Need advice

In article <L4SdnRtljpIFJtHanZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d.RemoveThis@comcast.com>,
"nana wilson" <nnaoj5.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All.
>
> I already have an Olympus 2100 ultra zoom. I am in the market for a smaller
> digital camera (purse size) Any suggestions? Under $200.
>
> TIA
> Nana NOT giving up the old 2100!!

Check out http://www.dpreview.com
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

I don't understand what a 'rebel eos' is I have seen cameras around
$200 that are very nice.
Nana

"none" <none DeleteThis @optonline.net> wrote in message
news:474CC32C.5000902@optonline.net...
> nana wilson wrote:
>> Hi All.
>>
>> I already have an Olympus 2100 ultra zoom. I am in the market for a
>> smaller
>> digital camera (purse size) Any suggestions? Under $200.
>>
>> TIA
>> Nana NOT giving up the old 2100!!
>>
>>
>>
> under 200 is a bit of a stretch why not try to get a rebel eos
>
> --
> http://www.photochimper.com
> A great digital photo Club/forum
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

Thanks Shawn!

I have bookmarked the site!
Nana

"Shawn H." <s_r_h_i.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:s_r_h_i-D2DA8E.21322427112007@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <L4SdnRtljpIFJtHanZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d.DeleteThis@comcast.com>,
> "nana wilson" <nnaoj5.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi All.
>>
>> I already have an Olympus 2100 ultra zoom. I am in the market for a
>> smaller
>> digital camera (purse size) Any suggestions? Under $200.
>>
>> TIA
>> Nana NOT giving up the old 2100!!
>
> Check out http://www.dpreview.com
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

nana wilson wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> I already have an Olympus 2100 ultra zoom. I am in the market for a smaller
> digital camera (purse size) Any suggestions? Under $200.
>
> TIA
> Nana NOT giving up the old 2100!!
>
>
>

You might wanna take at look at Canon A570 IS (should be around $150
from BHVideoPhoto web site). It is 7M pixel camera, manual controls
included and has optical image stabilization. Next, check out the Canon
A720 IS, same as the previous one but 8M pixels. Both take 2 AA sized
batteries.

However, for a purse camera, maybe Canon SD1000 or SD800 would be even
better. There are ultra compact cameras but have proprietary batteries.

Other than those, you can always take a look at http://dpreview.com for
comparisons and reviews.

->HS
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

H.S. wrote:

> You might wanna take at look at Canon A570 IS (should be around $150
> from BHVideoPhoto web site). It is 7M pixel camera, manual controls
> included and has optical image stabilization. Next, check out the Canon
> A720 IS, same as the previous one but 8M pixels. Both take 2 AA sized
> batteries.

There are more differences between the A720 IS and the A570 IS than just
the resolution.

The A570 IS has a 35 - 140 mm lens, while the A720 IS has a 35mm - 210
mm lens. The A570 IS is a better choice in terms of image quality, with
a better lens and less noisy sensor.

> However, for a purse camera, maybe Canon SD1000 or SD800 would be even
> better. There are ultra compact cameras but have proprietary batteries.

The SD800 IS is a better choice than the SD1000, IMVAIO. Larger pixels,
wide angle lens, and image stabilization.
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

nana wilson wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> I already have an Olympus 2100 ultra zoom. I am in the market for a
> smaller digital camera (purse size) Any suggestions? Under $200.
>
> TIA
> Nana NOT giving up the old 2100!!

Take a look at the Panasonic TZ3:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz3/

Purse size, and a 28 - 280mm zoom range.

Cheers,
David
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

none wrote:
> nana wilson wrote:
>> Hi All.
>>
>> I already have an Olympus 2100 ultra zoom. I am in the market for a
>> smaller digital camera (purse size) Any suggestions? Under $200.
>>
>> TIA
>> Nana NOT giving up the old 2100!!
>>
>>
>>
> under 200 is a bit of a stretch why not try to get a rebel eos

A DSLR is purse size?
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 07:35:17 GMT, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor.RemoveThis@blueyonder.not-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:

>none wrote:
>> nana wilson wrote:
>>> Hi All.
>>>
>>> I already have an Olympus 2100 ultra zoom. I am in the market for a
>>> smaller digital camera (purse size) Any suggestions? Under $200.
>>>
>>> TIA
>>> Nana NOT giving up the old 2100!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> under 200 is a bit of a stretch why not try to get a rebel eos
>
>A DSLR is purse size?
>

Only for his purse.

