Best Point-and-Shoot for ~$200

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've used two cheaper Nikon compact cameras enough in the past couple of years to know what they can do in ideal and less than ideal conditions:

Coolpix S220
Coolpix S6200

Both produce stunningly awful photos.
lol.gif


Seriously.

But I agree with rjundi's point about the downside of a DSLR.
 
WAY off topic, but one of the things I've decided is an absolute necessity, no compromise permissible, is an eye level viewfinder, preferably old school optical.

The LX-5 and LX-7, and the Leica's, have an optical and an electronic viewfinder that can be stuck on the camera hot shoe, not great, but better than nothing, I guess.

I'm leaning toward the FinePix X-100 or X-10. I handled an X-100 locally and it feels and works like a real camera with a great optical viewfinder - not a plastic toy like most of the new digital stuff, and it can be used as a full manual mode camera.
 
Originally Posted By: Win
I'm leaning toward the FinePix X-100 or X-10.


Olympus EM-5. I can't imagine spending $1200+ and limiting yourself to one lens.
 
Originally Posted By: surfstar
Originally Posted By: Win
I'm leaning toward the FinePix X-100 or X-10.


Olympus EM-5. I can't imagine spending $1200+ and limiting yourself to one lens.


That's a nice looking body and reminds me a bit of my OM-1, but a DSLR is just not at all the right tool for the immediate task at hand. I might be interested in a good DSLR in four or five years, but not just now.

As an aside, I looked at one of the new Olympus 4/3 cameras, don't recall the model, and was disappointed. The "body" for lack of a better phrase, was made in China, felt insubstantial, was a gaudy raspberry color, and the Zuiko lens on it was slow and not anywhere close to the quality feel of the old Zuiko lenses that I have for my OM-1.
 
Recieved our Panasonic ZS-15 on the 10th just before going to the beach for vacation. Got it from Amazon for $165 delivered including a free 4 GB SD card.

Yes you'll get better pictures with an SLR or other large sensor type camera. Those cameras will not fit in your pocket nor can they be had brand new with a warranty for $165 so no need to discuss them anymore
smile.gif


The camera takes nice photos in bright and moderate lighting, the auto mode works well and there's a full set of manual and semi-manual controls if you're so inclined. The stabilization works very well. The zoom is great and I was really suprised how well some of the photos I took at the full 16x and even further out with the digital zoom looked.

The biggest changes from our old Canon Powershot A590 (which was a perfectly nice camera that cost ~$150 when we got it 3 years or so ago) are a superior apparent build quality (just feels more sturdy/hefty, some metal components vs plastic), much faster focusing, very short shutter delay, and much better video quality. It claims to shoot 1080p/30 and while I haven't put them up on the 50" plasma yet they really look good on the laptop.

Dim lighting of course brings out the weaknesses. The flash is only good for close subjects, and the higher ISO and slower shutter speeds required tend towards grainyness and blur, but again this isn't anything unique to this camera just a fact of life at this size and price point. I took a bunch of pictures of my daughter dancing around at dusk in a shaded area and they turned out acceptably.

jeff
 
Originally Posted By: Win
WAY off topic, but one of the things I've decided is an absolute necessity, no compromise permissible, is an eye level viewfinder, preferably old school optical.

The LX-5 and LX-7, and the Leica's, have an optical and an electronic viewfinder that can be stuck on the camera hot shoe, not great, but better than nothing, I guess.

I'm leaning toward the FinePix X-100 or X-10. I handled an X-100 locally and it feels and works like a real camera with a great optical viewfinder - not a plastic toy like most of the new digital stuff, and it can be used as a full manual mode camera.


We went through this PS compact digital camera dance a few years ago.

Apparently, the lens system is just as important as the CCD architecture. That being said, after looking at about 50 different makes and models, including all the majors, we settled on a Fuji F200EXR. Solid optics and cutting edge CCD. It has given us no problems and takes great photos, in just about any lighting situation. At the time there were several setting "tweaks" that made for better than factory setting results. It was better than the Pannys at that time, which was our second choice. It's only big drawbacks to us were a lack of optical viewfinder and proprietary battery (the old Canon would run on AAs in a pinch).

It also fits in my shirt pocket. An iPhone does too, but doesn't take anywhere near the same level of picture. Made in Japan to boot.

I'm sure the technology has refined and trickled down since then, and what we bought in 2009 is now further improved and available at a lower price point.
 
Originally Posted By: Volvohead
We went through this PS compact digital camera dance a few years ago.

