Newbie seeks camera suggestions

[rowekmr]

Hello
I have had a few HP and now Sony point and shoot compact digital cameras. The current one is Sony Cyber Shot DSC-W180. It has 10.1 MP and 3x optical zoom. I mainly take pics of my family when we travel and go places locally and thus far I am running up against a few limitations that I am starting to notice:

1. Not enough zoom (I find myself walking closer sometimes)
2. The auto focus is slow at times sometimes not even able to focus my long range shot. I don't know if it is related but sometimes the follow up shot in a fast moving environment (airshows) don't allow my camera to catch the follow up shot in time.
3. Many places have a ban on flashes and those pictures either come out dark or blurry (or both) when I turn off the flash.

I wanted to get a new camera if there is no way to make adjustments with mines and if so I would like to stay on the low end price wise less than $300 if possible. Should I stay with point and shoot or possible move on to SLR cameras? Any help or recommendations would be appreciated.

 

[robbins.photo]

Well I would probably recommend DSLR - the reason for that was that you mentioned that you shoot in places that ban flashes and that your having problems getting better pictures in lower light conditions. Ok, first understand that a DSLR is not a magic bullet when it comes to shooting in low light. It is much, much better than a point and shoot or what they call a "bridge camera" at shooting in low light because it has a much larger sensor. But even a DSLR will struggle under certain lighting conditions, particularly if your subject happens to be moving.

Ok, for DSLR under $300 your options are going to be a little limited, but you can take a look at something like this:

Nikon D3100 14 2 MP Digital SLR Camera w 18 55mm VR Lens Refurbished by Nikon 018208130269 | eBay

The D3100 is an older camera but still very capable, will give you good image quality and perform reasonably well in lower light conditions. The image quality will be a huge step up from what your used to if your using a point and shoot. Night and day really.

 

[rowekmr]

Thanks for the response. Interesting enough I read about the camera you suggested in another thread here on recommendations. The link you sent me was not selling them anymore but I found others that were slightly more refurbished by Nikon. Are refurbished cameras (by the manufacturer) reliable?

I read in other point and shot reviews that low lighting pictures can be troublesome and some mention ISO settings which I read has an effect on low light pictures. Is this something that is preferably chosen by the auto setting of the camera or can it be set manually while the rest of the camera functions in auto? If it is manually set how does the user know which number is best, will the view finder show the changing effect or only the picture will show the outcome?

Thanks

Hello
I have had a few HP and now Sony point and shoot compact digital cameras. The current one is Sony Cyber Shot DSC-W180. It has 10.1 MP and 3x optical zoom. I mainly take pics of my family when we travel and go places locally and thus far I am running up against a few limitations that I am starting to notice:

1. Not enough zoom (I find myself walking closer sometimes)
2. The auto focus is slow at times sometimes not even able to focus my long range shot. I don't know if it is related but sometimes the follow up shot in a fast moving environment (airshows) don't allow my camera to catch the follow up shot in time.
3. Many places have a ban on flashes and those pictures either come out dark or blurry (or both) when I turn off the flash.

I wanted to get a new camera if there is no way to make adjustments with mines and if so I would like to stay on the low end price wise less than $300 if possible. Should I stay with point and shoot or possible move on to SLR cameras? Any help or recommendations would be appreciated.

 

[goodguy]

Consider getting a Canon G12 or maybe Canon G15, excellent point and shoot cameras close to your price range.

 

[SCraig]

Thanks for the response. Interesting enough I read about the camera you suggested in another thread here on recommendations. The link you sent me was not selling them anymore but I found others that were slightly more refurbished by Nikon. Are refurbished cameras (by the manufacturer) reliable?

Anybody can claim a camera body has been factory-refurbished. I strongly recommend that you deal with someone reputable such as B&H Photo Video, Adorama, Calumet Photo, KEH, etc. If you are unsure ask about them here and see if anyone has dealt with them. Those I mentioned have been around for years and I doubt you will find many that have EVER had a problem with any of them.

