Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
How about the Canon SD300 (IXUS 40)? From the reviews I've read, it's
the best camera in the $300 price range.
How about the Canon SD300 (IXUS 40)? From the reviews I've read, it's
the best camera in the $300 price range.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
On 5 Apr 2005 03:01:11 -0700, "Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
I just did this exercise yesterday, bought a Konica-Minolta Z10,
but it only cost $187 (delivered). @ buydig.com
On 5 Apr 2005 03:01:11 -0700, "Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
I just did this exercise yesterday, bought a Konica-Minolta Z10,
but it only cost $187 (delivered). @ buydig.com
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
"Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
Hard to tell. I'd check the offerings on dpreview.com . Things to
consider are effective zoom range, sensitivity, F number of lense,
megapixels, memory card type.
Cross check with ebay to see if there is a decent deal out there since
many people like to finance upgrades by selling the old camera.
A lot of this depends on you and your needs. Just to put something
out there a minolta dimage z1 might be in the ball park if you like to
shoot both near and far and 3MP on SD cards appeals to you.
No, I don't own one, never had one but my uncle has one and he likes
it. The other day he was sure that my Sony V3 7MP camera had to be
better for bird shots than his. Well not really. He has a 10x zoom
and 3MP. I have a 4x zoom, a 1.7x tele attachment and 7mp. Works out
close enough to be the same.
There you have it, a suggestion which is a challenge to others to
knock it down and offer a better choice.
HTH,
Wes
--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Gee Tee EYE EYE dot COM
Lycos address is a spam trap.
"Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
Hard to tell. I'd check the offerings on dpreview.com . Things to
consider are effective zoom range, sensitivity, F number of lense,
megapixels, memory card type.
Cross check with ebay to see if there is a decent deal out there since
many people like to finance upgrades by selling the old camera.
A lot of this depends on you and your needs. Just to put something
out there a minolta dimage z1 might be in the ball park if you like to
shoot both near and far and 3MP on SD cards appeals to you.
No, I don't own one, never had one but my uncle has one and he likes
it. The other day he was sure that my Sony V3 7MP camera had to be
better for bird shots than his. Well not really. He has a 10x zoom
and 3MP. I have a 4x zoom, a 1.7x tele attachment and 7mp. Works out
close enough to be the same.
There you have it, a suggestion which is a challenge to others to
knock it down and offer a better choice.
HTH,
Wes
--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Gee Tee EYE EYE dot COM
Lycos address is a spam trap.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
I'd find the Panasonic DMC-FZ3 on sale for $300. I'd wait if necessary.
Perfect camera to complement my C-5060. $329 right now, but it'll go on
sale when the FZ4 and FZ5 are finally available everywhere.
If I couldn't find a FZ3 for under $300, I'd probably get a Canon S1-IS
- selling for $310 at B&H right now, again, it'll come down soon.
ECM
I'd find the Panasonic DMC-FZ3 on sale for $300. I'd wait if necessary.
Perfect camera to complement my C-5060. $329 right now, but it'll go on
sale when the FZ4 and FZ5 are finally available everywhere.
If I couldn't find a FZ3 for under $300, I'd probably get a Canon S1-IS
- selling for $310 at B&H right now, again, it'll come down soon.
ECM
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Certainly the kodak cx 7430 which sells for 240 euro here.
--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering, freelance electrician
FH von Iraklion-Kreta, freiberuflicher Elektriker
dimtzort AT otenet DOT gr
? "Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> ?????? ??? ??????
news:1112692498.385359.107590@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
>
Certainly the kodak cx 7430 which sells for 240 euro here.
--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering, freelance electrician
FH von Iraklion-Kreta, freiberuflicher Elektriker
dimtzort AT otenet DOT gr
? "Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> ?????? ??? ??????
news:1112692498.385359.107590@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
>
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
"Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1112692498.385359.107590@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
Canon A95. $299 at BH Photo.
"Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1112692498.385359.107590@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
Canon A95. $299 at BH Photo.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
"Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> writes:
> If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
Probably the Canon A510 at $200 or so. It's reasonably pocketable,
has a well-evolved user interface, takes good pictures and uses standard
AA batteries which can be a real convenience when travelling etc.
