Best $300-$500 Camera

[bobt]

To all of you professional photographers out there, which is the best digital camera around with 10 megapixal resolution in the $300-$500 range?
One other question. Assuming all other things being equal between two cameras, do you notice much of a difference in the quality of an image taken with a camera that has a 8 megapixal resolution as opposed a photo taken with a camera with 10 megapixal resolution? Is the difference in quality between the two images unnoticeable or obvious?

[TomNine]

I don't know anything about this stuff, but nobody else wants to play.

What do you want a camera for?

Is your $300-500 range a total investment or just a start? Some entry-level DSLRs with a kit lens fall in this range, but you'd probably be better off with a point and shoot unless you plan to expand on the system.

I would ignore the megapixel stuff unless you plan to make large prints. It is not a good measure of how good the pics will look, sample pics and reviews are more useful.

[bobt]

Thanks for responding Tom but since I posted this thread I did buy a Samsung L200 digital point-and-shoot for $134. It has a resolution of 10.2MP and an optical zoom of 3x among other features and has gotten great reviews for the entry level camera that it is. I haven't owned a camera in decades and this Samsung L200 blew me away with the high quality images that it produced. I just want a camera for every day uses....so far, but may upgrade after a while as I find more uses for one. For starters I want higher zoom power but the 10.2MP resolution is quite adequate and I doubt that I will ever utilize the full advantage of it's resolution unless I produced some very large poster sized prints of my pictures. What camera do you use and does 6 or 7 MP resolution work for you? Also what your zoom power if you don't mind my asking?

[chris10000]

as tom 9 said, it is not the mp thats important.
the lens is important.
you can make sharper pics with an old 6 mp camera with good lens than some 11 mp cameras.

i use a nikon d 80.

[TomNine]

Thanks for responding Tom but since I posted this thread I did buy a Samsung L200 digital point-and-shoot for $134. It has a resolution of 10.2MP and an optical zoom of 3x among other features and has gotten great reviews for the entry level camera that it is. I haven't owned a camera in decades and this Samsung L200 blew me away with the high quality images that it produced. I just want a camera for every day uses....so far, but may upgrade after a while as I find more uses for one. For starters I want higher zoom power but the 10.2MP resolution is quite adequate and I doubt that I will ever utilize the full advantage of it's resolution unless I produced some very large poster sized prints of my pictures. What camera do you use and does 6 or 7 MP resolution work for you? Also what your zoom power do you don't mind my asking?I'm glad you found something that works for you. If you decide to upgrade, using the Samsung will help you decide what features and qualities are most important to you.

I've been using a shirt pocket size Sony DSC-W80 for casual stuff when I don't want to lug around the DSLR, but I am disappointed by the quality of the pics. It has a 3x zoom and shoots at 7.2 mp, but resolution doesn't seem to be the problem. My current DSLR (Sony a350) shoots at 14.2 mp, but I often use the medium (7.7mp) or small (3.5mp) settings when shooting contest stuff, and the quality is still much better.

Here is a recent lobby pic with the W80, using flash under terrible fluorescent lighting:

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a215/TomNine/WendyMcMaster.jpg

And a stage pic I probably shot at 3.5 mp on the a350:

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a215/TomNine/AvisWare.jpg

I just saw Chris's response, and agree. The amateur market has been trained to think megapixels are important, causing the manufacturers to wage an mp war, pushing resolution size faster than quality (especially under low light) can keep up.

[bobt]

Thanks guys. Your comments and suggestions has helped me a great deal in which direction to take in upgrading my camera. I know that high resolution is a much overblown feature but I never would have guessed that you used as little resolution that you did, Tom, in some of you contest pictures. I really do need to experiment with resolution settings and lighting etc. with the camera that I have before I upgrade. It is begining to seem that it is way to easy to jump in the wrong direction when buying these cameras and end up with a very expensive camera with features you don't need rather than settle for a cheaper camera that will deliver all you need.
One other question. Does the color quality of the digitals out perform the film cameras in quality and depth of color or are the digitals not quite there yet?

[chris10000]

One other question. Does the color quality of the digitals out perform the film cameras in quality and depth of color or are the digitals not quite there yet?
:-)
i still love my nikon f4.

the quality of film is still better than digital.
BUT it only matters if you make big big posters.
on the downside (we are all working on the internet) film needs to be scanned for internet use... and then its digital..

for the technic lovers : film equals 34 mp

[bobt]

Thanks chris10000. I'm learning more every day. There's a lot to learn about camera's and photography and it's all very interesting.

