Getting into Picture Editing, and Looking for Good Quality Camera

SAPierce2006 · May 7, 2009

Hey guys. I'm just getting into picture editing, and photoshop, and I've been really enjoying it. Taking pictures is something I've always enjoyed doing, and I always run into situations where I wish I had a camera, so this summer I figured I'd aim to buy one. I'm on a college student budget, and I'm probably going to be aiming to find something on craigs list in the next 2 to 3 months.

This is what I'm looking for:
1. Something small. I want to be able to carry it around with me 24/7. I always have a small messanger bag I have with me, and Ideally it would fit in there without causing too much of a bulge. However, I'm not willing to sacrifice quality for size, but at the same time, I'm absolutely not looking for one of these monstrosities with detachable lenses that actual photogrophers use(surely you know what I'm talking about?). I wouldn't be able to carry that around with me all the time.
2. I'm looking for something that is fairly decent quality, since I do plan on editing some of the photos, so I'm looking for something that spits out pretty high res photos.
3. I want something that doesn't pause for long periods of time before taking a picture. Too many times pictures are lost waiting. :-(

How much am I looking at spending? Ideally I'd like to spend $200-300 on a used camera or new camera (the less the better). I figured I'd find out what I'm looking for now, so I can start scanning craigslist for someone with the camera I want in good condition.

If someone has a guide or something that I can read on what I should look for in buying a camera, that'd be cool too. I used to know what f-stop and other things were, but I don't know any of that now, so any good readups would be welcomed. Thanks!

Sw1tchFX · May 8, 2009

Fuji F200 EXR

SAPierce2006 · May 8, 2009

Why do you choose that specific camera?

Big Mike · May 8, 2009

If you plan to focus on image editing, I'd go for a camera that can record RAW files. I'd suggest a Canon G series camera...they are considered by many to be the best Point & Shoot digital cameras. A new one is probably out of your price range but a used one should be OK.

SAPierce2006 · May 8, 2009

Humm... I just looked into the Cannon G10. I think I can grab one from someone over the summer for ~300-350 used. I'm pretty impressed with what I see there.

Katier · May 8, 2009

The Canon's are definatly a good choice, also worth considering is Panasonic's LX-3. This is an interesting camera because it is technically identicle to Leica's similar camera and has a Leica Lens. The Leica is only different cosmetically.

SAPierce2006 · May 8, 2009

Hmmmmm, looking at the Panasonic LX3 vs the Canon G10 brought me to the T25 which apparently a lot of people recommend. However, I also noticed that it doesn't save as RAW. It's also a lot cheaper it seems. How important would you say RAW is, and what are it's specific advantages over high quality JPEG besides less processing on the camera? From a photo editing perspective, why would I want RAW opposed to high quality JPEG?

I'd like to be able to shoot quality video with it, which the G10 lacks in, but that's also not really what I'm getting the camera for. I feel like I'm slightly leaning towards the LX-3 right now. Does anyone have any specific reasons for why I should go a specific way? What I might come down to, since I'm looking for a used camera, is I might just look for both until I find a good deal on one. I dunno.

Thoughts please? I've got a bunch of muddled information in my head, and I don't really know much about cameras myself, so I'd be much more comfortable hearing you guys thoughts on which camera you think is better overall (as in for general picture taking in bright, medium, and low light settings)?

Sw1tchFX · May 8, 2009

SAPierce2006 said:
Why do you choose that specific camera?

28mm wide angle, 800% increase in highlight dynamic range, High ISO performance that is better then said G10 and LX3, the most accurate color from compared to any other manufacturer ESPECIALLY with skin tones, and 6MP modes that look just as sharp as the files from my Nikon D70.

It's a no brainier, unless you need build quality.

SAPierce2006 · May 10, 2009

Sw1tchFX said:
28mm wide angle, 800% increase in highlight dynamic range, High ISO performance that is better then said G10 and LX3, the most accurate color from compared to any other manufacturer ESPECIALLY with skin tones, and 6MP modes that look just as sharp as the files from my Nikon D70.

It's a no brainier, unless you need build quality.

I see what you mean, and I'm tracking with you now. My only reservation about that camera is that it does not spit out RAWs. Only jpegs. Is that something I'm caring too much about? Because that's really what's stopping me from making my choice now.

Do'Urden's Eyes · May 10, 2009

If you want to edit your pictures youre definitely going to want your camera to spit out RAWs. They carry a tonne more information than JPEGs, which means you'll have more data to edit and play around with. RAW is like film, and shooting straight to JPEG is sort of like shooting a poloroid where the camera basically processes the picture for you. With RAW you have complete control of what the print will look like, unlike JPEGs.

So i say again, get a camera that shoots RAW, i believe its immensely apropriate and critical.

blash · May 10, 2009

RAWs are definitely easier to deal with in post-production - but there's a reason why a lot of wedding photographers will shoot in JPEG and not RAW. RAW's strengths are basically to let you muck around with settings that are set in stone with a JPG, like the white balance - if you get these things right the first time, then you don't need RAW! Also keep in mind that Photoshop can mess around with a lot of these settings (like white balance) in JPG files, just not *quite* to the level of control it can with a RAW.

What I'm basically trying to say is, I'd be a hell of a lot more worried about stuff like high-ISO performance and tonal range than I would about whether it spits out RAWs or not.

SAPierce2006 · May 10, 2009

KK, thanks for stressing that. I just spent a good amount of time comparing the G10 and the LX3's shots. 60Hz Productions - Canon G10 vs Panasonic LX3

I was initially pretty thrown off by the, what seems to be noise levels, of the Cannon G10, particularly in high ISO settings. But after comparing the two I almost feel like the G10 is better than the LX3. Plus more zoom. That's where I think I"m going to go.