Which Camera? **Please read OP first**

smallgarden

hello
I'm looking for a compact point and shoot camera to replace a canon ixus 70. I am thinking of getting the canon ixus 265hs which is around 160euros but was wondering if anyone had any other recommendations. I've found the canon ixus really good to date. I was also looking at the powershot sx600 which would be about ten euros more than the ixus,
Thanks

sashafierce

This post has been deleted.

Saruman

Using a DSLR requires a learning curve. Even if all you do is use it on automatic mode, there are too many options for what you want.

A good bridge camera will be your best option I think.

Personally, I want the control that comes with a manual DSLR but that's just me.

sebphoto

sashafierce take a look on Powershot G11, G12, G1x and similar cameras.
At least you will have a chance to learn how to setup everything manually or if you're lazy you will use program mode.

Damien360

Hi folks

I have been reading this thread for a long while and I am still not sure.

We currently have a point and click Fuji which does nicely for outdoors as long as it is not landscape you want but fails miserably for indoor or action shots. Lighting is the issue.

Indoor general use required but also dance hall (feis) at 30 feet away which always has poor lighting. These would be the action shots. I take the odd landscape shots but I am alone in the family in their appreciation.

I decided on a DSLR to achieve lighting and shutter speed and in that repect it was between the nikon d3200 and the d3300. Better ISO in d3300 and reviews marginally better, especially for battery life. Prices vary wildly for each. Nikon because the menu system seems simpler than canon plus I had a canon camcorder and the software was bloody awful. I will not be post processing at all so SD card to PC will be extent of it.

The bridge camera price seems too close to DSLR price to justify it and it just seems to be an expensive point and click. Should I stick with point and click (good bridge camera) or invest in DSLR for my requirements.

Can you recommend a camera for my needs (family camera needs if I am honest).

Thanks

kearneybobs

My dad went with the Powershot S120. Ended up getting it for £230. Supposed to be really good in low light with the only downside being that the battery doesn't last that long.

candytog

Damien360 wrote: »

Hi folks

I have been reading this thread for a long while and I am still not sure.

We currently have a point and click Fuji which does nicely for outdoors as long as it is not landscape you want but fails miserably for indoor or action shots. Lighting is the issue.

Indoor general use required but also dance hall (feis) at 30 feet away which always has poor lighting. These would be the action shots. I take the odd landscape shots but I am alone in the family in their appreciation.

I decided on a DSLR to achieve lighting and shutter speed and in that repect it was between the nikon d3200 and the d3300. Better ISO in d3300 and reviews marginally better, especially for battery life. Prices vary wildly for each. Nikon because the menu system seems simpler than canon plus I had a canon camcorder and the software was bloody awful. I will not be post processing at all so SD card to PC will be extent of it.

The bridge camera price seems too close to DSLR price to justify it and it just seems to be an expensive point and click. Should I stick with point and click (good bridge camera) or invest in DSLR for my requirements.

Can you recommend a camera for my needs (family camera needs if I am honest).

Thanks

I think the key word there is "invest" in the dslr. If you spend the money on a bridge camera you will get an excellent camera but with a dslr you will get an excellent camera with the potential to become even better.

The nikons will give you great low light performance due to their large image sensors. The weakest link with a new dslr is the it's lens so in time it is worth investing in a lens that suits your needs. Not that the lens is bad, it's just there are better to upgrade to.

For example, a better lens will let in more light and make your camera even better in low light situations.

Another point to consider is the zoom range on the kit lens will likely be only 4x optical. This is pretty standard in the dslr world but if you are used to a longer zoom range this is important. Of course you can purchase a longer lens if that's what you are looking for.

sashafierce

This post has been deleted.

Kenny Logins

sashafierce wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

A 'Bridge' between a 'point and shoot' camera and a DSLR.

candytog

sashafierce wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's a general term for an advanced digital camera that sits between a simple point and shoot and a dslr (or mirrorless cameras with removable lens).

They typically have advanced features like manual controls and the ability to shoot raw while having a fixed lens.

sashafierce

This post has been deleted.

dinneenp

sashafierce wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Bridge camera-
a lot bigger than a compact but smaller than a Dslr.
It has a viewfinder, MASSIVE zoom, focuses very close up compared to a Dslr.
Have a look here.

