# Need a camera recommendation!



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

I don't consider myself a photography expert, maybe just a casual hobbyist, but I'm growing increasingly dissatisfied with my camera.

Currently I have a Panasonic DMC-TZ1, 5.0 megapixels. The main issues I have are:

1) It's difficult to get pictures in any low light aquariums. Or even high light with fish that never sit still, exposure time is too long and it comes out motion blurred.

2) It's difficult to get a small subject in focus. The autofocus often focuses on something else, even when set to center point and directly pointed at the subject. Or the subject has moved from the center point by the time it completes autofocus, and sometimes even out of frame by the time it takes a picture. It has no manual focus option, other than pushing the button halfway down when pointed at a stationary object, then holding it there while searching for the real shot; the button is sensitive and annoying.

3) The LCD has a narrow viewing angle. Often with all the contortions needed to try and work around other deficiencies and get a decent picture, I end up shooting blind.

I'm setting an initial maximum budget of $200. Has camera tech advanced to the point where some are available for this price, that will substantially improve on what I have? If so, some specific recommendations?


----------



## DogFish (Jul 16, 2011)

Great thread, I'm in the same situation. I looked at a Nikon Nikon - Coolpix S800c 16.0-Megapixel Digital Camera at BestBuy. Along with the points Dark Cobra brought up, I'd like it to "talk" to my Mac without USB wires. 

The Nikon looks good but I don't need internet access or additional internet service bills. I just want to take decent pics of my tanks and be able to load them into my MAC.


----------



## Kat12 (Aug 11, 2013)

I'm canon DSL all the way.


----------



## MSG (Jul 16, 2012)

You don't need a HIGH megapixel camera. Any Canon PowerShot with a "scroll wheel" will suffice. 

@ the sub $200 price range I would recommend the...... 

PowerShot A1000 IS 
PowerShot A480 AiAF
PowerShot SX100 IS 
PowerShot SX160 IS 

I have all those cameras just listed. Also when taking photos, I usually have it set to the 2MP & LOWEST quality setting. I'll adjust it higher if I see something worth framing.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ3 was another camera that I've owned & had good results with, but the button icons started to wear away after 10 months so I sold it. That's when I first got a hold of a Canon.


DSLR will definitely enable you to take high quality photos, but it's not practical to carry around, especially made worse with the extra lithium battery packs, charger, memory cards (sometimes cards get corrupted), cleaning tools (dust/dirt/sand), etc... 

Also what good is a DSLR if the batteries need to be recharged? You can't just run to the closest convenience store for a brand new set of batteries.
The whole thing should set you back a minimum of $500 for a basic DSLR. 

When you finally get the camera out of the box, go through the instruction manual & LEARN how to use the different settings. Once you understand WHY the picture is blurry, you can fix it in the next shot. Takes me about 1-2 seconds to make adjustments. 

Each camera will have it's limitations. It's up to you to learn what they are & make the most of it. If it really bothers you, upgrade to the next model. 

Canon is the one brand that has given me the least amount of headaches. I can pick up almost any Canon & get good FOCUSED pictures in less than 30 seconds.


----------



## DogFish (Jul 16, 2011)

Kat12 said:


> I'm canon DSL all the way.


O.K. so that info is super-helpful :tongue:


----------



## Kat12 (Aug 11, 2013)

MSG said:


> You don't need a HIGH megapixel camera. Any Canon PowerShot with a "scroll wheel" will suffice.
> 
> @ the sub $200 price range I would recommend the......
> 
> ...


red above.


----------



## Kat12 (Aug 11, 2013)

DogFish said:


> O.K. so that info is super-helpful :tongue:




I can catch a quality shot of a guppy fry from 6 feet away from my tank.

It gives you more control over your photos than a point and shoot where all you can do is zoom in or out.

The quality from my canon DSLR vs my credit card size point and shoot (with zoom) is night and day. 

Add in ability to grow and add accessories vs having to upgrade the whole camera. 

Like I mentioned above, I can take it anywhere if I'm being fancy I'm carrying an extra lense, but it hangs around my neck so really not that much of a pain, and that's with often carrying a child. My dad takes his out and does nature (bug) photos all the time and never had an issue with carrying his and as long as I can remember he's taken it just about everywhere we went. 

To me point and shoot really doesn't have many more capabilities beyond that of a cell phone camera now a days.


----------



## Bserve (Nov 4, 2012)

Find a Canon Rebel DSLR on evilbay. That may cost around $300 though. Maybe a used 1D mkii...?


Sent from my BRAIN


----------



## m00se (Jan 8, 2011)

Digital cameras are like any other commodity these days. The second you drive it off the lot the price halves and there's something new!! better!! coming along. I'll tell you what though - If I had the scratch when the Canon S100 came out I would have grabbed one in a heartbeat. Alas I settled on an ELPH 300hs instead. 

So in your honor I went looking and I just found this:

http://goo.gl/ZWgPZa

The power of manual focus and shutter speed cannot be overemphasized. This (among other things) sets a DSLR apart from the mere point and shoot. This camera has that capability. If you can get past the "Refurbished" part of this offer you should seriously consider it.


----------



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

Thanks for all the responses!

Seems to be a lot of love for Canon here, so I'm now looking primarily at them.

I've been looking over a lot of reviews and specs, and I have a question. Let's say I'm comparing higher end point-and-shoots, like S- or SX-series models, with the option for manual focus and exposure. Versus low-end DSLRs, like the Rebel T3 or 1D MkII, with a _basic_ OEM lens. (If I need to shell out hundreds more for a better lens to get good use out of a DSLR, they're definitely not worth it to me.)

The DSLRs obviously have larger lenses and image sensors, and I understand the advantage to that.

But the point-and-shoots seem to have every other advantage.

I frequently found that the higher end point-and-shoots use newer generations of image sensors, with better sensitivity, to at least partially make up for the smaller area. (At least for other brands, for which I found plenty of info on Exmor, backlit CMOS, and so on; Canon doesn't seem to go into similar detail.)

And then there's the chipsets. A few examples:

SX280: DIGIC 6
S100: DIGIC 5
Rebel T3: DIGIC 4
1D MkII: DIGIC 2

The low-end DSLRs are lagging behind here too.

Plus they're larger, heavier, and more expensive. And lacking in bells and whistles, most of which I probably won't care about; but WiFi would be awfully nice, and the cheapest Canon DSLR with that appears to be $1,000!

So is a stripped down DSLR _really_ that much better? How and why?


----------



## DogFish (Jul 16, 2011)

I have different goals than dark cobra so i'm out here and I'll start a spin off thread so I don't hijack this one. :smile:


----------



## Algae Beater (Jun 3, 2011)

Seriously, I'm a total canon loyalist. Just better lenses for my 7d IMO. 

I went to Thailand this year and to avoid lugging my slr and gear I opted for a G15 with an underwater housing. I realize it isn't wireless, but for a non slr, it truly performs in high ISO situations and is very quick for a Ccd camera. 

Though the industry seems to be moving towards the 3/4 mirrorless interchangeable lens format. S


----------



## gerbillo (Dec 5, 2013)

DarkCobra, comparing chipsets / image processors between Point-and-Shoots and DSLRs is, excuse the cliché, comparing apples to oranges. P&S rely on their image processor to analyze millions of pixels several times a second for auto focus (aka contrast detect). DSLRs us a different AF technology that's far less computationally expensive (phase-detect), so DSLRs can get much faster AF performance even if it has older electronics than a P&S.

Anyway, enough of the jargon. As everyone else is saying, in good lighting a P&S is not much better than a good smartphone camera. Less ideal lighting, I expect P&S to edge out, for example more light is needed for macro shots if you want to get closer. How close do you want to be? Are the fish small or large? Those are issues you need to figure out if you want to go with a P&S.