Apparently, the lens system is just as important as the CCD architecture. That being said, after looking at about 50 different makes and models, including all the majors, we settled on a Fuji F200EXR. Solid optics and cutting edge CCD. It has given us no problems and takes great photos, in just about any lighting situation. At the time there were several setting "tweaks" that made for better than factory setting results. It was better than the Pannys at that time, which was our second choice. It's only big drawbacks to us were a lack of optical viewfinder and proprietary battery (the old Canon would run on AAs in a pinch).

It also fits in my shirt pocket. An iPhone does too, but doesn't take anywhere near the same level of picture. Made in Japan to boot.

I'm sure the technology has refined and trickled down since then, and what we bought in 2009 is now further improved and available at a lower price point.


I too got the same F200EXR after the same research for a small P&S that takes good photo. It was between the Panasonic LX5 for $450 or the F200EXR for $300 on ebay. The Auto mode at ISO 400 and 6MP really make use of the EXR sensor for good dynamic range, and has been our default mode with and without flash.

Ours was shipped from Japan (tan / champagne color) and made in China. It is performing well except the zoom switch is acting funny half the time.
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear


I too got the same F200EXR after the same research for a small P&S that takes good photo. It was between the Panasonic LX5 for $450 or the F200EXR for $300 on ebay. The Auto mode at ISO 400 and 6MP really make use of the EXR sensor for good dynamic range, and has been our default mode with and without flash.

Ours was shipped from Japan (tan / champagne color) and made in China. It is performing well except the zoom switch is acting funny half the time.


Depending on when you bought it, I think there was a firmware upgrade that addressed that behavior at some point . . . but I could be mistaken. The FW is downloadable from Fuji's website.
 
As promised, here are some sample pics of my new S9100. I'm very pleased for the price ($105 refurb) paid. There were a couple of hot air balloons behind our house last night. Below are natural (untouched, no tripod) of "no zoom" vs. "max zoom":

balloon1.jpg


balloon2.jpg


balloon3.jpg


balloon4.jpg


Macro shot our our flowers (and weeds):

flowers.jpg


Sure, not near dslr quality, but I'm quite pleased for the price paid. It's much better than my 5 yr old Canon.
 
There appears to be serious distortion in those pictures, unless those trees and that building in the lower right corner of picture 1, and the building in the lower left corner of picture 3, really looks like that.
 
It was set to wide in those pics. I'm an amateur. I somewhat see what your talking about -- when looking at the window in the shed? The ground is sloped a lot between the neighbor's yard and mine. The pics were resized a lot, and uploaded to photobucket. I was attempting to show the zoom quality, not "lack of distortion" in the corners. I wasn't really trying in the original pics. I just turned it on, and shot in auto mode.
 
Originally Posted By: asiancivicmaniac
Looks like what a wide-angle lens would do


Well, I'll preface this by saying that it's been about twenty five or thirty years since I had any real interest in photography, but I remember wide angle lenses as exhibiting barrel distortion, where straight lines bow out a bit to the edge of the negative, and then only at extreme wide angles, closer to fisheye focal lengths. And the better lens makers were very good at controlling that distortion.

The lines at the corners of picture 1 that should be straight from that perspective, are converging toward the middle. I'd call that perspective distortion, and it's evident on both sides of the photo - trees at the left are crooked, building on the right is crooked, stakes on the fence are crooked. The fence line looks to bow down in the middle, barrel distortion, but that could be the way the fence really looks.

For what I'm wanting to do now, wide angle performance is virtually all I'm interested in, so I'm probably unfairly nitpicking this camera, especially considering the price point.
 
I see a litte bit what you mean on the left side (trees, fence stakes). However, our yards are quite sloped. Neighbor's run downhill into our yard. The top of the fence lines are very crooked because they follow the terrain. The shed is the only thing fairly level in our yard. It might not even be by now (it was in April).

I'll look with the nekkid eye tonight, and maybe snap another pic. I could even try one with my Canon ELPH in the same direction.

I would have never noticed those things-- as I simply take pics for fun, and rarely look at the "whole picture". As long as the people in the middle aren't crooked, I'll be happy.
 
I believe that kind of distortion is going to be common. Try taking a group photo at widest angle and see if faces of the folks who are at the end look funny. Once you go wider than 35, the distortion is going to be obvious. At least that has been my experience with most P&S.
 
Take 2: Another shot tonight. Turned camera on, and shot. It's overcast/cloudy. No zoom. No wide. Resized and uploaded to photobucket. Trees and shed are straight now
smile.gif
.

test_2.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

doitmyself
  • Locked
Pocket Point and Shoot Cameras
2
Replies
26
Views
7K
Quattro Pete
Back
Top