I read in other point and shot reviews that low lighting pictures can be troublesome and some mention ISO settings which I read has an effect on low light pictures. Is this something that is preferably chosen by the auto setting of the camera or can it be set manually while the rest of the camera functions in auto? If it is manually set how does the user know which number is best, will the view finder show the changing effect or only the picture will show the outcome?

ISO is a function of the amount of amplification or sensitivity of the sensor. Higher sensitivity means that it is more sensitive to light however it also means that it is more sensitive to internal electrical noise. Noise manifests itself as "Grain" in digital photographs (although I hate to call it "Grain" since it really isn't), and most entry-level camera bodies have much higher noise levels than better bodies. You will not see it through the viewfinder since what you see is what the lens sees before the shutter opens. In addition, noise can be reduced in-camera using noise reduction algorithms in the camera's firmware or during editing afterwards.

In reality your goals are not all that reasonable. A $300 DSLR is going to most likely be a used entry-level DSLR with a "Kit" lens in the 18-55mm zoom range. You might get lucky and find one with a bit longer zoom but in that price range it still isn't going to be the best glass. While the image quality and autofocus will be much better than what you have now, the zoom level is going to be rather low and the body and lens most likely something you will outgrow rather quickly. My recommendation would be to stick with what you have until you can save some additional funds to put with your $300. When you get upwards of $500 your choices will be a lot better.

 

[robbins.photo]

Thanks for the response. Interesting enough I read about the camera you suggested in another thread here on recommendations. The link you sent me was not selling them anymore but I found others that were slightly more refurbished by Nikon. Are refurbished cameras (by the manufacturer) reliable?

I read in other point and shot reviews that low lighting pictures can be troublesome and some mention ISO settings which I read has an effect on low light pictures. Is this something that is preferably chosen by the auto setting of the camera or can it be set manually while the rest of the camera functions in auto? If it is manually set how does the user know which number is best, will the view finder show the changing effect or only the picture will show the outcome?

Thanks

I've never had a problem with refurbished, just make sure your buying from a reputable dealer and authorized Nikon reseller, Adorama, B&H Photo, and KEH all have good reputations and have been around for quite a while. Most of there refurbished will come usually with a 1 year warranty as well, so you're pretty safe ordering from one of them.

You can set the ISO on most DSLR's in most modes and let the camera handle the rest if you wish. The biggest difference in lowlight situations between a DSLR and a point and shoot or bridge camera is the size of the sensor, for a smaller camera the sensor is also pretty small, and as a result the low light performance is usually really bad. The DSLR has a much larger sensor, so you generally get much better results shooting in lower lighting conditions. It also generally gives you much better noise handling capabilities at the same ISO as a point and shoot or bridge camera would.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/101097886@N03/11144374403/

Quick example, this was actually shot at ISO 6400 - on a bridge camera that's usually enough to make the picture far to grainy to even be useful.

 

[rowekmr]

I looked at both and it seems the G12 is more expensive even though it's an older model?

Consider getting a Canon G12 or maybe Canon G15, excellent point and shoot cameras close to your price range.

 

[goodguy]

I looked at both and it seems the G12 is more expensive even though it's an older model?

Consider getting a Canon G12 or maybe Canon G15, excellent point and shoot cameras close to your price range.

G12 should be cheaper and is indeed older but it is still a very good capable camera with all the functions of a DSLR.
Its the P&S camera for the photography enthusiast.

 

[rowekmr]

I already found out my budget is a limitation because even the ones mentioned thus far are 350+. Without sacrificing the things you mentioned what is the lowest price model that you can recommend?

Thanks for the response. Interesting enough I read about the camera you suggested in another thread here on recommendations. The link you sent me was not selling them anymore but I found others that were slightly more refurbished by Nikon. Are refurbished cameras (by the manufacturer) reliable?

