2nd hand ones seem to be going for £200 on ebay, new ones for £250. If it was my money, I'd be going for a new one.
spec me a camera!
- Thread starter Cew27
- Start date
2nd hand ones seem to be going for £200 on ebay, new ones for £250. If it was my money, I'd be going for a new one.
If you have £300 to spend then I will highly reccomend a Canon PowerShot G9. The missus has just got one and its a fantastic camera, can be had for under £300 from the rainforest store.
Your parents must be loaded to buy you a server to run CoD4, a laser pen, a £300 camera and an EeePC.
Your parents must be loaded to buy you a server to run CoD4, a laser pen, a £300 camera and an EeePC.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 2,240
- Location
- Newcastle upon Tyne
Do not get the D40, you'll just have to upgrade sooner if you get into photography. Instead get a Nikon D50 (predecessor) as it has a few essential features the D40 and D60 lack.
Search for D40 threads in this forum to see the numerous reasons why.
Search for D40 threads in this forum to see the numerous reasons why.
Do you know what you want? It's difficult to spec for very vague requirements.
For the requirement of closeup pics, you'll need a macro lens. On a DSLR, these arent too cheap.
The 100mm f/2.8 canon is about £300, the nikon equivilent is about £500.
A lens for fast moving pics is a little more difficult to spec as it depends what that is fast moving. a 70-200 2.8 IS/VR comes in at about £1100.
These are all significantly outside of your price range, and may be more than you want to carry arround. My carry round bag weighs in at about 5 - 6kg.
If, however, you just want closeish pictures, in most situations, then go for a G9, or the nikon 5100. dSLRs are good for camera nerds (ducks at this comment, I love mine) but for most normal people, they aren't the right camera.
Doesn't sound like you really want and/or need a dSLR. Without having the faintest idea what one is or does, or what exactly you're getting yourself into in regards of equipment, I'd have thought you'd be better off with a decent point and shoot or a bridge. If you want a camera to stick in your pocket when you're out and about with mates, then an SLR isn't really for you.
I recently got my mother a Samsung from their NV line. Great cameras. Equally the Canon G series are good.
I recently got my mother a Samsung from their NV line. Great cameras. Equally the Canon G series are good.
im not after a camera that i can stick in my pocket, im after a decent one so that i can take pictures and alter them in photoshop ect, i dont need extreme close up shots just ones that can focus on an object about 1 foot away or so, also fas moving objects such as a person moving or a car, will i need separate lenses for all these or will one do the job ok, i dont need extreme pictures just some half decent sharp good detail ones.
my price range is from 200-300 preferably 250, i would need to get a all round lense (if these exist)
i arent wanting to get into photography as it is an expensive hobby.
ok so in short
300- price
needs to be able to take good pics of object about a foot close
good capture of moving objects
dont want to by specific lenses (expensive!)
not an in the pocket camera, a proper one
i really do appreciate the help
my price range is from 200-300 preferably 250, i would need to get a all round lense (if these exist)
i arent wanting to get into photography as it is an expensive hobby.
ok so in short
300- price
needs to be able to take good pics of object about a foot close
good capture of moving objects
dont want to by specific lenses (expensive!)
not an in the pocket camera, a proper one
i really do appreciate the help
Then seriously, without investing in some decent lenses to expand functionality over the kit lens, you'd be better off with a bridge. To get as close as a bridge can focus in macro mode, you'd need a macro lens and to get as far as one can zoom, you'd be needing a 300mm+ lens. Even with the kit lens, that leaves some pretty glaring gaps.
There are loads about. Take a look at some of these.
Canon G9
Canon S5 IS
Fuji S5700
Sony DSC-H50
Nikon P80
Many bridge cameras do RAW too. The G9 certainly does, as a starting point.
Well that would depend what you need it for, really.
Things to look out for:
ISO ratings. Higher ISO = better performance in low light but more image noise.
Burst rate. If you want to do sports / cars etc then it's obviously important.
IS. Image stabilisation.
Memory. You might want to make sure they take high-density cards.
Video. If you'd use it, the fps, res. etc.
JPEG / RAW. If you want to do some serious editing in PS then RAW is the way to go, though you can do lots with JPEGs too. Not that many do RAW and it's a good feature. Burst rates for cameras that do do RAW may be talking about JPEG burst, so watch out.
Don't get suckered into the 'more MP the better' argument. It's really not that important if you're not going to be doing massive prints and many high MP sensors end up recording a worse image than smaller ones. Google for some reviews of the cameras you like the look of.
