TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Digital Cameras?
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Digital Cameras?

i want to get a digicam soon, and want one that has really good picture quality and pocket size...when i look at ppl's picks from places like guv...sometimes they like they get blurry in places and others, look crystal sharpness (i obviously want one like the latter)

i've been looking at the canon sd500

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/c...t_sd500-review/


what u think? i'd like to hear from the ppl with those really sharp cam's in clubs to (minus the canon digital rebel ppl thats way outta my league)

Re: Digital Cameras?

quote:

Originally posted by djbruuen i want to get a digicam soon, and want one that has really good picture quality and pocket size...when i look at ppl's picks from places like guv...sometimes they like they get blurry in places and others, look crystal sharpness (i obviously want one like the latter) i've been looking at the canon sd500 http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/c...t_sd500-review/ what u think? i'd like to hear from the ppl with those really sharp cam's in clubs to (minus the canon digital rebel ppl thats way outta my league)

i sold digi cams for 2 years, any of the canon sds are pretty much the best for a small compact camera. I have the sd 300, had the s230 and s200 before that, never regretted buying one of them.

if i was gonna buy another one, it'd be the sd450. 7.1 mega pixels (sd500) is completely useless and in no way makes the picture better quality, the lense makes the difference and they pretty much use the same one on all that series. 5 megapixles is more than enough. I'd even get the sd400 if ur stuck for money, think the only diff is the screen size really.

last i knew the next best compact camera was the pentax series, but its not as good as canon....stick with canon.

Pocket size? Look no further.

My camera, Sony Cybershot DSC-U50.



Mind you it's only 2 megapixels and has no zoom, but that's the price you pay for miniaturization.

Re: Digital Cameras?

quote:

Originally posted by djbruuen what u think? i'd like to hear from the ppl with those really sharp cam's in clubs to (minus the canon digital rebel ppl thats way outta my league)

how about digital SLR?

anyways, stick with Canon, nothing will work better! sd500 isn't bad at all!

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 Pocket size? Look no further. My camera, Sony Cybershot DSC-U50. Mind you it's only 2 megapixels and has no zoom, but that's the price you pay for miniaturization.

i love Sony products... but their cameras are awful!

I'm planning to sell my Canon d30 digital SLR with two lenses (Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM and Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II).

pictures quality:

http://alex777.net/ta/251105_marcelwoods/07.html

http://alex777.net/ta/281005/06.html

not a pocket size though

pm me if you are interested.

quote:

Originally posted by niveole i love Sony products... but their cameras are awful!

It's worked pretty damn well for me over the past little while. I've had zero problems and its built like a fuckin' tank. Takes pretty rad pictures.

sony actually has pretty good cameras, their w series is amazing, its a little bigger than pocket size though otherwise i'd have bought that instead of canon. They have all these crazy small ones too, they're ok but the lense is just too smal, you'll never get the pictures you say like you want from them.

The majority of Sony's cams have very narrow angle lenses. Aside from that, results are good.

Having said that, Canon all the way.

My Sony DSC-T1 is topnotch. rj-approved.

Check eBay. I picked up the DSC-T1 in July for under $300 on eBay (new, sealed in box).

http://www.dcviews.com/reviews/Sony...C-T1-review.htm

A gereral complaint with the super-slim cameras (Sony DSC and Canon Powershots) is that the flash placement is so close to the lense that without red-eye reduction turned ON - EVERYBODY is a demon (and even with red-eye reduction turned on, there still a bit of it).

Apparently the Sony DSC-T7 and DSC-T33 have improved red-eye reduction (and photo quality) compared to my T1 - but I haven't used them so I can't say from first hand experience.

Bottom line: I'm happy as a pig in shit w/ my DSC-T1. So glad I bought a digital camera. It lasts about 200 shots w/ red-eye flash before batter goes dead. Make sure you buy a 1 GB card (no matter what camera you buy) and I'm thinking of buying a back-up battery in the near future.