Anybody can claim a camera body has been factory-refurbished. I strongly recommend that you deal with someone reputable such as B&H Photo Video, Adorama, Calumet Photo, KEH, etc. If you are unsure ask about them here and see if anyone has dealt with them. Those I mentioned have been around for years and I doubt you will find many that have EVER had a problem with any of them.

I read in other point and shot reviews that low lighting pictures can be troublesome and some mention ISO settings which I read has an effect on low light pictures. Is this something that is preferably chosen by the auto setting of the camera or can it be set manually while the rest of the camera functions in auto? If it is manually set how does the user know which number is best, will the view finder show the changing effect or only the picture will show the outcome?

ISO is a function of the amount of amplification or sensitivity of the sensor. Higher sensitivity means that it is more sensitive to light however it also means that it is more sensitive to internal electrical noise. Noise manifests itself as "Grain" in digital photographs (although I hate to call it "Grain" since it really isn't), and most entry-level camera bodies have much higher noise levels than better bodies. You will not see it through the viewfinder since what you see is what the lens sees before the shutter opens. In addition, noise can be reduced in-camera using noise reduction algorithms in the camera's firmware or during editing afterwards.

In reality your goals are not all that reasonable. A $300 DSLR is going to most likely be a used entry-level DSLR with a "Kit" lens in the 18-55mm zoom range. You might get lucky and find one with a bit longer zoom but in that price range it still isn't going to be the best glass. While the image quality and autofocus will be much better than what you have now, the zoom level is going to be rather low and the body and lens most likely something you will outgrow rather quickly. My recommendation would be to stick with what you have until you can save some additional funds to put with your $300. When you get upwards of $500 your choices will be a lot better.

 

[robbins.photo]

I already found out my budget is a limitation because even the ones mentioned thus far are 350+. Without sacrificing the things you mentioned what is the lowest price model that you can recommend?

Actually Scott's suggestion of waiting and increasing your budget a bit might be the way to go, for a little bit more you can get into a good model like a D5100 which will give you a lot more capabilities. You can do the bridge camera thing if you prefer or if you simply cannot wait, but just be aware you will be sacraficing a lot in terms of low light capabilities. Most bridge cameras do very well in good lighting, they are lightweight and portable, and you don't have to worry about swapping lenses. The drawback of course being that with the smaller sensor your looking at reduced image quality and the ability to compensate when shooting in lower lighting conditions.

 

[SCraig]

I already found out my budget is a limitation because even the ones mentioned thus far are 350+. Without sacrificing the things you mentioned what is the lowest price model that you can recommend?

I would not recommend a Nikon body lower than the D5100 personally. I had a D60 several years ago, which was then replaced by the D3xxx series, and found its performance pretty poor. Then I realized that some (but not all) of the poor performance was from my lenses and when I started getting better lenses image quality got better.

DSLRs are not an inexpensive game and there's no real limit as to how much or how little one can spend. The limitations are in image quality and how much that quality is worth to one financially. All other things being equal, a $5,000 body with a $10,000 lens is going to create better image than a $300 body with a $150 lens.

Lenses are the big dollar items and when you start getting into longer focal lengths the dollar signs climb quickly. My recommendation for you would be something like a Nikon D5100 with a 18-140mm lens to start out with. That lens alone is $569 new though, and the D5100 body is $547 with no lens. It will give you about 4x telephoto zoom and about 2x wide-angle zoom (although we seldom refer to anything as an "x" factor since it's really meaningless). I've never personally used that lens so others here may have a better idea, but something like that would give you some level of wide-angle and some level of telephoto.

 

[robbins.photo]

I already found out my budget is a limitation because even the ones mentioned thus far are 350+. Without sacrificing the things you mentioned what is the lowest price model that you can recommend?

I would not recommend a Nikon body lower than the D5100 personally. I had a D60 several years ago, which was then replaced by the D3xxx series, and found its performance pretty poor. Then I realized that some (but not all) of the poor performance was from my lenses and when I started getting better lenses image quality got better.