They never give up trying to suggest things for others that the other person
clearly doesn't want and doesn't need. Meaning: "I never read anything, I just
spew."
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:51:27 -0500, "nana wilson" <nnaoj5.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Hi All.
>
>I already have an Olympus 2100 ultra zoom. I am in the market for a smaller
>digital camera (purse size) Any suggestions? Under $200.
>
>TIA
>Nana NOT giving up the old 2100!!
>
>
The Canon SD1000 is for you, small purse size, lots of features,
including viewfinder, and is now on sale for under $170.
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

Thanks so much for all the help. I have those sites bookmarked & will be
off after the holidays (with, I HOPE, me gifted moneys) to the stores with
at least more info than before.

THANKS AGAIN!!

Nana

"irwell" <hook.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jq3rk35flv0goiqv5ucmdhjsc1l7lifccs@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 19:51:27 -0500, "nana wilson" <nnaoj5.RemoveThis@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Hi All.
>>
>>I already have an Olympus 2100 ultra zoom. I am in the market for a
>>smaller
>>digital camera (purse size) Any suggestions? Under $200.
>>
>>TIA
>>Nana NOT giving up the old 2100!!
>>
>>
> The Canon SD1000 is for you, small purse size, lots of features,
> including viewfinder, and is now on sale for under $170.
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

SMS 斯蒂文• å¤� wrote:

>
> There are more differences between the A720 IS and the A570 IS than just
> the resolution.
>
> The A570 IS has a 35 - 140 mm lens, while the A720 IS has a 35mm - 210
> mm lens. The A570 IS is a better choice in terms of image quality, with
> a better lens and less noisy sensor.

Ah, thanks. The latter is probably due to the lower number of pixels in
A570 than in the other one (I believe they both have the same sized sensor)?


>
>> However, for a purse camera, maybe Canon SD1000 or SD800 would be even
>> better. There are ultra compact cameras but have proprietary batteries.
>
> The SD800 IS is a better choice than the SD1000, IMVAIO. Larger pixels,
> wide angle lens, and image stabilization.

The wide angle lens and IS are definitely nice features in this!

thanks,
->HS
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:08:33 -0500, H.S. wrote:

> SMS ???• ? wrote:
> . . .
>> The A570 IS has a 35 - 140 mm lens, while the A720 IS has a 35mm - 210
>> mm lens. The A570 IS is a better choice in terms of image quality, with
>> a better lens and less noisy sensor.
>
> Ah, thanks. The latter is probably due to the lower number of pixels in
> A570 than in the other one (I believe they both have the same sized sensor)?

Both cameras us a 1/2.5" sensor, 7mp for the A570 IS and 8mp for
the A720 IS. Image quality is not that easy to generalize. With
fewer pixels, the noise advantage should go to the A570 for shooting
in dim light @ high ISO. But in good light at low ISO, the
advantage could go to the A720 based on its greater number of
pixels. [I just checked some of DPReview's tests, which confirms
this].

With similar sensors, lens quality might be the determining factor
for image quality. According to DPReview the A570 probably has a
little less noise at higher ISO values, but the small sensor is
probably why DPReview notes that for the A570 "ISO 800 and above
only suitable for emergency use". Quoting from the conclusion pages
of reviews for these two cameras :

[A570 IS]
Pros :
> # Good resolution
> # Clean and detailed results across the frame and zoom range
> # Little purple fringing
> # Big, fairly bright (though low res) screen
> # Good balance of noise reduction and detail retention at higher ISO settings
Cons :
> # Occasional highlight clipping
> # Images a bit soft viewed at 100% - benefit from a little sharpening
> # ISO 800 and above only suitable for emergency use
Overall conclusion :
> Its well balanced combination of image quality, functionality
> and handling (and not to forget value for money) means the
> A570 IS just about deserves our highest award.
> Detail Rating (out of 10)
> Build quality 7.5
> Image quality 7.5
> Optics 8.0
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona570is/page13.asp

[A720 IS]
Pros :
> Surprisingly good image quality (at lower ISO settings)
> Fairly subtle noise reduction in ISO 100-400 region
Cons :
> Usual issues above ISO 400 due to noise and noise reduction
Overall conclusion :
> If used in automatic mode, it takes consistently good photographs
> so long as you keep away from the highest ISO settings.
> Detail Rating (out of 10)
> Image quality 8.0
> Optics 8.0
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona720is/page12.asp

So as far as the lens optical quality, there's little difference
between them (both rated at 8.0), and for image quality a slight
edge goes to the A720 IS over the A570 IS (8.0 vs. 7.5). But as I
pointed out, this is a generalization. The A720 might have slightly
better image quality in normal lighting conditions, but in dim light
the A570 probably has a slight image quality edge.


>>> However, for a purse camera, maybe Canon SD1000 or SD800 would be even
>>> better. There are ultra compact cameras but have proprietary batteries.
>>
>> The SD800 IS is a better choice than the SD1000, IMVAIO. Larger pixels,
>> wide angle lens, and image stabilization.
>
> The wide angle lens and IS are definitely nice features in this!