[ibarramedia]

I'm glad you found something that works for you. If you decide to upgrade, using the Samsung will help you decide what features and qualities are most important to you.

I've been using a shirt pocket size Sony DSC-W80 for casual stuff when I don't want to lug around the DSLR, but I am disappointed by the quality of the pics. It has a 3x zoom and shoots at 7.2 mp, but resolution doesn't seem to be the problem. My current DSLR (Sony a350) shoots at 14.2 mp, but I often use the medium (7.7mp) or small (3.5mp) settings when shooting contest stuff, and the quality is still much better.

Here is a recent lobby pic with the W80, using flash under terrible fluorescent lighting:

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a215/TomNine/WendyMcMaster.jpg

And a stage pic I probably shot at 3.5 mp on the a350:

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a215/TomNine/AvisWare.jpg

I just saw Chris's response, and agree. The amateur market has been trained to think megapixels are important, causing the manufacturers to wage an mp war, pushing resolution size faster than quality (especially under low light) can keep up.


Awesome shot of Wendy. Look at those quads.

[bobt]

Ibarramedia: "Awesome shot of Wendy. Look at those quads."


Wendy would look awesome if you took her picture with the lights turned off!

[chris10000]

http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk308/chris10000-janapics/bikeandlegs3.jpg

how do you like that pic ?

it wasnt even done with a photocamera.
this is a videostill from a clip i made with my videocamera.

http://87.118.98.128/mainpage/downloads/samplebikeweek2.wmv

my videocamera does have a carl zeiss lens.

this is the important factor.

[bobt]

That's a great shot of Jana, chris10000. I can see a lot of sharp defined detail which I like to see in photos of FBB'ers. Looks like the resolution was pretty high or was it just the carl zeiss lens you used? Great picture anyway.
By the way, I posted some some pictures of her at her/your website in the "Athletes And Models" area. I love the way she wore her hair in these pictures....long and wild. Loved her look in them.

[chris10000]

That's a great shot of Jana, chris10000. I can see a lot of sharp defined detail which I like to see in photos of FBB'ers. Looks like the resolution was pretty high or was it just the carl zeiss lens you used?.
no... the resolution is 1920 x 1080 ( 2 mp)
i posted that videostill to show you its more important a sharp lens than megapixels.

[bobt]

no... the resolution is 1920 x 1080 ( 2 mp)
i posted that videostill to show you its more important a sharp lens than megapixels.
Your message came trough loud and clear chris10000. I had no idea that a lens could have that much of an impact on image clarity with so small of a resolution. I will start looking more closely to lenses from now on and not worry so much about resolution. Thanks for the demo. ;)

[claus]

Technical critics for the picture - ÖK!
Good quality for a video still, very bad quality for a photo:
1. background and position of model not good - bike is good but second bike and ground are badly chosen.
2. background to sharp
3. white shirt to white (overexposed)
4. bad colours
5. feet cut

The best lens does not help if the photographer does not know how to handle it.

All resolution beginning at 6 megapixels is good for 8by10 prints, for the web even 3 MP can be sufficient.
Lens and senor noise are the key - and thats where you are paying for.


http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk308/chris10000-janapics/bikeandlegs3.jpg

how do you like that pic ?

it wasnt even done with a photocamera.
this is a videostill from a clip i made with my videocamera.

http://87.118.98.128/mainpage/downloads/samplebikeweek2.wmv

my videocamera does have a carl zeiss lens.

this is the important factor.

[chris10000]

Technical critics for the picture - ÖK!
Good quality for a video still, very bad quality for a photo:
1. background and position of model not good - bike is good but second bike and ground are badly chosen.
2. background to sharp
3. white shirt to white (overexposed)
4. bad colours
5. feet cut

The best lens does not help if the photographer does not know how to handle it.

All resolution beginning at 6 megapixels is good for 8by10 prints, for the web even 3 MP can be sufficient.
Lens and senor noise are the key - and thats where you are paying for.
that was a videostill...taken out of a video where i moved from the whole body down to janas legs.

the question was about megapixels and camera 300$
i think i helped out with my response.

this i shot with my nikon d80 (but you will not get for 300bucks :-))
http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk308/chris10000-janapics/DSC_0230.jpg

[thegreatsatan]

The Cannon Digital Rebel Xti is a reasonably well priced SLR that you can get for around 500 on Amazon with a decent kit lens. The Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi and EOS 400D are the same camera with different names.

Review here: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/rebelxti.html