit if you're into using the camera for video, Sony's cameras can autofocus during video recording. Even Canon's 5 grand 1D can't do that. Again its all to do with the SLT set up.

Another good selling point of Sony's is that they have image stabilisation technology built into the camera body and not the lens. With Canon and Nikon if you want image stabilisation you have to have a lens with that feature. With Sony its all taken care of regardless of what lens you use. Its a useful feature in any low light situation when you can't use a flash and don't have a tripod. I find it incredibly useful.

Another interesting selling point on the Sony cameras is they now all have an EVF (electronic view finder) There are mixed feeling about this within the industry. It basically means when you look through the cameras view finder you're actually looking at a screen and not an optical magnification of the view down the lens. This has its advantages and its disadvantages but for me the advantages massively out weigh the disadvantages. You can have it set so the image you see in the view finder corresponds to whatever exposure setting you've got. In other words you're getting a live preview of the photograph you're going to take. Its something that's again very useful, apparently even Nikon have admitted the future is EVF and not optical.

If I had 500 quid to spend on a camera I'd probably buy this http://www.jacobsdigital.co.uk/p-42389-jacobs-digital-sony-alpha-a55-18-55mm-kit.aspx  Although its slightly over budget you're getting a lot of camera for the money.

There's also a couple of other things worth considering. Any serious photographer will tell you lenses are where you want to spend your money and don't faff about considering gimmicky camera features. This is absolutely true of course but its a line of thinking that has carried over somewhat from the days of film cameras. Now days you also have to consider the quality of the sensor and also the cameras ability to compute the information coming off the sensor and believe it or not the ability does vary from one manufacturer to the other. In this day and age there's certainly no point in putting a 2 grand lens on a 300 quid camera body. The lens quality will be completely wasted on a camera that's unable to deal with that amount of detail. So you do have to find a balance.

Canon and Nikon camera's also have their benefits. Certainly with Nikon for example you can get incredibly good quality lenses second hand for less than the equivalent from Sony (which use Minolta's A mount lens attachment) Its something certainly worth considering. 

[chocky909]

Are there any compact cameras with mic input for video recording?

Or... an easy way to combine the audio from my sound recorder and the video from my camera. I read it's still tricky to sync though.

[Ignatius_S]

I've got a Sony A700 plus a brand new Sony A77. I actually work as a professional photographer specialising in botanical photography...

Very interesting read – cheers!

Although being able to autofocus during video recording can be a big bonus, the usefulness will obviously depend on the user. In my own case, it was something that I could live without as I would be primarily using autofocus when framing shots, rather than when actually shooting. Also, I had read that with large sensors AF during shooting can be less than smooth. With the Canon series, there's a rather wonderful open-source project Magic Lantern, which turned out to be a good bonus for me.

Are there any compact cameras with mic input for video recording?

Or... an easy way to combine the audio from my sound recorder and the video from my camera. I read it's still tricky to sync though.

As far as I'm aware, there isn't and the nearest (and this is a bit of a stretch) would be a Four Thirds camera like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2. For someone who wanted to shoot video with a ultra-portable device with a mic input, I always used to recommend the Kodak Zi8 pocket camcorder, which has now been discontinued. There's the Kodak Playtouch, although it's a little more pricey and you might just want to stick to one device.

Syncing video and audio shouldn't be a problem. If you have a specific video editor in mind, it might have a syncing tool – in any case, it's worth doing a google search for that app and syncing audio/video as quite a lot of people ask for help or advice with this kind of thing.

[The Masked Unit]

Just to add to what Mobias said, we've got a Sony a200 (now discontinued) and absolutely love it. The interesting thing about the Minolta buyout is that you can use old Minolta lenses on them, meaning you should be able to pick up some 2nd hand bargains.

[falafel]

Olympus may be run by Yakuza but I love my PEN. No Oly love in the thread - how come?

[mobias]

Olympus may be run by Yakuza but I love my PEN. No Oly love in the thread - how come?

Back in the days of film Olympus were a major player. Its interesting how things have changed in the world of photography. For all the major brands it was much more of a level playing field back in the 80's and 90's then, as cleverly an early adopter of digital, Canon managed to consume a lot of the market share, especially from Nikon, and a lot of the once mighty brands in photography like Olympus and Minolta got into real trouble. I might be wrong about this but I'm not sure how well Olympus are supported by third party lens manufacturers like Sigma and I do know that Olympus have had problems with investment in new technology, which is what its all about these days.   

[falafel]

Makes sense. One of the things I love about micro 4:3 though is the amazing array of vintage lenses you can attach. You lose automation obviously but it's good fun - especially for video.