They probably need IS more than the A570 and A720 since very small
cameras are harder to hold steadily. Small size matters more if
there isn't much room to store the camera. So the SD800 and SD1000
would be much better choices if you'd want to store the camera in a
very small case or in a small shirt pocket. Any of these four
cameras could almost get lost in all but the smallest purses. For
another generalization, very small cameras tend to be more expensive
and perform slightly less well. DPReview tested the SD800 and not
the SD1000, but did test the SD1100. Without a full review, it's
hard to compare the SD800 with the SD1000, but if the latter is
comparable to the SD1100, SMS's conclusion that the SD800 is the
better choice would be wrong. For image and lens (optical) quality
the SD1100 did quite well, matching the A720 IS :

> Image quality 8.0
> Optics 8.0

but did not earn the Highly Recommended label of the A570 and A720,
since DPReview noted :
Cons :
> # Little manual control
> # Poor Auto White Balance performance under artificial light
> # Pretty noisy at any sensitivity above ISO 200 (decent detail retention though)
> # Some highlight clipping
> # Some noise reduction detail blurring even at base ISO
> # Viewfinder so tiny as to be virtually pointless
> # Lens a little soft at the long end
Overall conclusion :
> Our rather minor complaints aside, in conclusion the SD1100 was designed
> as a point and shoot camera and it performs well as such. It's got an attractive
> design, it is small enough to always carry it with you and reliably produces
> good out the box results. If that's what you are after go for it. If you are
> looking for manual controls, a real wide angle, new groundbreaking
> features or class-leading image quality then you better keep browsing
> dpreview.com a little longer, if you want an a simple, well made pocket camera,
> go for it.
>
> The SD1100 IS is a perfectly good camera, if a little dull, and has that
> redeeming quality common to most Canon compacts; it can be relied on
> to take attractive pictures in a wide range of shooting situations with true
> 'point and shoot' simplicity. It's the camera you'd buy your mum.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonsd1100is/page10.asp

The SD800 did less well :
Cons :
> * AiAF focus a bit unpredictable - turn it off
> * Very little manual control
> * ISO 200 and 400 suffer from the effect of noise reduction and loss of low contrast detail
> * ISO 800 and 1600 of limited use
> * Still no exposure information for shutter speeds over 1/60 sec
> * Some corner softness and some highlight clipping
Overall conclusion :
> Of course nothing in life comes for free, and there have obviously been
> some compromises involved in designing and manufacturing a 28-105mm
> equiv. lens in such a small form factor - and in squeezing even more pixels
> onto a 1/2.5-inch CCD. The excellent edge-to-edge sharpness we saw with
> the SD700 IS has gone; the SD800's more ambitious lens range means that
> there is a slight, but noticeable drop off in sharpness towards the edges
> and corners in some circumstances.
> . . .
> I was also disappointed to see the new DIGIC III processor's heavy noise
> reduction blurring away fine, low contrast detail at ISO 200 and 400.
> This is the curse of modern compacts (for the more serious user), but it's
> unusual for a Canon to exhibit noticeable NR artefacts. I wouldn't use
> anything other than ISO 80 for any shot with lots of fine detail (such as
> landscapes), but again, the typical casual/social snap shooter simply won't
> have an issue with it, particularly in prints.
> . . .
> So then, what Canon gives with one hand - the wider lens, better screen
> and other tweaks - it takes away with the other (reduced image quality).
> . . .
> The SD 700 IS was an easy 'Highly Recommended', this one doesn't
> quite make the grade simply because here at dpreview we put a lot of
> weight on image quality, which is the one area where the SD 800 IS
> can't compete with the older model.
> . . .
> Image quality 7.0
> Optics 7.0
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonsd800is/page11.asp
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice 

ASAAR wrote:
>
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:08:33 -0500, H.S. wrote:
>
> > SMS ???• ? wrote:
> > . . .
> >> The A570 IS has a 35 - 140 mm lens, while the A720 IS has a 35mm - 210
> >> mm lens. The A570 IS is a better choice in terms of image quality, with
> >> a better lens and less noisy sensor.
> >
> > Ah, thanks. The latter is probably due to the lower number of pixels in
> > A570 than in the other one (I believe they both have the same sized sensor)?
>
> Both cameras us a 1/2.5" sensor, 7mp for the A570 IS and 8mp for
> the A720 IS. Image quality is not that easy to generalize. With
> fewer pixels, the noise advantage should go to the A570 for shooting
> in dim light @ high ISO. But in good light at low ISO, the
> advantage could go to the A720 based on its greater number of
> pixels. [I just checked some of DPReview's tests, which confirms
> this].

<heavily edited for brevity>

Hello, ASAAR:

Why are you reacting to such an ANCIENT article (dated November 28,
2007), man? It's over seven months old!


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur.TakeThisOut@concentric.net>
 >> Stay informed about: Need advice