^ looks pretty good...heres a deal i saw on ebay that i'm finding very temping:

http://cgi.ebay.ca/Canon-PowerShot-...1QQcmdZViewItem


pretty decent deal i think, for $450CDN (prolly more like $600 after duties and bullshit like that kills you)

it includes the

sd500 +extras:
1gb memory
extra lithium battery
case for cam.

tiny cameras and good club pics don't go together

Re: Digital Cameras?

quote:

Originally posted by djbruuen when i look at ppl's picks from places like guv...sometimes they like they get blurry in places and others, look crystal sharpness (i obviously want one like the latter)

thats what happens when you use slow shutter.
it really depends on the lighting situation when you are taking the picture. if the shutter stays on for a long period of time, it will look more blurry because the camera catches more of the people moving..
unfortunately, slow shutter is the best way to take a picture of club lighting.

after owning two canons, powershot S200 and SD230, i will never buy anything else.

canons take clean crisp beautiful pictures, are small, durable, and have good battery life. for a point and shoot camera, IMO there is no better.

quote:

Originally posted by simms327 after owning two canons, powershot S200 and SD230, i will never buy anything else. canons take clean crisp beautiful pictures, are small, durable, and have good battery life. for a point and shoot camera, IMO there is no better.

lol i can't count the amount of times i've dropped mine on floors of clubs.

and as far as shutter speed goes, the bigger the lense, the more light it lets through, the less time the shutter needs to be open. Thats why if you go too small, theres just nothing you can do about blurryness.

i still say the the sd500 is a bit overboard, sd400 or 450 is a better choice unless the cash isn't an issue

As far as compacts go, I also give a big thumbs up to Sony!

7

quote:

Originally posted by malek tiny cameras and good club pics don't go together

+1

these pics i think are good enough , i mean, you're looking for sharp pics. i think the sony P93A cybershot which is my cam is pretty good


looks kindda like that 5 mega pixel

Yeah I'm in the market for a digi cam too.

I'd like between 5 and 6 MPs, 3x optical zoom at least, 1GB mem card capacity, movie-mode with sound (limited to card size only, no time limit like 30 secs or some crap like that), and USB2.0 interface.

I can't seem to decide on one because there's so many possiblitities. Any1 got any suggestions? I'll most likely get from EBay.

..and what the difference between the memory cards?

^ check out the ebay auction i listed on the last page...the sd500 is 7.1mp and it has everything you said, + the package comes with 1gb of mem

quote:

Originally posted by TRANCEEEE these pics i think are good enough , i mean, you're looking for sharp pics. i think the sony P93A cybershot which is my cam is pretty good looks kindda like that 5 mega pixel

i own a sony dsc-w5 and i love it.
i used to own a sony dsc-p72 and it was a great camera too.
shaya knows how i feel about sony's.

quote:

Originally posted by djbruuen ^ check out the ebay auction i listed on the last page...the sd500 is 7.1mp and it has everything you said, + the package comes with 1gb of mem

oops, I prolly should have mentionned that my budget is $150 to $300 CDN + shipping.

if size is an issue, the SD500 is a great camera. My cousin has one, and it takes excellent pictures. If size is not as much of an issue, or cost, then I would go with one of cannons S series cameras. I have a friend with an S70, and it takes phenomenal pictures. The quality of the lens surpasses any of the compact pocketsize cameras, and it really isnt that much larger. It has an assload of features that you would expect only on an SLR, and works great.

The latest version, the S80, is a little sleeker, and has a higher resolution (8 megapixel) although it is fairly pricy.

keep in mind megapixels has no relation to the quality of the picture anymore...this misconception started from when cameras were 1/2 mpix, 1mpix etc. 3mpix is all you really need, can print an 8x10 with no quality loss. If you're going to be cropping and editing then 5 is good, anything over 5 is a waste of money unless its got a better lense or features as well.

quote:

Originally posted by malek tiny cameras and good club pics don't go together

I guess If you haven't used the tiny cams you wouldn't know how to take good club pics with them...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.