digital cameras

[bing]

I have been using a Kodak digital camera for a few years. I do have a complaint. The flash is not powerful. I see some of the pictures posted here have nice distance on their flash. Since I am thinking of updating cameras. Does anyone have a suggestions on a particular camera they have been pleased with?

Here is a Feb 2006 update of the Comsumer Association of the UK's WHICH report Best Buys.

http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/fo ... .php?e=160 (http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/forum/weblog_entry.php?e=160)

[Smiles]

Love my Canon S1, and would rcommend it to anyone. I've taken some excellent night/flash shots with this puppy.
Plus it has what I most wanted, a really terrific 10X optical zoom.

Since I bought it (about a year and a half ago) the S1 has been supplanted by the Canon S2 (5 MGP instead of the 3.2 the S1 has ... and a 12X zoom), but you can still get the S1 at a very deep discount to what it was selling for when I purchased it.
Comes with an instruction manual as thick as a telephone book and has about 434,000 features ... of which I have tried maybe 3. I use "AUTO" quite a lot :cheers:

This is the S2:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v18/sawatdeephotos/Images/PowerShotS2IS.jpg

Downside to this camera is that it is not particularly light or compact. I assume that is because of the zoom lens apparatus ... it also takes 4 batteries, which definitely adds weight . If you want one of those little razor thin jobs, this is not the camera for you. Personally I like the heft of it ... something to hold on to!

Good hunting and cheers ....

[Boxer]

Just read today in Database Bangkok Post a review of the new pocket size Pentax Optio WPi6 12500 baht 6 meggapixels 2in TFT screen and ITS WATERPROOF. idea for the beach pool or splashing around at Songkran time!
I also use a Canon G6 as my main camera.

Sony makes nice small digital cameras, but I would not buy one because they do NOT have a viewfinder. I do not like using the LCD for taking pictures. They rarely work good in bright light and battery life if much shorter if forced to use an LCD for picture taking. I prefer the Canon cameras.

I agree with the above. Without fumbling for my reading glasses, I can't see the LCD screen clearly enough to take a picture comfortably. No need for glasses when using a viewfinder, though.

I use a sony digital camera and, unlike the LCD screens on many other digital cameras, the picture is bright and clear even in strong sunlight. For composing shots it is therefore better than a viewfinder - and I am now quite short-sighted.

However, as one2go points out, you can't turn the LCD screen off, so its heavy on the battery. I always carry a spare which, though small enough not to be a bother, was quite expensive to buy. Each fully charged battery gives around 90 minutes of CONTINUOUS use, so two will last even the most prolific photographer a full day.

The great advantage of sony cameras is that you get great quality pictures without having to lug around a huge camera. The sony is about the size of a one centimeter thick credit card, and will fit easily in any pocket.

I bought one of the early Kodaks. Yes, the flash power was much too weak. Additionally the color reproduction, especially greens was horrid. I like my Olympus C3030 much better but the flash power is too strong often creating white spots whereever the flash reflects back. The key to the c3030 is even lighting, whether low lighting or not.

www.whatdigitalcamera.com/ (http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/) gives reviews and UK prices for many popular cameras.

Price is a major factor for most of us and I would be wary of spending much more than 20,000 baht. My reasons are that the technology is improving very fast you will likely want o upgrade within a few years and the old camera will be worth very little. Also you don't want to be worrying about carrying around something too valuable.

The magazine above offers reviews on many makes of camera.

[bing]

Thanks for the imput... Now I feel like the kid in the candy store... so many choices,, again thanks guys.

It all depends: how much do you want to spend. There are two types of people: Canon and Nikon. Nikon is best. This is because I use a Nikon. Look at the D50 and D70. Having spent a lot of time on researching I rejected the slightly better deal Canon for the D50 or D70. Will probably, in the end go for the D50 because it is lighter. Older Nikon lenses fit, so one can get fantasitic bargains there. It is generally accepted that the Nikon lenses have the edge over all others. But if you do not want the SLR effect then try the Coolpix range of Nikons. But in the end, these days, you will get good results from anything over ┬г250. About five years ago people said you must have at least 1 million pixels...now my phone has 1.5 million! Good luck... let us all know what you bought in the end and make sure we see some of the pics.

An important point at purchase of a digital photograph camera is the lens . Sony and other large marks use of CARL ZEISS . I find a good lens more important than the number of mega pixels .

I have had two Coolpixes (one still in use) both have visitted "the shop". I also bought an inexpensive Canon A75 last time the 5400 was being repaired Maybe I'm just unlucky with Nikons. The 5400 is great when I want to take long exposures but the Canon fits into my pocket for skiing trips and seems to give a more balanced brighter basic file.

The image below is about 12 percent of a shot I took on my last hol. I think the temp was -17c at that moment so any shake should be excused.


http://upload2.postimage.org/96704/zermatt1copy.jpg (http://upload2.postimage.org/96704/photo_hosting.html)

http://upload2.postimage.org/96692/IMG_01921.jpg (http://upload2.postimage.org/96692/photo_hosting.html)

Sorry about screwing up the page width.

Here's another one.

I have always found this site a great reference tool and have bought 2 digital cameras and some accessories based upon the reviews here.

www.steves-digicams.com/ (http://www.steves-digicams.com/)

Good luck.