 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / December 2006low end cameras
Hi, I have a Canon 350XT with three lenses. The popularity of DSLR stretches approximately from $600 to ?. I wanted to buy a first digital camera for my 8-year old grandson so I started to look at the lower end P&S models. It's truly amazing how much the price competition has dropped prices at this end. Sears (Bend, Oregon) had many closeout models around the $100 point (a little more - a little less) - including most of the major lines. Many of these cameras were good to excellent buys for the money. I finally ended up buying my grandson an H-P E327 at Staples (check it out at dpreview.com). It has obvious deficencies (no optical zoom; no optical viewfinder) but it's a 5-megapixel camers with a 1/2.5 sensor and a fair sized LCD, and uses SD memory. It cost me $70 on sale for a new P&S camera. I know some people would want a better starting camera - but for an 8-year old this might start him off. Next time - he'll probably choose a DSLR. Best, Conrad Camp Sherman, Oregon > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Conrad > Camp Sherman, Oregon That is great. Does the camera have raw output? Having only 5 megapixels for that sensor size means the performance per pixel (low noise performance and dynamic range) is most likely better than a lot of newer cameras costing much more. In the megapixel wars pixel size in decreasing too much in my opinion. Such small cameras are great ideas for small children, and perhaps some adults too! It is nice to see the prices have dropped so much. After Christmas, the prices may drop further ;-). If anyone knows of classes of small cameras please let me know. I would like to get a few to fill in more of the trade spaces in my graphs at: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel.size.matter http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary What I need are: Each camera must have raw output so I can analyze the sensor data: 1) the smallest pixels (2 microns or less). The number of megapixels is not important, and low mpixel count would likely mean lower cost to me. 2) cameras in the 2.8 to 5.5 micron pixel pitch to fill in the gaps on my plots between DSLRs and the small P&S cameras. The lens and zoom are not important as I'm only interested in sensor performance, not imaging by the lens. Roger > That is great. Does the camera have raw output? Having only > 5 megapixels for that sensor size means the performance per > pixel (low noise performance and dynamic range) is most > likely better than a lot of newer cameras costing much more. > In the megapixel wars pixel size in decreasing > too much in my opinion. My opinion too. I teach digital photography in my community and cannot break the megapixel bias. Boy, talk about pre-conceived notions! For some reason, I think the p&s medium pixel cameras won't have raw output. What would a father taking pictures of his kids opening xmas presents have for raw. He'd want a portable printer for 4x6 pix so he can show the pix right away, (AW LOOK AT HOW CUTE!!!). Harry > > That is great. Does the camera have raw output? Having only > > 5 megapixels for that sensor size means the performance per [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > My opinion too. I teach digital photography in my community and cannot > break the megapixel bias. Boy, talk about pre-conceived notions! The only one who would think it's not a pre-conceived notion is the commercial photographer who needs a large mp count to make his shots come out professional. Harry > > That is great. Does the camera have raw output? Having only > > 5 megapixels for that sensor size means the performance per [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > My opinion too. I teach digital photography in my community and cannot > break the megapixel bias. Boy, talk about pre-conceived notions! >> That is great. Does the camera have raw output? Having only >> 5 megapixels for that sensor size means the performance per [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >My opinion too. I teach digital photography in my community and cannot >break the megapixel bias. Boy, talk about pre-conceived notions! I just bought a Fuji A400 for $80 for my daughter, my main concern was image quality and a viewfinder, also simplicity of use for a novice photographer. Hi Charles, >> I just bought a Fuji A400 for $80 for my daughter, my main concern was image quality and a viewfinder, also simplicity of use for a novice photographer.<< That's great. Good choice. Concerning inexpensive P&S cameras - it's really a challenge to see how good or bad your resulting pics are. Next, is how much enlargement you can give them and sill look good. What fun. Happy holidays, Conrad Camp Sherman, Oregon PS Waiting for the onslaught replies. >> I know some people would want a better starting camera - but for an >> 8-year old this might start him off. Next time - he'll probably choose >> a DSLR. > That is great. Does the camera have raw output? Having only > 5 megapixels for that sensor size means the performance per > pixel (low noise performance and dynamic range) is most I'm sure that eight year old is FUMING MAD over the noise and dynaic range. Q: Whatdja get for Christmas? A: An HP E327 5 Megapixel Camera! Q: Poor you! Don't you know that its sensor size is tiny, the noise attrocious? Why, it doesn't even have optical zoom! A: Bwaahahaahahaha. Mahwmmmmeeeeeeee!!! Q: And RAW? Forget about it stinky. Looks like crap!  Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > >> I know some people would want a better starting camera - but for an > >> 8-year old this might start him off. Next time - he'll probably choose [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > A: Bwaahahaahahaha. Mahwmmmmeeeeeeee!!! > Q: And RAW? Forget about it stinky. Looks like crap! If you read what Roger wrote he said it would likely have good dynamic range not bad. Scott > If you read what Roger wrote he said it would likely have good dynamic > range not bad. Do they have humor calibration shops in Hawaii? Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > > If you read what Roger wrote he said it would likely have good dynamic > > range not bad. > > Do they have humor calibration shops in Hawaii? Sure they do, come and get a tune up. Scott And it probably would become a hobby with him, I mean look at all the great pictures you can get without going to the drugstore to have them developed. Harry > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Conrad > Camp Sherman, Oregon |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.