[mobias]

I've been mucking about with one of these on my camera recently.http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/New-AF-Confirm-M42-Lens-Canon-EOS-EF-Adapter-Ring-550D-500D-60D-50D-7D-5D-UK-/230711216468?pt=UK_Photography_CameraLenses_Lens_caps_hoods_adaptors_ET&hash=item35b775c954

It means you can attach any M42 size vintage lens to a modern DSLR. You can get an old 1970's Carl Zeiss Jenna lens for about 30 quid in ebay and the images you get from it are  pretty dam amazing. 

[falafel]

Oooooh

[lazyhour]

I'd recommend a Canon, go for a large screen too.

£125 IXUS 115  http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-IXUS-115-Digital-Camera/dp/B004M8S21K/ref=dp_ob_title_ce

Buying guide    http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/02/uk-electronics/shops/canon/buyingguide/PowerShot_IXUS_Buying_Guide_v2.pdf

I can't seem to get that Buying guide link to work - is there a particular reason you've chosen that IXUS 115 over the others? The modern Canons (Ixus or Powershot) do look good to me, but there's just so many of them - if my budget is more like £180 do you have any recommendations? I wonder if these days the Ixus models are pretty much as good and flexible as the Powershots, or if they're still holding back some features from the Ixuses....

God, I hate trying to choose a new camera. Last one I bought was about 5 years ago and researching and selecting it was agony. I just want something that'll cope well with gig photography and general low-light conditions without changing tons of settings.

Is it fair to assume that a newer model will be superior to an older model, or doesn't it really work like that with cameras?

[chocky909]

As far as I'm aware, there isn't and the nearest (and this is a bit of a stretch) would be a Four Thirds camera like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2. For someone who wanted to shoot video with a ultra-portable device with a mic input, I always used to recommend the Kodak Zi8 pocket camcorder, which has now been discontinued. There's the Kodak Playtouch, although it's a little more pricey and you might just want to stick to one device.

Syncing video and audio shouldn't be a problem. If you have a specific video editor in mind, it might have a syncing tool – in any case, it's worth doing a google search for that app and syncing audio/video as quite a lot of people ask for help or advice with this kind of thing.

Well, I was thinking of selling my Nikon D40 and upgrading to something more portable that shoots good video, has a mic input and also has auto bracketing because I'm dying to try out some HDR photography.

Given that I'll be lucky to get £200 for my D40 and lens, is there anything suitable under £300-£400 that would do me or should I just grab a Zi8 2nd hand and get a nice £100 compact? Do compacts have auto bracketing?

[presta didwicks]

is there a particular reason you've chosen that IXUS 115 over the others?

- if my budget is more like £180 do you have any recommendations? I wonder if these days the Ixus models are pretty much as good and flexible as the Powershots, or if they're still holding back some features from the Ixuses....


Is it fair to assume that a newer model will be superior to an older model, or doesn't it really work like that with cameras?

I can't claim to know a great deal about cameras other than i've had an Ixus 75 (£75 nowadays) for about 4 years and I really rate it, solid build, good battery life and pin sharp screen.
I did make the presumption that the newer models would be even better.



Orbital at the Big Chill a few years back




These too  http://www.flickr.com/photos/richsumtricky/sets/72157625829830198/detail/

[Lfbarfe]

I needed a new camera a while back, and couldn't quite justify the cost of a DSLR. So I went for a Fuji 'bridge camera' - the S1600 to be precise. It's less adjustable than an SLR (there's a degree of manual override, but not the full range of shutter speeds or apertures), and lacks the ability to change lenses, but it's way more flexible than a standard compact and I've been pretty impressed with it all round. In particular, it seems to have a decent lens on the front. Mine was a refurbished one with a full guarantee, and they're still doing them at the Fuji site, for a mere £79.99. For £85, you can have an S1800, which has a longer zoom lens.



I will get a DSLR (or SLT) at some stage, and will probably go Sony because my last film SLR was a Minolta, and I can use the rather nice standard zoom lens.

[chocky909]

I've just spent the last hour looking at the Sony A55/A33 and they almost look exactly what I was looking for albeit for a price. They have external mic input and good quality video with great autofocus giving video a more arty look that these fixed focus videos. The only thing is the HDR is automatic and you can't set auto bracketing. Damn, nearly had everything there. Oh, it looks bigger than my Nikon too so there that as well.

[JerryMojica]

raditional cameras capture light onto photographic film or photographic plate. Video and digital cameras use an electronic image sensor, usually a charge coupled device or a CMOS sensor to capture images which can be transferred or stored in a memory card or other storage inside the camera for later playback or processing.

[lazyhour]

So I finally plumped for a Nikon P300 for £179. It lacks mega-zoom (only 4.2x) and doesn't have RAW but it looks to be pretty flawless apart from that, including full manual controls and well-reviewed 1080p video with built-in stereo mic.



It's pleasingly chunky.