Author Topic: Best small digital camera for <$250 (Read 5178 times)

atek3 · « **on:** May 27, 2005, 04:33:14 PM »

I asked around for a a good small digital camera for <$250, my photographer friend recommended the canon powershot A95...great camera, takes spectacular photos, but is huge.
Another one recommended a Minolta DimageX50, which might fit the bill. Any other good, small, cheap (sub-250) digital cameras?

thanks,

atek3

Silver Bullet · « **Reply #1 on:** May 27, 2005, 05:06:57 PM »

I'm not a camera guy, and I've never owned a digital camera before my Canon A85, but I'm very impressed with it. I got mine on sale for less than $250, but the regular retail might be more.

LaTropa64 · « **Reply #2 on:** May 27, 2005, 05:40:49 PM »

Canon Digital Elph:

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=145&modelid=10599

I have an older model that they don't make anymore and it's served me well. It's tiny! It's the kind of camera that you can throw in your pocket and hardly know you have.

Paddy · « **Reply #3 on:** May 28, 2005, 07:38:24 PM »

How about this one:
http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/product_detail.do?BV_SessionID=@@@@1753745008.1117341448@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccchaddekfjmfgmcfngcfkmdfondfgf.0&product_code=Q2232A%23ABA&aoid=24315&category=digital_cameras&catLevel=3&storeName=storefronts&subcat1=see_all

DigMe · « **Reply #4 on:** May 30, 2005, 05:30:01 AM »

Also happy with my Canon Powershot A75. The newest generation of that is the A500 series such as the A510 (3mp) and the A520(4mp). They are smaller due to using half the batteries and an SD memory card rather than Compactflash. Don't get caught up on megapixels. Four megapixels is plenty. For my uses printing out 4x6s and 5x7s 3 megapixels is plenty. There are 3megepixel cameras that take better pics than 5 megapixel cameras. The most important thing is getting a camera that gets high ratings across the board for performance and photos.

Check out www.steves-digicams.com and www.dpreview.com for some detailed recomendations and reviews.

brad cook

Silver Bullet · « **Reply #5 on:** May 30, 2005, 05:44:42 AM »

RileyMc: Yours is one cent too low for his requirements !

DigMe · « **Reply #6 on:** June 02, 2005, 09:40:52 AM »

Just came across an incredible deal! Using these coupons you can get the Canon Powershot A510 for a whopping $139 from Dell! I can't imagine finding a better deal for a casual point-and-shoot digital camera.

http://www.slickdeals.net/#p6136

If you buy it you need to enter the 20% off coupon first and then enter the $20 off coupon.

brad cook

crt360 · « **Reply #7 on:** June 02, 2005, 12:26:00 PM »

It may be too big for your requirements, but the Olympus C-740 Ultra Zoom (3.2 megapixel, 10x optical zoom) is a great camera that has gradually come down from $400+ to $250 or less at several places.

Read a review here: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/c740uz.html

thorn · « **Reply #8 on:** June 04, 2005, 12:29:20 AM »

maybe i just got lucky, but i got a canon a310 on ebay for $70 shipped- (medium grade camera)
about $50 less than in store- so you might want to consider that for whatever model you decide on

DigMe · « **Reply #9 on:** June 04, 2005, 04:41:02 AM »

If you buy the A310 though just know that it has no optical zoom and that digital zoom is worthless if you actually want to print out pictures.

brad cook

InfidelSerf · « **Reply #10 on:** June 04, 2005, 09:35:09 AM »

I love my little Pentax Optio MX this link is for the 4MP version http://www.pentaximaging.com/products/product_details/digital_camera--OptioMX4/reqID--1018/subsection--optio
I have the 3MP version which was about $220 at wally world.

It records video at 640x480 30fps on a 128MB SD card you get about 5minutes of high quality video.

It's very compact and I've been very pleased with the battery life. I took a trip to Vegas for 2 days and I shot over 300 images and about 10minutes of video on one charge. Half of those with the flash.

Oh and did I mention it has a 10x optical zoom. Hard to find that high of an optical zoom in that price range.

atek3 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 07, 2005, 11:08:28 AM »

ya but the optio MX looks really funny. like a mini camcorder.

I've been shooting on a few different camera's lately. I've played with a 2.0 megapixel camedia from Olympus, definetly need more res.

This was a shot taken by it:

I also played with the canon powershot A95. I didn't take this shot:

What a difference 3 mp makes. I'm deciding whether to get a 4 or 5 mp camera.

atek3

DigMe · « **Reply #12 on:** June 07, 2005, 12:42:48 PM »

Quote from: atek3

http://www.southbayriders.com/forums/uploads15/100146.jpg

What a difference 3 mp makes. I'm deciding whether to get a 4 or 5 mp camera.

atek3

It's not necessarily the megapixels that make the difference. I've taken some stunning pictures with the two 3 megapixel cameras that I have. The sensor, optics and size of the pixels play a much larger factor in the quality of the image. The noise and blurriness you see in the first picture is most likely a result of other factors aside from megapixels. Considering the size of both of those pictures in this thread a quality 2mp camera with someone who knows how to use it could have easily taken as good a picture as the second one.

Here are some images I've taken with a 3mp Powershot A70. I'm not saying that these are the "stunning" pictures but they give a good idea of colors and image quality. Keep in mind that they have all been compressed for internet viewing so you lose some quality in that:

Playing with the panorama option:

brad cook

atek3 · « **Reply #13 on:** June 07, 2005, 02:02:05 PM »

wow, those are incredible pictures, thats with a 3mp? impressive.

atek3

DigMe · « **Reply #14 on:** June 07, 2005, 06:00:45 PM »

Yeah, the Canon Powershot A70. I have the A75 now and it has better red-eye reduction and some nice features. Both are 3mp.

