Best small superzoom camera with best quality and cheapest price?

[snapsnap1973]

I'm wondering what a good superzoom camera that's relatively small and costs less and has good image quality.

 

[brunerww]

Hi snapsnap, and welcome to the forum. Many people here would be glad to help, but we need to know a price range. Costs less than what?

Bill

 

[Benco]

My wife just got a Lumix TZ30, £190 and pretty impressive performance for such a small camera. Wouldn't mind one myself, it's small enough to live in my pocket for whenever I'd need it.

 

[snapsnap1973]

Well, say around $300-400

 

[snapsnap1973]

Hi snapsnap, and welcome to the forum. Many people here would be glad to help, but we need to know a price range. Costs less than what?

Bill

300-400 USD

 

[pixmedic]

Samsung WB150f
samsung wb150f in Digital Cameras | eBay

or its newer version the WB850F
samsung wb850f in Digital Cameras | eBay

great camera. within your budget. both have WIFI.

 

[TCampbell]

Because best quality and cheapest price are typically traits that go together?

Be realistic. If you want cheapest price then you DON'T want best quality. You'll want to prioritize your needs to make a reasonable selection.

If there is a particular type of use you have planned than it's critical that the camera can handle that particular use -- regardless of price. If this is a general purpose camera and you don't have a specific use then you can prioritize on price... but keep in mind that there will simply be things that the camera can't do.

You wont be buying a $99 camera and then using it to shoot sports games indoors, under poor lighting, from the top row of the bleachers at the very back with the camera at maximum zoom. That's not going to happen.

 

[snapsnap1973]

I mean the best for the money that I'm willing to spend. This will be a general purpose camera for landscape, travel, etc. No sports or studio or anything. I basically want something like a superzoom that can take pretty descent quality shots.

 

[snapsnap1973]

Because best quality and cheapest price are typically traits that go together?

Be realistic. If you want cheapest price then you DON'T want best quality. You'll want to prioritize your needs to make a reasonable selection.

If there is a particular type of use you have planned than it's critical that the camera can handle that particular use -- regardless of price. If this is a general purpose camera and you don't have a specific use then you can prioritize on price... but keep in mind that there will simply be things that the camera can't do.

You wont be buying a $99 camera and then using it to shoot sports games indoors, under poor lighting, from the top row of the bleachers at the very back with the camera at maximum zoom. That's not going to happen.

I mean the best for the money that I'm willing to spend. This will be a general purpose camera for landscape, travel, etc. No sports or studio or anything. I basically want something like a superzoom that can take pretty descent quality shots.

 

[brunerww]

Hi snapsnap, it's a little above your price target, but I think the $429 Canon SX50 is what you're looking for. It is the 2012 Digital Camera Info "Best Super-Zoom" of the year.

I saw in the mirrorless forum that you were interested in being able to take pictures of the Moon. Here is what the SX50 and its 50:1 zoom can do (credit: ephotozine):



If you want the best bang for the buck interchangeable lens camera at about the same price, I recommend the $416 Samsung NX1000 camera with its DSLR sized sensor, 20.3MP resolution and wi-fi sharing. Here is what this amazingly inexpensive camera can do:

Flickr: The Samsung NX1000 Pool


Hope this is helpful,

Bill

 

[Plantman]

I just returned a Canon SX50 because of the image quality. I'd consider the SX40 over it if RAW isn't a big deal. I'm moving up to a DSLR