what would you recommend for a tiny non-professional camera for casual snapshots?

[photographyJeane]

Hello everyone,

I'm trying to research a tiny camera I can use for casual snapshots when I am going somewhere, space is tight and I don't intend to do anything professional looking. I'm always lugging around my huge SLR and sometimes just wish I had something small for certain occasions.

I've typically used canon cameras, and am looking at the powershot series, but its been a while since I had anything point-and-shoot.

I definitely do not want anything with a huge amount of megapixels since this will not be for things I intend to print, and even so, what's on the market is way more than enough for printing giant pictures these days. (And taking up an incredible amount of hard drive space)
I am much more interested in the best lens (for the tiny kind of lens it is) and a good quality, easy to use camera.

Would be very appreciative of any recommendations.

 

[Rogan]

the canon G9 has been highly recomended ,ately

 

[potownrob]

Well, I definitely like my new Panasonic FX35, though I'd probably settle for the FX33 if I did it again, though the 25mm wide angle of the FX35 is hard to pass up. Both are nice and compact. I also had a Canon SD630 which was a good camera (though terrible in low light and no image stabilization and mediocre zoom) and compact. I'd probably go with the SD870 or SD800 if I got another small Canon. My sister now has that one since her SD600 started acting up (got wet and she used it a lot). If you want new but not too expensive but still small, the lowend Olympus FE series cameras seem to get good reviews, along with the Fujifilm J10 and the Fujifilm Z series cameras.

 

[zandman]

i'd go for a cybershot..

 

[Robin]

By "tiny" do you mean an especially small compact, like an Ultra Compact (as categorized on dpreview.com). If so, I like Canon's ELPH line for ultra compact cameras. They're very small but usually have minimal shutter lag (for a compact) - the downside is that some of them only have about a 3x zoom. That could mean they're putting quality before zoom amount but I don't know that for sure.

But this review of the SD950 says it has a "good quality lens" in the "pros" at the bottom: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SD950IS/SD950ISA.HTM
And the SD890 from the same website says "above average lens sharpness": http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SD890IS/SD890ISA.HTM
Some of the others in the ELPH line don't mention the lens quality but do comment on something like "very sharp images overall".

If you haven't already looked at that website (imaging-resource.com), I would check it out, they have very extensive reviews and details of many, many cameras.

 

[andrew99]

I second the Sony Cybershots.

 

[Roger]

if you're a Canon person I suggest sticking with a product you know, I have an Ixus 60 and take it everywhere including when I have my 13kg gear pack. I think the Ixus is an 80 now! Anyway they take great pictures in the right light, this means not too contrasty and the flash is quite okay for the limitations of a compact. You can also be creative with it, some of the images on my website were taken with the Ixus.

 

[DwainDibley]

If space is at a premium, there's always the old Sony Cyber-Shot U series, though these are only 2-megapixels and have no optical zoom, though do produce surprisingly good photos, and are still tiny and very light! Takes 'AAA' batteries too, which is a bonus.