You can pay a lot for a top end one (€800) or not much for a standard one (€300).
Picture quality isn't meant to be as good as a Dslr but for snapshots & picking it up as a hobby, general use camera who cares. It'll take 1/500 of a second of so longer than a dslr to take the photo but no big deal.

I began with one and loved it. Great to start with as it's a jack of all trades. You could even buy one 2nd hand and if you get the photography bug sell it for pretty much the same price you paid for it.

candytog

dinneenp wrote: »

Bridge camera-
a lot bigger than a compact but smaller than a Dslr.
It has a viewfinder, MASSIVE zoom, focuses very close up compared to a Dslr.
Have a look here.

You can pay a lot for a top end one (€800) or not much for a standard one (€300).
Picture quality isn't meant to be as good as a Dslr but for snapshots & picking it up as a hobby, general use camera who cares. It'll take 1/500 of a second of so longer than a dslr to take the photo but no big deal.

I began with one and loved it. Great to start with as it's a jack of all trades. You could even buy one 2nd hand and if you get the photography bug sell it for pretty much the same price you paid for it.

The term is pretty arbitrary, there is no set criteria for a camera to be considered a "bridge". There are lots that don't have viewfinders or large zoom ranges. Superzooms are generally considered bridge cameras but so are others like the sony rx100.

Mike Litoris

Bridge cameras usually have the same type/size sensors as P+S cameras. There is a huge difference in image quality and ISO performance so be careful.


I took the route of p+s, bridge then dslr many moons ago. If you have the money and feel you have a passion for photography, my advice would be to leap straight for a DSLR. Don't fear it, they all have auto and are way easier to learn due they're responsiveness imo. Whatever brand you go for, the first thing I would get is a cheap 2nd hand 50mm f1.8 lense.

justoon

alright so i was just about to buy Canon EOS 100D Digital SLR
with EF-S 18-55 DC III and 40mm STM Lenses
the whole package £500

and then a friend offered me
this
Olympus E-420 with lenses for €100

i wanted to buy a camera to get into photography and im stumped cause i know feck
all
what should i do?

arcius

justoon wrote: »

alright so i was just about to buy Canon EOS 100D Digital SLR
with EF-S 18-55 DC III and 40mm STM Lenses
the whole package £500

and then a friend offered me
this
Olympus E-420 with lenses for €100

i wanted to buy a camera to get into photography and im stumped cause i know feck
all
what should i do?

Canon 100d is much much more advanced, much more newer and the image quality is much better because of the up to date processor. Go with it. Just don't pay 500 pounds as you can get it with that lens for around 470 euros delivered to your door

justoon

arcius wrote: »

Canon 100d is much much more advanced, much more newer and the image quality is much better because of the up to date processor. Go with it. Just don't pay 500 pounds as you can get it with that lens for around 470 euros delivered to your door

where will i get it for that price
pm me or send here please

regards
j

arcius

justoon wrote: »

where will i get it for that price
pm me or send here please

regards
j

sent you a pm

fro9etb8j5qsl2

Just wondering what would be the standard of camera needed to branch out into semi-professional photography, ie doing a few paid portrait shoots etc in spare time? I've been using a canon 1100d since my 650d went to heaven last year and I find it great for personal use but not sure if it would be good enough to use professionally. I have the standard 18-55 lens that came with the camera and also a 50mm 1.8f and a 70-200 f 4.0.

Mike Litoris

Lorelei Alive Stovepipe wrote: »

Just wondering what would be the standard of camera needed to branch out into semi-professional photography, ie doing a few paid portrait shoots etc in spare time? I've been using a canon 1100d since my 650d went to heaven last year and I find it great for personal use but not sure if it would be good enough to use professionally. I have the standard 18-55 lens that came with the camera and also a 50mm 1.8f and a 70-200 f 4.0.

I think lenses, lighting, editing software and maybe some props would be more important for portaits. Most entry level cameras will do a decent job. It depends on what you do with it and the quality of the lense that have the biggest impact.

fro9etb8j5qsl2

Brilliant that's what I was hoping thanks I have loads of props etc but could do with updating my studio equipment alright.

bpmurray

I've had a few bridge cameras (the latest is a Lumix FZ72 with an insane 1200mm zoom) but I'd like to switch to something with a better sensor. I'm pretty confident that the future lies with mirrorless cameras, but I suspect that they're not yet at the same level as DSLRs.

