BuffettNews.com

Posted: **May 25, 2005 12:31 pm**

AlbatrossFlyer wrote:
land_shark3 wrote:I hate making these decisions.
then just go buy the sd400 and you won't be sorry

I agree. I would have gone with the sd400, but it was out of my price range by a little bit

Posted: **May 25, 2005 12:37 pm**

I've been thinking of going digital but since I didn't buy my first auto-focus 35mm SLR until about 20 years after they came out I figure I'll wait for the next wave of technology to hit before I jump in.

Posted: **May 25, 2005 12:39 pm**

SchoolGirlHeart wrote:but on a day when the waves are running high in Hawaii, I've shot over 700 pics and bunch of video clips.....

Damn! I would think that memory cards would be more of a concern than the batteries. I just picked up a 512mb card for mine, that should be plenty for me.

Posted: **May 25, 2005 12:42 pm**

SchoolGirlHeart wrote:
AlbatrossFlyer wrote:
land_shark3 wrote:I hate making these decisions.
then just go buy the sd400 and you won't be sorry
I agree. I would have gone with the sd400, but it was out of my price range by a little bit

4 mpixel sd300 is about 50 bucks cheaper

Posted: **May 25, 2005 12:48 pm**

AlbatrossFlyer wrote:
SchoolGirlHeart wrote:
AlbatrossFlyer wrote:
land_shark3 wrote:I hate making these decisions.
then just go buy the sd400 and you won't be sorry
I agree. I would have gone with the sd400, but it was out of my price range by a little bit
4 mpixel sd300 is about 50 bucks cheaper

Or for $60-70 more, you can get the 7.1 MP SD500.

Posted: **May 25, 2005 12:49 pm**

while we're talking cameras, and such . .

I have the Olympus with the 10X zoom . .anyone know info on the attachment/lens that doubles your zoom capabilities . .? ?

sorry, I'm just a rookie re: digitals . .

Posted: **May 25, 2005 12:50 pm**

land_shark3 wrote:
AlbatrossFlyer wrote:
SchoolGirlHeart wrote:
AlbatrossFlyer wrote:
land_shark3 wrote:I hate making these decisions.
then just go buy the sd400 and you won't be sorry
I agree. I would have gone with the sd400, but it was out of my price range by a little bit
4 mpixel sd300 is about 50 bucks cheaper
Or for $60-70 more, you can get the 7.1 MP SD500.

7 MP is way overkill for a pocket camera. at 7mp you'll need a huge memory card to store a reasonable number of snapshots.

Posted: **May 25, 2005 1:48 pm**

AlbatrossFlyer wrote:7 MP is way overkill for a pocket camera. at 7mp you'll need a huge memory card to store a reasonable number of snapshots.

But think of the detail on the boo... I mean the detail out at the lake or tailgating.

Posted: **May 25, 2005 1:48 pm**

So have we determined that size doesn't matter?

Posted: **May 25, 2005 1:52 pm**

buffettbride wrote:So have we determined that size doesn't matter?

From the men; I hear that a more compact, tighter design is favorable.

From the women; it sounds like 10x zoom and lasting power is important.

Posted: **May 25, 2005 1:58 pm**

land_shark3 wrote:
buffettbride wrote:So have we determined that size doesn't matter?
From the men; I hear that a more compact, tighter design is favorable.

From the women; it sounds like 10x zoom and lasting power is important.

Well, I'm not compact...but I'm versatile.

Oh wait...are we still talking about cameras?

Posted: **May 25, 2005 2:07 pm**

Megapixels baby, it's all about megapixels

With enough mp's you don't need a big zoom.

Size smize, most camera's are small anyway

Posted: **May 25, 2005 2:08 pm**

buffettbride wrote:
land_shark3 wrote:
buffettbride wrote:So have we determined that size doesn't matter?
From the men; I hear that a more compact, tighter design is favorable.

From the women; it sounds like 10x zoom and lasting power is important.