If I was absolutely required to spend more (but stay under the $300
limit), then the very similar A520 which is maybe $250(?). The A520
has more pixels but higher noise.
"Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> writes:
> If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
Probably the Canon A510 at $200 or so. It's reasonably pocketable,
has a well-evolved user interface, takes good pictures and uses standard
AA batteries which can be a real convenience when travelling etc.
If I was absolutely required to spend more (but stay under the $300
limit), then the very similar A520 which is maybe $250(?). The A520
has more pixels but higher noise.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Newbie wrote:
> If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
Canon A510 or 520.
Now, if you are not a complete new comer to photography, and you want a
pocketable 'Swiss knife', all-weather go-anywhere, decent digicam -- an
Austin Mini of the camera world -- I'd suggest Ricoh Caplio R1v (or R2 if
you are happy taking shots not looking through a viewfinder). I believe it
is Rollei dr5 in the USA. It has enough functions to be much more versatile
than a simple point-and-shoot camera. The pictures are sharp, detail and
*natural* in colour rendition, unlike the more popular makes where they are
bright and cheery (enhanced red) and therefore more appealing -- 'charming',
literally -- to the general users. The darker tone usually levied upon it
can be readily rectified with any photo editing software (the camera comes
with one). All these extra functionalities put the *fun factor* back to
taking photographs! (Read reviews and scrutinize the photo samples)
This may be going over budget, but who doesn't want to.....in choosing a
camera?
--
Lin Chung.
[The Water Margins of Liang Shan Po were at the time of the Sung dynasty.
Replace that with "ntlworld" for emails.]
Newbie wrote:
> If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
Canon A510 or 520.
Now, if you are not a complete new comer to photography, and you want a
pocketable 'Swiss knife', all-weather go-anywhere, decent digicam -- an
Austin Mini of the camera world -- I'd suggest Ricoh Caplio R1v (or R2 if
you are happy taking shots not looking through a viewfinder). I believe it
is Rollei dr5 in the USA. It has enough functions to be much more versatile
than a simple point-and-shoot camera. The pictures are sharp, detail and
*natural* in colour rendition, unlike the more popular makes where they are
bright and cheery (enhanced red) and therefore more appealing -- 'charming',
literally -- to the general users. The darker tone usually levied upon it
can be readily rectified with any photo editing software (the camera comes
with one). All these extra functionalities put the *fun factor* back to
taking photographs! (Read reviews and scrutinize the photo samples)
This may be going over budget, but who doesn't want to.....in choosing a
camera?
--
Lin Chung.
[The Water Margins of Liang Shan Po were at the time of the Sung dynasty.
Replace that with "ntlworld" for emails.]
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
On 5 Apr 2005 03:01:11 -0700, "Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
I'd buy the best film camera I could find.
On 5 Apr 2005 03:01:11 -0700, "Newbie" <chromallly@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
I'd buy the best film camera I could find.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
DJ wrote:
>>If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
>
>
> I'd buy the best film camera I could find.
I guess you'd be pretty unhappy with the file format you get from a film camera, and
after a year of shooting you might well have spent enough to have bought a $1000 camera.
Personally, I'd buy the camera that had the widest lens, along with full manual
capability, and RAW. For the most part performance and features will be comparable,
but there would still be less than unanimous agreement on which camera best meets
those criteria.
--
Steve
The above can be construed as personal opinion in the absence of a reasonable
belief that it was intended as a statement of fact.
If you want a reply to reach me, remove the SPAMTRAP from the address.
DJ wrote:
>>If you have $300, which digital camera would you buy?
>
>
> I'd buy the best film camera I could find.
I guess you'd be pretty unhappy with the file format you get from a film camera, and
after a year of shooting you might well have spent enough to have bought a $1000 camera.
Personally, I'd buy the camera that had the widest lens, along with full manual
capability, and RAW. For the most part performance and features will be comparable,
but there would still be less than unanimous agreement on which camera best meets
those criteria.
--
Steve
The above can be construed as personal opinion in the absence of a reasonable
belief that it was intended as a statement of fact.
If you want a reply to reach me, remove the SPAMTRAP from the address.
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter