I'm in the market for a new digital camera and I'm sure there are plenty of knowledgeable people here who would just love to help me pick one. Here's the problem....I'm not really sure of what I want/need. I'd like to get a bit more serious into photography, but at this point I am very amateur. Heck, I didn't even know what aperture really meant until a couple of days ago (as you can tell by the arch pic below). I'd like something that I can have with me all the time, but I don't know if that necessarily means it has to be pocket sized. I'd rather have a nice camera I can really learn on and take great pictures with over just a handy size.

I do know that I want it to be fast. Right now I have a 6ish year old Sony DSC s85. It was a nice camera when we got it, but it's just sluggish. I'd like something where you push the button and the picture is snapped without the 1 second pause in between. I take too many pictures of my kids, and by the time the picture is snapped they've moved on to something else. Also, I'd like a quick reset between pictures. I've tested a few out that have about a 4 second pause between pictures...I don't like that.

I saw a camera yesterday that had a macro/super-macro setting. I hadn't really thought about it before, but I'd like something like that. Is that a setting you need to look for, or can that just be done with manual adjustments?

I can't decide if I'd rather have a camera with AA batteries, or a charger type deal. My Sony has to be charged and usually what happens is that I go to take a picture and the battery is dead. AAs are easy to replace, but they probably don't last as long (although I'd get rechargeables anyway). Maybe a battery level indicator would be helpful so I knew when it was time for a charge.

I've been looking at Canon's mostly, but recently started looking at Fuji too. I'm interested in Nikon too.

So, I'm guessing I'll be getting a point and shoot, but I've seen some Canon digital SLRs online for around $450. That's a bit higher of a price than I was looking at, but maybe it would be worth it if it really was that much better. The high speed photo taking appeals to me especially.

So, with my very limited help here, does anyone have any comments or suggestions? Any specific aperture ranges, ISO ranges, or anything else I should specifically look for as a must-have?

Here are a few of my recent shots on my old camera. Like I said, I'm just starting to learn about photography, so this is all just auto settings at 4 megapixels.

Then you need to get a dSLR. My wife likes to take pictures of our dogs catching frisbees and such and our old camera wasn't up to snuff. After a lot of research I found out that the dSLR is the way to go. We now have the 10MP Cannon Digital Rebel XTi. It's pretty nice and it takes pictures right when you push the button.

That's what I've discovered, but until DSLRs come down to <$300, I have to live with my Canon Elph thingie.

I was looking at this Canon dSLR 8 MP
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0007QKN22/ref...

One thing I noticed in the reviews is that you can't use the big screen for lining up and taking your shots...it's only for review and menus. Is the 10MP like that too?

As a "serious amateur" myself, given the research I have done, I found that a good intro camera is the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18. It's a pseudo-SLR (the viewfinder has a LCD screen so it just mimicks) at a good price, with very good Leika lens and an insane 18x optical zoom (yes, optical). It supports RAW and I think that's what you'd have to aim for in the first place.

It has a proprietary battery, unfortunately, but the result is a surprisingly compact and light camera.

Also, keep in mind that a true SLR is not a very practical travel camera, given all the hardware. Think carefully about your needs before acquiring one.

http://tinylink.com/?gnpygYoSPJ

That link leads you to dpreview.com where you can do side-by-size comparison of cameras.

They (dSLR's) are ALL like that except for one relatively new Olympus model. The view through the eyepiece is truer (WYSIWYG) than the viewscreen and so is preferred by serious photographers.

If you want to get more serious about photography, I'd say a digital SLR is the way to go. I bought a Canon 400D (Rebel XTi) about a year ago, and it's been my most-used gadget ever. Yes, it's bigger and heavyer than a compact (depending on the lens you use, potentially a lot bigger and heavier!), but it opens up a whole new range of possibilities for your photography.

The reasons that made me go the SLR route include these:

1) I can choose between many different lenses (doh!), allowing for great flexibility. With a fixed lens compact I am limited to the zoom range, aperture, etc. of the lens built into the camera. With an SLR I can have wide-angle zooms, standard zooms, telephoto lenses, dedicated macro lenses, fast primes, etc., using just the one that is applicable at the time.

2) Having a fast lens (=lens with large maximum aperture) allows me to play with low depth of field in my pictures. Very nice for, say, portrait photography, artistic game component pictures, etc.

3) For low-light photography, SLRs rule. Without flash, the superior high ISO characteristics of SLRs allow very nice natural light photos (especially with large aperture lenses). Alternatively, using an external flash that can be bounced off, say, the ceiling, allows for flash photography looking much, much nicer than what you can get from a compact camera.

4) Depending on the autofocus speed of the lens used, there is potentially very little delay between half-pressing the button and taking the picture.


Of course, the unlimited flexibility you get from being able to change lenses comes at a price - literally. "Lens lust" is a dangerous disease among photo enthusiasts, and one that really makes one appreciate just how cheap a hobby boardgaming really is!

So, in conclusion "more serious about photography" strongly points in the direction of an SLR. But of course, compact cameras (or even "SLR-like" fixed-lens cameras) are cheaper, smaller and lighter, and you have to work out just how much each of these concerns matter to you.

I believe some of the latest Canons (40D, 1D mk.3) and possibly a new Sony camera have this too.

When I first got my Canon SLR, I too was a bit worried about not being able to use the LCD as a viewfinder anymore. Turns out my concerns were unfounded. As fizzix says, the optical viewfinder feels much superior and I don't miss using the LCD for that purpose a bit.

The best way of avoiding the problems of lens lust is to have a dead relative that owned 30K worth of lenses that are compatible with a modern digital SLR. The problem then becomes transporting the lenses on long trips.

Yes, SLRs are miles better than a compact camera as far as picture quality and versatility. It's just a matter of physics.

I'm not a camera expert either but when I was researching one for my father who is also very much an amateur but wanted a decent camera with good zoom features we chose this as the best choice:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/panasonic_tz3.ht...

It's quite inexpensive for the features it has and has good zoom and is quite a compact design.

The Leica optical lens is a good quality one which is one of the reasons we chose this particular Panasonic model.

Read the last page for this particular reviewers conclusions and you can decide whether it's speedy enough for you:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/panasonic_tz3_pg...

This camera might be a notch below a DSLR in terms of speed (I'm not certain as I've never used a DSLR) but I do think it likely would be able to accomplish 95% of everything you would want and for probably half the price of a decent DSLR as well.

Again, just my suggestion as it's basically the best digital camera we could find in terms of bang-for-the-buck ratio.

Can't add much more info that people above have already said. We jumped into the DSLR market several years ago with the Digital Rebel (the first Canon DSLR that was consumer priced) and have never looked back. I love the quick shutter (ability to take action shots)




And I love being able to change lenses. We have acquired some nice lenses for it now: the kit lens zoom 18-55, a tamron macro lens, a f1.4 50mm lens and the Bigma (Sigma zoom 50-500).

If the price point of a DSLR is too high right now, then just wait and save up some more money. You won't regret it. We are now in the market for a new body - obviously it will have to be canon considereing our lenses.

That is also one thing to consider, if you are going to go with a DSLR, is to maybe research the lenses that you think are best and then go with that brand of camera.

Check out www.dpreview.com