Last edited:
ok lets say the
Sony Cybershot DSC-H50 Digital Camera vs the Fuji Finepix S5700
would they both be ok for stop motion videos of small items out of the box?
if i really did get into photography would the sony be better?
basically is it worth paying the extra for the sony and will it be a decent camera out of the box
Sony Cybershot DSC-H50 Digital Camera vs the Fuji Finepix S5700
would they both be ok for stop motion videos of small items out of the box?
if i really did get into photography would the sony be better?
basically is it worth paying the extra for the sony and will it be a decent camera out of the box
Do you really mean stop motion video? Stop motion video is the combination of stills - like this ...
Yes. It is far more feature rich, has a pretty good level of manual control and lots of things you can play around with, like exposure bracketing if you'd want to do HDR. A lot of the stuff is a bit gimmicky, though - like all the options with face and smile recognition - and I doubt the average person would ever really use a lot of the features.
They will both be excellent out of the box and I doubt you'd be disappointed with either. As for worth, well that's up to you.
Don't just look at those though, there are loads of bridge cameras out there. Those just came off the top of my head.
Last edited:
I've just purchased a S5700, and I'm a complete beginner, so please bare this in mind from the following info
S5700
The S5700 isn't a compact, it's a bridge camera, so you wont fit it in your jeans pocket. The manual focus is next to useless if your not using a tripod as you have to hold down a button on the back of the camera whilst using the zoom lever, but the auto focus is excellent (I assume all cameras are good at this now).
It has an excellent LCD on the back, and an excellent internal LCD which you can use through the viewfinder. BUT! You cannot change the focus on the viewfinder, so if you wear glasses like me the viewfinder LCD will be blurry
so I have to wear my glasses which reduces my stability when taking shots using the viewfinder.
The camera I got has firmware 1.02 already on it, which provides SDHC support as well as SD and XD (I'm talking memory cards here). I would advise you read up on this as I'm not 100% sure of the differences and wouldn't want to mislead you.
The modes you can use are Auto (point and click and everything is done for you, you can turn the flash on/off in this mode). Manual: you can set the ISO, shutter speed, and aperture yourself (see below). Aperture mode: all settings are auto except for aperture which you choose. Shutter mode: all settings are auto except for shutter speed which you choose. Program mode: there are some preset shutter speed + apeture combinations which you can choose from.
Regarding the quality of the pictures, it's best I stay schdum on this subject because I've taken no outdoors shots (it's been raining), and I wouldn't know how to judge the quality anyhow for now. But, I have read that picture quality degrades over 400 ISO (see below). I've taken plenty of pics indoors, but I don't think it's fair to comment on the quality purely based on these: I bought it for entirely outdoors purposes.
Don't quote me
No doubt I've said many times in this post that I'm new to this too lol So thought that a fellow beginner may be able to explain some of the techie stuff (and hope that others can correct me!):
Shutter speed
Affects: brightness of your pics, blurry pictures
Shutter speed is of course the duration that the image sensor in your camera is exposed to the light to record your image. Fast shutter speed means less light gets in so you get darker pictures. Fast shutter speed will reduce any blurryness (not a techie term) from your shaky hands though. Slow shutter speed will increase bluryness from shaky hands, but will let in more light so brighter pictures. Shutter speed is measured in seconds, but you will see settings as 40, 20, 5 etc which mean 1/40th of a second 1/20th of a second etc. So bigger numbers mean bigger denominators (500 means 1/500th of a second) which means faster shutter speeds.
Aperture
Affects: brightenss of your pics, depth of field
Aperture is the size of the hole that lets light through to your image sensor. A big aperture means lots of light gets through (a big hole), a small aperture means a small hole and little light gets through. Aperture is not measured in the diameter of the hole or the radius of the hole though. It is measured in f-stops. The terminology is confusing for a beginner, so I'll have a stab at it:
Large aperture = small f-stop number (say 3.5) = big hole = lots of light
Small aperture = large f-stop number (say 6.8) = small hole = little light
I wont bore you with the mathematics of it, but if you have a reasonable understanding of [Area of circle = pi*radius squared] I can explain if needs be. So why bother having a small aperture (small hole, large f-stop number) when you will have to have compensate with a slower shutter speed (more chance of bluryness) to get enough light onto the image sensor? This is because aperture determins Depth of Field. A large DOF is where something near to the camera and something further away from the camera both remain in focus, a small DOF means that only things a particular distance from the camera will be in focus (check here):
Large apeture (big hole, lots of light) = small depth of field (small focus area)
Small apeture (small hole, little light) = large depth of field (large focus area)
Of course by focus area I mean that range of distance moving away from your camera. So if you want to take a pic of someones face while blurring the background (to bring attention to the face) you want a relatively small DOF, which means a larger apeture which allows you to have a fast shutter speed (which is nice, as it reduces the chance of blurring). But if you want a large depth of field (you want things in focus near and far from the camera) you need a large depth of field and thus a small apeture (small hole, little light) so you need a slower shutter speed (longer shutter speed, let more light in to compensate, more chance of bluryness).
ISO
In the old days, film had different 'speeds'. This referred to a physical property of the film deliberately produced in the films production. A fast film meant little light was needed for good exposure (enough light to make a nice pic), a slow film meant a lot of light was needed for good exposure. In the digital world film is of course not used, but this 'speed' is applicable when considering the sensitivity of the image sensor. When you take a shot, light hits the image sensor pixels and through some magik this is converted into electronic signals that are stored as numerical values - essentially the colours of each pixel. The thing is is that you can change the amplitude (think of this as the strength of the electric signal) of the electric signal produced from light hitting a pixel: increasing it means higher sensitivity to light, decreasing it means lower sensitivity to light: you can set this sensitivity through a discrete range of values known as the ISO:
small ISO (ISO 100 say) = low sensitivity to light = slow speed = darker pics
high ISO (ISO 800 say) = high sensitivity to light = fast speed = lighter pics
But there is a tradeof. You would be tempted to set ISO as high as it will go, as this results in lighter images (the image sensor is essentially more sensitive), so you can use a faster shutter speed (lets in little light but reduces bluryness). But a higher ISO increases 'grain' (I believe it is called) which is also known as 'noise' which is imperfections in your resultant images (look on the web for examples). So:
low ISO (ISO 100) = less light sensitivity = darker pics = little or no grain/noise
high ISO (ISO 800) = high light sensitivity = lighter pics = a lot of grain/noise
Have I waffled on this much?
To sum up:
Shutter speed: brightness of your pics, affects bluryness
Apeture: brightness of your pics, affects Depth Of Field
ISO: brightness of your pics, affects amount of grain/noise
So, when you're taking a pic you may want a medium amount of depth of field to keep things in focus say over ten feet (this is a very arbitrary example), which means your aperture will have to be fairly small (smaller aperture = larger depth of field), which means you have to get more light into the camera, which means either a slower shutter speed (more chance of blur if hand held) or a higher ISO (more chance of grain/noise).
I'm a noob remember And I've waffled on considerably, but its helped me get my head around this stuff, and hopefuly others can correct me where my reasoning or info is wrong. If you havn't found any of this interesting I would take a guess and say you need a compact, if you have found this interesting like me, then maybe you need a not too expensive bridge camera (like the S5700) with manual settings that you can learn with like me.
The s5700 is said to have noticeable graining over ISO 400 (it has ISO settings of 64, 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1600), but your care for this or personal sensitivity to this I suppose will vary. It is regarded as a relatively 'slow' camera, meaning the largest aperture (largest setting for the size of the hole that lets in the light) isn't as big as it could be, meaning you are going to have to compensate to get more light into it in darker environments, by either upping the ISO (light sensitivity but you'll get more grain/noise) or slowing down the shutter speed (shutter open for longer, more light in, but more chance of your shaky hands causing a blurry image). Here is a review of it, maybe my waffling here will help you understand it better:
nformative review here
S5700
The S5700 isn't a compact, it's a bridge camera, so you wont fit it in your jeans pocket. The manual focus is next to useless if your not using a tripod as you have to hold down a button on the back of the camera whilst using the zoom lever, but the auto focus is excellent (I assume all cameras are good at this now).
It has an excellent LCD on the back, and an excellent internal LCD which you can use through the viewfinder. BUT! You cannot change the focus on the viewfinder, so if you wear glasses like me the viewfinder LCD will be blurry
so I have to wear my glasses which reduces my stability when taking shots using the viewfinder.The camera I got has firmware 1.02 already on it, which provides SDHC support as well as SD and XD (I'm talking memory cards here). I would advise you read up on this as I'm not 100% sure of the differences and wouldn't want to mislead you.
The modes you can use are Auto (point and click and everything is done for you, you can turn the flash on/off in this mode). Manual: you can set the ISO, shutter speed, and aperture yourself (see below). Aperture mode: all settings are auto except for aperture which you choose. Shutter mode: all settings are auto except for shutter speed which you choose. Program mode: there are some preset shutter speed + apeture combinations which you can choose from.
Regarding the quality of the pictures, it's best I stay schdum on this subject because I've taken no outdoors shots (it's been raining
), and I wouldn't know how to judge the quality anyhow for now. But, I have read that picture quality degrades over 400 ISO (see below). I've taken plenty of pics indoors, but I don't think it's fair to comment on the quality purely based on these: I bought it for entirely outdoors purposes.Don't quote me
No doubt I've said many times in this post that I'm new to this too lol So thought that a fellow beginner may be able to explain some of the techie stuff (and hope that others can correct me!):
Shutter speed
Affects: brightness of your pics, blurry pictures
Shutter speed is of course the duration that the image sensor in your camera is exposed to the light to record your image. Fast shutter speed means less light gets in so you get darker pictures. Fast shutter speed will reduce any blurryness (not a techie term) from your shaky hands though. Slow shutter speed will increase bluryness from shaky hands, but will let in more light so brighter pictures. Shutter speed is measured in seconds, but you will see settings as 40, 20, 5 etc which mean 1/40th of a second 1/20th of a second etc. So bigger numbers mean bigger denominators (500 means 1/500th of a second) which means faster shutter speeds.
Aperture
Affects: brightenss of your pics, depth of field
Aperture is the size of the hole that lets light through to your image sensor. A big aperture means lots of light gets through (a big hole), a small aperture means a small hole and little light gets through. Aperture is not measured in the diameter of the hole or the radius of the hole though. It is measured in f-stops. The terminology is confusing for a beginner, so I'll have a stab at it:
Large aperture = small f-stop number (say 3.5) = big hole = lots of light
Small aperture = large f-stop number (say 6.8) = small hole = little light
I wont bore you with the mathematics of it, but if you have a reasonable understanding of [Area of circle = pi*radius squared] I can explain if needs be. So why bother having a small aperture (small hole, large f-stop number) when you will have to have compensate with a slower shutter speed (more chance of bluryness) to get enough light onto the image sensor? This is because aperture determins Depth of Field. A large DOF is where something near to the camera and something further away from the camera both remain in focus, a small DOF means that only things a particular distance from the camera will be in focus (check here):
Large apeture (big hole, lots of light) = small depth of field (small focus area)
Small apeture (small hole, little light) = large depth of field (large focus area)
Of course by focus area I mean that range of distance moving away from your camera. So if you want to take a pic of someones face while blurring the background (to bring attention to the face) you want a relatively small DOF, which means a larger apeture which allows you to have a fast shutter speed (which is nice, as it reduces the chance of blurring). But if you want a large depth of field (you want things in focus near and far from the camera) you need a large depth of field and thus a small apeture (small hole, little light) so you need a slower shutter speed (longer shutter speed, let more light in to compensate, more chance of bluryness).
ISO
In the old days, film had different 'speeds'. This referred to a physical property of the film deliberately produced in the films production. A fast film meant little light was needed for good exposure (enough light to make a nice pic), a slow film meant a lot of light was needed for good exposure. In the digital world film is of course not used, but this 'speed' is applicable when considering the sensitivity of the image sensor. When you take a shot, light hits the image sensor pixels and through some magik this is converted into electronic signals that are stored as numerical values - essentially the colours of each pixel. The thing is is that you can change the amplitude (think of this as the strength of the electric signal) of the electric signal produced from light hitting a pixel: increasing it means higher sensitivity to light, decreasing it means lower sensitivity to light: you can set this sensitivity through a discrete range of values known as the ISO:
small ISO (ISO 100 say) = low sensitivity to light = slow speed = darker pics
high ISO (ISO 800 say) = high sensitivity to light = fast speed = lighter pics
But there is a tradeof. You would be tempted to set ISO as high as it will go, as this results in lighter images (the image sensor is essentially more sensitive), so you can use a faster shutter speed (lets in little light but reduces bluryness). But a higher ISO increases 'grain' (I believe it is called) which is also known as 'noise' which is imperfections in your resultant images (look on the web for examples). So:
low ISO (ISO 100) = less light sensitivity = darker pics = little or no grain/noise
high ISO (ISO 800) = high light sensitivity = lighter pics = a lot of grain/noise
Have I waffled on this much?
To sum up:
Shutter speed: brightness of your pics, affects bluryness
Apeture: brightness of your pics, affects Depth Of Field
ISO: brightness of your pics, affects amount of grain/noise
So, when you're taking a pic you may want a medium amount of depth of field to keep things in focus say over ten feet (this is a very arbitrary example), which means your aperture will have to be fairly small (smaller aperture = larger depth of field), which means you have to get more light into the camera, which means either a slower shutter speed (more chance of blur if hand held) or a higher ISO (more chance of grain/noise).
I'm a noob remember
And I've waffled on considerably, but its helped me get my head around this stuff, and hopefuly others can correct me where my reasoning or info is wrong. If you havn't found any of this interesting I would take a guess and say you need a compact, if you have found this interesting like me, then maybe you need a not too expensive bridge camera (like the S5700) with manual settings that you can learn with like me.The s5700 is said to have noticeable graining over ISO 400 (it has ISO settings of 64, 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1600), but your care for this or personal sensitivity to this I suppose will vary. It is regarded as a relatively 'slow' camera, meaning the largest aperture (largest setting for the size of the hole that lets in the light) isn't as big as it could be, meaning you are going to have to compensate to get more light into it in darker environments, by either upping the ISO (light sensitivity but you'll get more grain/noise) or slowing down the shutter speed (shutter open for longer, more light in, but more chance of your shaky hands causing a blurry image). Here is a review of it, maybe my waffling here will help you understand it better:
nformative review here
Last edited: