best digital under $400?

Read reviews at dpreview, good options are Canon S3IS, Panasonic , Sony
H2.
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

Rex B wrote:
> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought
> a camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
> magazine.
>
> Min specs:
> 5 megapixels
> 10X optical
> macro capability
>
> Wide angle would be useful
> panoramic would be useful.
>
> Image stabilization
>
> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>
> I'd welcome all suggestions.
>
> Thanks
>

I guess the Panasonic DMC-FZ7 or the Canon S3is are about your best
choices. I guess I'd go with the S3is as it's lower noise than the
Panasonic. If Panasonic could solve their noise issues they'd have an
awesome product line, based on their features.
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

Maybe a camera phone for your brochure. Let's face it, a camera and a
phone! Very economically viable!

Tell me, how do 'you' define the difference between panoramic and wide
angle? Just interested.


"Rex B" <rex.TakeThisOut@wmautomotive.com> wrote in message
news:12fbsaqkok5qqa4@corp.supernews.com...
>I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought a
>camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
> magazine.
>
> Min specs:
> 5 megapixels
> 10X optical
> macro capability
>
> Wide angle would be useful
> panoramic would be useful.
>
> Image stabilization
>
> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>
> I'd welcome all suggestions.
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> - -
> Rex Burkheimer
> WM Automotive
> Fort Worth TX
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

Jack wrote:
> Maybe a camera phone for your brochure. Let's face it, a camera and a
> phone! Very economically viable!
>
> Tell me, how do 'you' define the difference between panoramic and wide
> angle? Just interested.

Wide angle is equivalent to a 24-28mm lense. For taking interior views
of rooms, for example.
Panoramic is like a long thin 180-degree landscape. This is more a
novelty than a need. I sometimes like to picture a retail store in a
small town. Panoramic view gives a better feel for what the neighborhood
is like

>
> "Rex B" <rex.DeleteThis@wmautomotive.com> wrote in message
> news:12fbsaqkok5qqa4@corp.supernews.com...
>> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought a
>> camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
>> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
>> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
>> magazine.
>>
>> Min specs:
>> 5 megapixels
>> 10X optical
>> macro capability
>>
>> Wide angle would be useful
>> panoramic would be useful.
>>
>> Image stabilization
>>
>> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>>
>> I'd welcome all suggestions.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --
>> - -
>> Rex Burkheimer
>> WM Automotive
>> Fort Worth TX
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:08:07 -0500, Rex B <rex DeleteThis @wmautomotive.com> wrote:
>
> Jack wrote:
>> Maybe a camera phone for your brochure. Let's face it, a camera and a
>> phone! Very economically viable!
>>
>> Tell me, how do 'you' define the difference between panoramic and wide
>> angle? Just interested.
>
> Wide angle is equivalent to a 24-28mm lense. For taking interior views
> of rooms, for example.
> Panoramic is like a long thin 180-degree landscape. This is more a
> novelty than a need. I sometimes like to picture a retail store in a
> small town. Panoramic view gives a better feel for what the neighborhood
> is like

24-28mm is hard for a 10x-ish camera; most of them tend to bottom out
around 35mm or thereabouts. There are one or two that go to 28mm, but
nothing (I think) in your price bracket.

I'd suggest living with the 35mm lower limit and investigate the
possibilities of digital stitching (taking two or more overlapping
frames and then gluing them together in software). You'll need that
anyway if you want to make panaorama views.

In the $300-400 range, there are several good cameras which would fit
the bill; most of the major manufacturers have a model in that niche.
The three that seem to have the most partisans here are the Canon S
series (current: S3IS), the Panasonic FZs (FZ7; the bigger FZ30 is
beyond your budget), and Sony (H2 and H5). There are plenty of other
good models, but those seem to be the most-talked-about on this group.

-dms

>> "Rex B" <rex DeleteThis @wmautomotive.com> wrote in message
>> news:12fbsaqkok5qqa4@corp.supernews.com...
>>> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought a
>>> camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
>>> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
>>> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
>>> magazine.
>>>
>>> Min specs:
>>> 5 megapixels
>>> 10X optical
>>> macro capability
>>>
>>> Wide angle would be useful
>>> panoramic would be useful.
>>>
>>> Image stabilization
>>>
>>> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>>>
>>> I'd welcome all suggestions.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> --
>>> - -
>>> Rex Burkheimer
>>> WM Automotive
>>> Fort Worth TX
>>
>>
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