I'm pretty sure that the Nikon D3300 will give the most bang for the buck for the DSLR side of the argument, and there are a zillion mirrorless at that price point although most of them don't have a viewfinder.

My question is: what's a good mirrorless and is it as good as the D3300?

Mike Litoris

From my own experience. I've an Oly epl3 + 20mm 1.7 and it doesn't compare to my Nikon D90 or Fuji S5 + 30mm 1.4. Granted the Oly is all about size so everything is smaller which includes the sensor. So the main trade offs with the above are speed, viewfinder and depth of feild versus size.

I wanted something small and it does come in handy but the results and handling are somewhere between a P+S and a DSLR.

I dont keep with the times so I've no idea what the latest tech is. Maybe there is something new that closed the gap but you'll surely be looking at big bucks.

cnocbui

bpmurray wrote: »

I've had a few bridge cameras (the latest is a Lumix FZ72 with an insane 1200mm zoom) but I'd like to switch to something with a better sensor. I'm pretty confident that the future lies with mirrorless cameras, but I suspect that they're not yet at the same level as DSLRs.

I'm pretty sure that the Nikon D3300 will give the most bang for the buck for the DSLR side of the argument, and there are a zillion mirrorless at that price point although most of them don't have a viewfinder.

My question is: what's a good mirrorless and is it as good as the D3300?

Mirrorless cameras can now compete with DSLRs except the higher end full frames. AF tracking in low light and very high ISO are about the only areas where they are not equal.

In terms of price, they aren't as competitive. Good ones with a viewfinder and IQ the equal of the D3300 would be the Olympus E-M10 at the lower end of the price range. It is more expensive than the D3300 but is also a lot smaller - as are the lenses.

da_shivsta

Okay so I have had a few compact cameras. My last one was the Canon Ixus 132. I really loved it but I lost it drunk in a taxi
I went in to Curry's the other day looking at a few cameras. The Ixus 155 was there but it has some poor reviews online. It can be hard to tell what standards the reviews are based upon though. Obviously, with a compact camera you are not expecting professional quality really.
I am no longer bringing my camera on a night out because all my friends have fancy phones with a flash anyway (which I don't have!!) and they take more than enough drunken snaps.

Anyway, the long and the short of it - should I upgrade to a bridge camera?
I can't afford a real SLR and anyway wouldn't need it. Some nice pictures of birds, butterflies, flowers and family and things like that are what I want. My friend has a bridge camera that is just sitting in her room because she says it isn't any better than a compact, really but it's bulkier. I don't know what brand it is or anything. I'm just looking for advice really???

jos28

First time posting in this forum and am looking for some advice. We are buying a camera for my son for his birthday. He's been doing his research and likes the Nikon d3200. Any ideas on the best place to look for one either new or second hand ?
Any other suggestions in the same price bracket. It's his first 'real' camera and he'll be using it for a variety of things - nothing specific.

cnocbui

A lot of people seem happy with E Global Central:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057154505&page=25
http://www.eglobalcentral.eu/?subcats=Y&status=A&pshort=Y&pfull=Y&pname=Y&pkeywords=Y&search_performed=Y&q=nikon+d3200&dispatch=products.search

Amazon would be another option.

jos28

Thanks for that Cnocbui, nice prices on that link. The one he is looking at is €130 cheaper than anywhere else I checked. Might throw a bag in for him too at that rate.
Cheers

h_orse

Hello guys,


Was hoping to get a camera for the other half for xmass...

I know nothing about cameras.

She is mad for an upgrade, she only has a basic model think its canon at the min.


Just saw this one advertised on the top of the page


Canon EOS 100D

Mad about Canon Cameras

Basically taking photos quite alot and miminal videos



Some pointers in the right direction would be brilliant....

€400 to €450 max price wise


Thanks in advance.....:o

h_orse

arcius wrote: »

Canon 100d is much much more advanced, much more newer and the image quality is much better because of the up to date processor. Go with it. Just don't pay 500 pounds as you can get it with that lens for around 470 euros delivered to your door

Help me out here pls.....



Thank you