The reason people put so much stock into the megapixels is because that's what the companies push. Believe it or not some companies recently put out new models that ROLLED back on the number of megapixels for the first time ever. That's because the sensors on some of the ones that were being used were not creating very good pictures. The reason is that in order to fit so many megapixels on a small sensor the megapixels have to be smaller, which makes for inferior pictures. So really at the 3mp point a big sensor is more important than another megapixel...unfortunately the sensor size is not typically advertised.

The only thing is you will start to see difference between a 3mp and a 5mp if you blow up pictures really big, however, for 4x6 and most 5x7's there's typically little to no difference between the printed output of a really good 3mp camera and a really good 5mp camera. Beyond 5mp it's pretty much all just bragging rights. Wink

Seriously though..for some good recommendations go to www.steves-digicams.com and www.dpreview.com and check out the recommended cameras section. At Steve's I usually jump ahead to the "Final Conclusions" section using the pulldown menu at the top of each camera's review pages. Both of those guys are often really spot on regarding the things they point out about the cameras.

If you want to get decent quality at 4mp at your price point then Kodak is probably your only good choice. There are several good choices at under $250 in 3mp.

brad cook

DigMe · « **Reply #15 on:** June 09, 2005, 04:00:56 AM »

Just thought I'd post another great digicam deal that I came across. YOu can get the 5mp Kodak CX7530 from Dell with a 256mb SD card all for $179 if you use two stackable Dell coupons. See the info here:
http://www.slickdeals.net/#p6163

This is a highly rated point-and-shoot digital camera and that's a helluva deal. Use the 20% off coupon first and then enter the $20 off coupon. I really can't think of any other quality 5mp cameras for anywhere near this price just off the top of my head.

BTW, www.snapfish.com now does 12 cent prints on digital pics. I haven't used them yet but I read an article in PC Magazine in which the author seemed to feel they had the best quality of anyone he tried including ofoto, shutterfly, a quality personal photo printer and a couple of drugstores and kiosk. You can't beat that price on prints!

brad cook

garrettwc · « **Reply #16 on:** June 13, 2005, 06:51:31 AM »

Dig me has already given some great answers.

Here's a good article on the megapixel myth.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

Here's a quick example of how megapixels work. A typical 17 inch monitor runs at 1024x768 pixels. That's 786,432 total pixels or less than 1 megapixel. In other words, on a typical computer screen a 1MP camera with a decent sized sensor and a good lens will look as good as a 6-8 megapixel camera. Because the computer strips away the additional MPs to fit it on the screen.

Where you would see the difference is in prints.

larry_minn · « **Reply #17 on:** June 13, 2005, 08:47:37 AM »

I just saw a Sony cybershot 4.1 megapixle with 3x optical. It was $200. Wife has the 5.0 MP one. She likes it. It is small/easy to use. BUT IMO a 5x would be wonderful. (optical) You can digitally (zoom) in but there is (some) loss in quality. (depending how far you go/how much you blow up image) It is a VERY small camera and newer ones use AA batteries incase your rechargable goes dead away from power source. (wifes uses propiratory battery) Sad

garrettwc · « **Reply #18 on:** June 13, 2005, 10:53:34 AM »

larry_minn makes an interesting point.

Whatever you get, try to avoid anything proprietary. If you find one that has standard AA batteries and takes a compact flash card rather than SD or Sony's memory stick, then if you decide to move up to a DSLR you won't have to start over again purchasing new memory cards.

DigMe · « **Reply #19 on:** June 13, 2005, 10:53:56 AM »

Quote from: larry_minn

I just saw a Sony cybershot 4.1 megapixle with 3x optical. It was $200. Wife has the 5.0 MP one. She likes it. It is small/easy to use. BUT IMO a 5x would be wonderful. (optical) You can digitally (zoom) in but there is (some) loss in quality. (depending how far you go/how much you blow up image) It is a VERY small camera and newer ones use AA batteries incase your rechargable goes dead away from power source. (wifes uses propiratory battery) Sad

Oh yeah, that's another thing. I definitely would look for one with rechargable AAs!

brad cook

DigMe · « **Reply #20 on:** June 15, 2005, 04:50:18 AM »

Gotta post some more great camera deals again!

Look at the "Tuesday 06/14/05" section:

www.slickdeals.net

Kodak LS753 5mp for $179, Canon A95 for $209 with online coupons and discounts

brad cook

atek3 · « **Reply #21 on:** June 16, 2005, 06:15:03 PM »

actually I think I'm going to get the kodak CX7300 for 50 dollars, it takes okay pics, but for 50 dollars I can buy it, use it for 6 months, sell it online, and by a new bling camera when I have more money.

atek3

DigMe · « **Reply #22 on:** June 17, 2005, 04:03:19 AM »

Sounds great!

brad cook

jefmad · « **Reply #23 on:** June 17, 2005, 12:18:52 PM »

Quote from: LaTropa64

Canon Digital Elph:

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=145&modelid=10599

I have an older model that they don't make anymore and it's served me well. It's tiny! It's the kind of camera that you can throw in your pocket and hardly know you have.

I second what LaTropa64 said and here is the place to buy:
http://www.beachcamera.com/shop/product.asp?ref=cnet&sku=CNPSSD300

$272 right outside your range but you don't pay sales tax.
Canon makes great digital cameras.

crt360 · « **Reply #24 on:** June 17, 2005, 01:14:04 PM »

I just saw where a couple of places on dpreview.com now list the Olympus C-740UZ for $160.00. I though mine was great for a $400 camera, but for $160 it's truly outstanding. I might have to buy a spare.

News:

Author Topic: Best small digital camera for <$250 (Read 5178 times)

Paddy