Daniel Silevitch wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:08:07 -0500, Rex B <rex.TakeThisOut@wmautomotive.com> wrote:
>> Jack wrote:
>>> Maybe a camera phone for your brochure. Let's face it, a camera and a
>>> phone! Very economically viable!
>>>
>>> Tell me, how do 'you' define the difference between panoramic and wide
>>> angle? Just interested.
>> Wide angle is equivalent to a 24-28mm lense. For taking interior views
>> of rooms, for example.
>> Panoramic is like a long thin 180-degree landscape. This is more a
>> novelty than a need. I sometimes like to picture a retail store in a
>> small town. Panoramic view gives a better feel for what the neighborhood
>> is like
>
> 24-28mm is hard for a 10x-ish camera; most of them tend to bottom out
> around 35mm or thereabouts. There are one or two that go to 28mm, but
> nothing (I think) in your price bracket.
>
> I'd suggest living with the 35mm lower limit and investigate the
> possibilities of digital stitching (taking two or more overlapping
> frames and then gluing them together in software). You'll need that
> anyway if you want to make panaorama views.
>
> In the $300-400 range, there are several good cameras which would fit
> the bill; most of the major manufacturers have a model in that niche.
> The three that seem to have the most partisans here are the Canon S
> series (current: S3IS), the Panasonic FZs (FZ7; the bigger FZ30 is
> beyond your budget), and Sony (H2 and H5). There are plenty of other
> good models, but those seem to be the most-talked-about on this group.

That's helpful in narrowing down what I have to look at.
Yours and other posts give me about 10 to look at.

Thanks much, still looking.

Rex

>
> -dms
>
>>> "Rex B" <rex.TakeThisOut@wmautomotive.com> wrote in message
>>> news:12fbsaqkok5qqa4@corp.supernews.com...
>>>> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought a
>>>> camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
>>>> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
>>>> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
>>>> magazine.
>>>>
>>>> Min specs:
>>>> 5 megapixels
>>>> 10X optical
>>>> macro capability
>>>>
>>>> Wide angle would be useful
>>>> panoramic would be useful.
>>>>
>>>> Image stabilization
>>>>
>>>> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>>>>
>>>> I'd welcome all suggestions.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> - -
>>>> Rex Burkheimer
>>>> WM Automotive
>>>> Fort Worth TX
>>>
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

For your specs and budget, looks like the Olympus SP500UZ will be the
best fit, ($ 280 at CompUSA, + $50 for a 1Gby mem card).

Daniel Silevitch wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:08:07 -0500, Rex B <rex RemoveThis @wmautomotive.com> wrote:
>> Jack wrote:
>>> Maybe a camera phone for your brochure. Let's face it, a camera and a
>>> phone! Very economically viable!
>>>
>>> Tell me, how do 'you' define the difference between panoramic and wide
>>> angle? Just interested.
>> Wide angle is equivalent to a 24-28mm lense. For taking interior views
>> of rooms, for example.
>> Panoramic is like a long thin 180-degree landscape. This is more a
>> novelty than a need. I sometimes like to picture a retail store in a
>> small town. Panoramic view gives a better feel for what the neighborhood
>> is like
>
> 24-28mm is hard for a 10x-ish camera; most of them tend to bottom out
> around 35mm or thereabouts. There are one or two that go to 28mm, but
> nothing (I think) in your price bracket.
>
> I'd suggest living with the 35mm lower limit and investigate the
> possibilities of digital stitching (taking two or more overlapping
> frames and then gluing them together in software). You'll need that
> anyway if you want to make panaorama views.
>
> In the $300-400 range, there are several good cameras which would fit
> the bill; most of the major manufacturers have a model in that niche.
> The three that seem to have the most partisans here are the Canon S
> series (current: S3IS), the Panasonic FZs (FZ7; the bigger FZ30 is
> beyond your budget), and Sony (H2 and H5). There are plenty of other
> good models, but those seem to be the most-talked-about on this group.
>
> -dms
>
>>> "Rex B" <rex RemoveThis @wmautomotive.com> wrote in message
>>> news:12fbsaqkok5qqa4@corp.supernews.com...
>>>> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought a
>>>> camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
>>>> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
>>>> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
>>>> magazine.
>>>>
>>>> Min specs:
>>>> 5 megapixels
>>>> 10X optical
>>>> macro capability
>>>>
>>>> Wide angle would be useful
>>>> panoramic would be useful.
>>>>
>>>> Image stabilization
>>>>
>>>> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>>>>
>>>> I'd welcome all suggestions.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> - -
>>>> Rex Burkheimer
>>>> WM Automotive
>>>> Fort Worth TX
>>>
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

tiresia2.DeleteThis@hotmail.it wrote:
> Rex B ha scritto:
>
>> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've
>> bought a camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next
>> few days. Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
>> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a
>> glossy magazine.
>>
>> Min specs:
>> 5 megapixels
>> 10X optical
>> macro capability
>>
>> Wide angle would be useful
>> panoramic would be useful.
>>
>> Image stabilization
>>
>> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>
>
> With all this item,it does not exist a camera in the world.