DSLRs are not an inexpensive game and there's no real limit as to how much or how little one can spend. The limitations are in image quality and how much that quality is worth to one financially. All other things being equal, a $5,000 body with a $10,000 lens is going to create better image than a $300 body with a $150 lens.

Lenses are the big dollar items and when you start getting into longer focal lengths the dollar signs climb quickly. My recommendation for you would be something like a Nikon D5100 with a 18-140mm lens to start out with. That lens alone is $569 new though, and the D5100 body is $547 with no lens. It will give you about 4x telephoto zoom and about 2x wide-angle zoom (although we seldom refer to anything as an "x" factor since it's really meaningless). I've never personally used that lens so others here may have a better idea, but something like that would give you some level of wide-angle and some level of telephoto.

Of course you can get much better deals if you go refurbished or used - but really it just sort of depends on what you think is going to work best for you overall. In this case one of the big advantages of the bridge camera is also a bit of a disadvantage as well - you can get more capabilities for a cheaper initial investment - problem is that whatever you've bought is pretty much it. With DSLR your going to have a higher initial investment, but as your needs change and grow you don't have to replace the entire camera - you can get new lenses, or maybe just upgrade the body, etc.

Realy there isn't a wrong choice here - you just need to decide what's going to work best for you and your situation.

 

[rowekmr]

I checked out the D3100 previously mentioned

Nikon D3100 Digital SLR Camera w 18 55mm VR Lens Refurbished by Nikon 25472B 018208130269 | eBay

and the D5100 that you mention

Nikon D5100 w 18 55mm VR Nikon Factory Refurbished 25478B 0018208254781 | eBay

Why do you recommend the D5100 over the D3100?

I already found out my budget is a limitation because even the ones mentioned thus far are 350+. Without sacrificing the things you mentioned what is the lowest price model that you can recommend?

Actually Scott's suggestion of waiting and increasing your budget a bit might be the way to go, for a little bit more you can get into a good model like a D5100 which will give you a lot more capabilities. You can do the bridge camera thing if you prefer or if you simply cannot wait, but just be aware you will be sacraficing a lot in terms of low light capabilities. Most bridge cameras do very well in good lighting, they are lightweight and portable, and you don't have to worry about swapping lenses. The drawback of course being that with the smaller sensor your looking at reduced image quality and the ability to compensate when shooting in lower lighting conditions.

 

[robbins.photo]

I checked out the D3100 previously mentioned

Nikon D3100 Digital SLR Camera w 18 55mm VR Lens Refurbished by Nikon 25472B 018208130269 | eBay

and the D5100 that you mention

Nikon D5100 w 18 55mm VR Nikon Factory Refurbished 25478B 0018208254781 | eBay

Why do you recommend the D5100 over the D3100?

I already found out my budget is a limitation because even the ones mentioned thus far are 350+. Without sacrificing the things you mentioned what is the lowest price model that you can recommend?

Actually Scott's suggestion of waiting and increasing your budget a bit might be the way to go, for a little bit more you can get into a good model like a D5100 which will give you a lot more capabilities. You can do the bridge camera thing if you prefer or if you simply cannot wait, but just be aware you will be sacraficing a lot in terms of low light capabilities. Most bridge cameras do very well in good lighting, they are lightweight and portable, and you don't have to worry about swapping lenses. The drawback of course being that with the smaller sensor your looking at reduced image quality and the ability to compensate when shooting in lower lighting conditions.

The 5100 is a much better camera overall - much better image quality, shoots a little faster than the D3100, better low light performance, will let you do in camera HDR for landscapes and such. The 5100 is a great all around camera for the price - I own one myself in fact - most of my shots are taken with a D5100 and a 70-300mm Nikkor lens.

 

[rowekmr]

Is the 18 55mm a good all around lenses? Is the equivalent to 3x zoom? I'm looking at both Nikons but found one (3100) with 2 lenses that I will watch the bidding:

New Nikon D3100 14 2MP Double Zoom Lens Kit 18 55 55 200 mm Lens 018208097982 | eBay