Well, I'm not compact...but I'm versatile.

Oh wait...are we still talking about cameras?

Well that's good, because the more compact cameras often have some faults that have been worked out in the more experienced versatile models.

Ok, I'm just about out of innuendos.

Posted: **May 25, 2005 2:11 pm**

land_shark3 wrote:
buffettbride wrote:
land_shark3 wrote:
buffettbride wrote:So have we determined that size doesn't matter?
From the men; I hear that a more compact, tighter design is favorable.

From the women; it sounds like 10x zoom and lasting power is important.

Well, I'm not compact...but I'm versatile.

Oh wait...are we still talking about cameras?
Well that's good, because the more compact cameras often have some faults that have been worked out in the more experienced versatile models.

Ok, I'm just about out of innuendos.

*pat on back*

Ya did good, kid.

Posted: **May 25, 2005 2:12 pm**

I have the Sony T1... its small.. is 5.0 megapixels and has a 3x optical zoom. I also mainly take pics for personal use and this camera has been great. Since it is so little it fits easily in the pelican box so we take it fishing/boating all the time. I also love that it does video... makes it easy to record the crazy stuff that happens. I love my camera... just my input!

Posted: **May 26, 2005 10:19 am**

Finally took the digital plunge about 2 months ago. My wife and I are photography nuts and we are sort of old school when it comes to cameras. Never liked cameras that made decisions for me so I had always been happy w/ my Nikon FM because it is completely manual. Shopped around and decided on the Nikon Coolpix 8800. It has 8.0 mp and a 10x optical zoom and takes beautiful pics that you can enlarge to ANY size and maintain sharp detail.

FinzEast is right, with enough megapixels, you can compensate for weaker zoom capability but this one has both. What sets the 8800 apart is the image stabilization technology similar to very high-end binoculars. All the zoom in the world won't do you any good if you can't hold the camera steady enough to use it.

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?ca ... ctNr=25523

Posted: **May 26, 2005 10:22 am**

That looks nice, but quite a bit higher than my budget ($300-400).

Posted: **May 26, 2005 10:29 am**

SchoolGirlHeart wrote:hmmm..... if you're going to be shooting mostly gatherings, zoom isn't that big a deal; almost anything will do. If it will be more landscapes, distance photos, etc, zoom becomes more important. I seriously miss my Olympus 10X optical zoom (the Olympus died...), because I shoot a lot outdoors.

Megapixels... again, depends what you're going to do with it.... 4x6's, 8x10's... doesn't matter all that much. Shoot on high resolution and you'll be fine. My old 2.1 mp did fine for non-professional, personal shots. My current 3.(something) is also enough.

Size... Size matters.... With my older camera, I left it behind a lot. Too big. I now have a small Canon that fits in a fanny pack, and I tend to take it along a lot more.

Consider this, too. Batteries. If you buy a camera with proprietary rechargables, and they die, you're screwed. Consider one what will take 4 AA's in a pinch.

Canon A80, 2 reloads of batteries plus the set in the camera, and two spare memory cards.. only thing I need now are a wide-angle and a telephoto lense to augment it.. and it great. I have probably shot 75 rolls of film (equiv) thru mine and it is a great camera.

Posted: **May 31, 2005 3:46 pm**

Still doing research....

I remember some time ago, advertisements about a camera that had speeds similiar to SLR cameras. Unfortunately, most of the ones I am seeing are close to 2 seconds shot-to-shot.

Does anyone know of cameras that might be a bit faster for action shots?

Posted: **May 31, 2005 4:03 pm**

Maybe you should be looking on CameraNews.com??

Just kidding J! Love ya man! Hubby got me a Kodak Easyshare with the printer dock for Mother's Day - I'm intimidated by it, but haven't put any time into learning about it yet. I'm the type who like t research these things, but he saved me that step.

Not sure if that's good or bad...

BuffettNews.com

Optical Zoom / Megapixels / Size - ???