Panasonic FZ5. Wide-angle and panos are easily achieved with image
stitching software. Not current, so should be quite low-cost.

David
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

Rex B wrote:
> Jack wrote:
> > Maybe a camera phone for your brochure. Let's face it, a camera and a
> > phone! Very economically viable!
> >
> > Tell me, how do 'you' define the difference between panoramic and wide
> > angle? Just interested.
>
> Wide angle is equivalent to a 24-28mm lense. For taking interior views
> of rooms, for example.
> Panoramic is like a long thin 180-degree landscape. This is more a
> novelty than a need. I sometimes like to picture a retail store in a
> small town. Panoramic view gives a better feel for what the neighborhood
> is like
>
> >
> > "Rex B" <rex.RemoveThis@wmautomotive.com> wrote in message
> > news:12fbsaqkok5qqa4@corp.supernews.com...
> >> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought a
> >> camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
> >> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
> >> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
> >> magazine.
> >>
> >> Min specs:
> >> 5 megapixels
> >> 10X optical
> >> macro capability
> >>
> >> Wide angle would be useful
> >> panoramic would be useful.
> >>
> >> Image stabilization
> >>
> >> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
> >>
> >> I'd welcome all suggestions.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> --
> >> - -
> >> Rex Burkheimer
> >> WM Automotive
> >> Fort Worth TX
> >
> >


This may sound a bit silly, but for panaromic why not just take a
photo from a distance and cut of the top and bottom? I had a pentax
35mm that did exactly that for its panaromic shots.


Eric
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

I thought the consensus of the group was that the Panasonic had less noise
than the Canon, with those same models? I could be wrong.


"SMS" <scharf.steven.DeleteThis@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:44f621dd$0$96198$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
Rex B wrote:
> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought
> a camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
> magazine.
>
> Min specs:
> 5 megapixels
> 10X optical
> macro capability
>
> Wide angle would be useful
> panoramic would be useful.
>
> Image stabilization
>
> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>
> I'd welcome all suggestions.
>
> Thanks
>

I guess the Panasonic DMC-FZ7 or the Canon S3is are about your best
choices. I guess I'd go with the S3is as it's lower noise than the
Panasonic. If Panasonic could solve their noise issues they'd have an
awesome product line, based on their features.
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

Panasonic are well known to have the most noise but do very well at iso
100 where as the competion gives you 1-200 more iso.
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

bluezfolk wrote:
> Rex B wrote:
>> Jack wrote:
>>> Maybe a camera phone for your brochure. Let's face it, a camera and a
>>> phone! Very economically viable!
>>>
>>> Tell me, how do 'you' define the difference between panoramic and wide
>>> angle? Just interested.
>> Wide angle is equivalent to a 24-28mm lense. For taking interior views
>> of rooms, for example.
>> Panoramic is like a long thin 180-degree landscape. This is more a
>> novelty than a need. I sometimes like to picture a retail store in a
>> small town. Panoramic view gives a better feel for what the neighborhood
>> is like
>>
>>> "Rex B" <rex.TakeThisOut@wmautomotive.com> wrote in message
>>> news:12fbsaqkok5qqa4@corp.supernews.com...
>>>> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought a
>>>> camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
>>>> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
>>>> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
>>>> magazine.
>>>>
>>>> Min specs:
>>>> 5 megapixels
>>>> 10X optical
>>>> macro capability
>>>>
>>>> Wide angle would be useful
>>>> panoramic would be useful.
>>>>
>>>> Image stabilization
>>>>
>>>> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>>>>
>>>> I'd welcome all suggestions.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> - -
>>>> Rex Burkheimer
>>>> WM Automotive
>>>> Fort Worth TX
>>>
>
>
> This may sound a bit silly, but for panaromic why not just take a
> photo from a distance and cut of the top and bottom? I had a pentax
> 35mm that did exactly that for its panaromic shots.

Well sure, but sometimes you can't back off far enough to do that.
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400? 

I took your suggestions, charted out the features/price by model.
Looks like the best one for my purposes is the Canon S3IS.
Thanks much for all the input.

- -
Rex Burkheimer
Fort Worth TX

Rex B wrote:
> I need a new camera for my workplace. It's been years since I've bought
> a camera, so I'm not up to speed, yet I need this in the next few days.
> Estimated budget was $300, but I can stretch it.
> Output needs to be good enough for (occasional) publication in a glossy
> magazine.
>
> Min specs:
> 5 megapixels
> 10X optical
> macro capability
>
> Wide angle would be useful
> panoramic would be useful.
>
> Image stabilization
>
> Nothing small, needs to be big enough to handle easily.
>
> I'd welcome all suggestions.
>
> Thanks
>
 >> Stay informed about: best digital under $400?