File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
/p/
im getting into photography
but i have no "proper" camera for actual photography
i have a digital camera that gets the job done but i need help with what a good camera is to get hopefully under 300 USD
please help


<--- current camera sony dsc-w5
its get the job done but i want a more serious camera as i get more and more into it
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution120 dpiVertical Resolution120 dpiImage Created2005:01:27 17:53:31Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width320Image Height233
>> Anonymous
Go on ebay and get a film slr for $20

Or get a Canon S2 IS, it's somewhere around $300
>> Anonymous
>>33667
now that i just looked at that camera
i realize i have no idea what to look for i na camera
>> Anonymous
>>33670

Elaborate.
>> Anonymous
Casio EX-Z700.

retail $280

I just got one. It is sweet.
>> Cameras Duke
The EX-Z700 is a great camera, but if you're shooting for more "professional" pictures (no pun intended), then I would go for the Canon S2 or S3. I've got an S3, and it's the best bang for your buck on the market. Sony's making a good mid-range camera, too, the Cyber-shot H2, but for $300, that could be tricky. But the feature and quality gap between the normal, $300 retail cameras and the ones just one step above like the S3 and the H2 is enormous, and very worth the extra dough, in my opinion.
>> angrylittleboy !wrJcGUHncE
Interesting thread. Like OP, I have also worked my L1 to death for almost two years and looking towards getting a better camera. DSLRs seem the logical choice, but changing lenses kinda put me off (risk of getting dust on the sensors & having to buy expensive lenses).

My choices include the Panasonic FZ50 & the Canon S3. The price of the FZ50 is crazy, but I'm a bit wary about the quality of the pics taken by the S3. So from S3 owners, is it worth getting instead f the FZ50?
>> Anonymous
>>33683

well of course its not going to get the same quality as a "real" camera. (slr)

but i am very impressed at the z700

i could have got a sony, but sony = fail
>> Duke
I would love to have the Panasonic FZ50, but the extra $150 that it costs isn't quite worth it to me (Amazon.com pricing). I mean, the specs are better than the S3, but for all that extra money, it doesn't put much forth.
>> Anonymous
Just grab a film SLR off ebay for $20. They're durable as hell, and it'll help you learn more about photography before spending big bucks on better digital cameras.
>> Anonymous
the reason many people stay away from film SLR cameras is because they want quick results and don't want to have to pay (and wait) for a consumer photolab to develop their pictures... as well as the ability to edit their shots in Photoshop (without the hassle of scanning) to get the results they want rather than what the technician thinks most people would like... ... ...I loved photography when I was growing up (highschool), but with all you end up paying for film (the film itself and processing), you could just make up the difference from less than a year's worth of prints and get a digital SLR or a SLR-like digicam...

A camera I thoroughly enjoy working with is the SLR-like Kodak P850... the price has come down considerably since my mother got it (to take vacation photos) it's 5.1 MP, "image stabalized" (though a tripod will still do good!), and has a 12x optical zoom and is about $265 on Amazon

I have a small P&S digital camera from Polaroid that I'll be keeping in my purse to take pictures with (i773... the pink breast cancer cameras) that's 7MP... but, in all honesty, I'd rather take shots with a DSLR if I want to make large prints. I have a "professional" camera I use for work or artistic shots and the P&S for something that catches my eye or moments of silliness with friends (a small P&S is easy enough to carry around so that I can actually take pictures)