I've used several DSLR camera systems in my life, and what really matters is the ergonomics, whether it has the lenses you want at the prices you can afford. So if you're thinking of an DSLR, shop around. Canons are excellent cameras but their ergonomics never felt right to my hand; I'm a Pentax man and I'm very happy with it, although I'd been happy with Nikon too.

Since you're not really considering a DSLR, I suggest looking into mirrorless camera systems like a Sony NEX or micro-4/3s. While not cheap as $200 for a basic setup, it can be less than a full DSLR, and have a large, high quality, fast sensor similar to a DSLR. I'm partial NEX, so a NEX-3N might be up your alley.

Really, just make a list of cameras that MIGHT work, shop at a place that has a good return policy, and give it a whorl. If it doesn't work out, return the camera and try the next one on your list. It's hard to judge the performance for your specific needs from reading a review, so try them out.


----------



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

gerbillo said:


> DarkCobra, comparing chipsets / image processors between Point-and-Shoots and DSLRs is, excuse the cliché, comparing apples to oranges. P&S rely on their image processor to analyze millions of pixels several times a second for auto focus (aka contrast detect). DSLRs us a different AF technology that's far less computationally expensive (phase-detect), so DSLRs can get much faster AF performance even if it has older electronics than a P&S.


That was one of my main concerns with the older chipsets, that AF and general response time would be slower. But had no idea DSLR used a different focusing method. Have looked them up and now understand the basic differences.



gerbillo said:


> Since you're not really considering a DSLR, I suggest looking into mirrorless camera systems like a Sony NEX or micro-4/3s. While not cheap as $200 for a basic setup, it can be less than a full DSLR, and have a large, high quality, fast sensor similar to a DSLR. I'm partial NEX, so a NEX-3N might be up your alley.


Aha, I've seen mention of these before, but called EVILs.



gerbillo said:


> Really, just make a list of cameras that MIGHT work, shop at a place that has a good return policy, and give it a whorl. If it doesn't work out, return the camera and try the next one on your list. It's hard to judge the performance for your specific needs from reading a review, so try them out.


This is the best suggestion of all. While at least all this is making better sense now, I still have little idea what will actually be satisfactory. Trying a few out will definitely help.

Thanks!


----------



## Wasserpest (Jun 12, 2003)

Adorama has the S110 right now (or shall we say had it today) for $190. I think this is by far the best camera in that price range.

To prevent motion blurriness under low light condition you need a flash. Frontal flash with aquariums leads to reflections, although if you get close enough to the glass you may be able to minimize them.

So the next step up would be a camera that allows you to use an external flash, which (incl the flash) will then almost triple your budget, like a G15+flash.

Then you are still stuck with P&S cameras and their sub-optimal autofocus and shutterlag (for something like fish pictures), and only going DSLR will resolve that. 

Then you get into lenses... It's a vicious cycle... only for a few fish pictures.


----------



## dana (Dec 12, 2013)

The last person who gave me a 200 dollar budget, I did an ebay search and found canon 30d for around 100 and recommended the 50 mm 1.8 lens to go with it.


----------



## DarkCobra (Jun 22, 2004)

dana said:


> The last person who gave me a 200 dollar budget, I did an ebay search and found canon 30d for around 100 and recommended the 50 mm 1.8 lens to go with it.


That's a sweet deal!

I'm starting to check out some local stores to see what they stock. If I try a point-and-shoot I will want the option to easily return, just in case it turns out to be insufficient (or broken/buggy/etc). But will also check Ebay just prior to making any purchase. Going to have to wait until after Christmas now though, busy busy.


----------



## ljapa (Jul 23, 2013)

dana said:


> The last person who gave me a 200 dollar budget, I did an ebay search and found canon 30d for around 100 and recommended the 50 mm 1.8 lens to go with it.


That Canon 50mm/f1.8 is a very nice lens for fish pictures. With the large aperture, you can make very low light shots. Of course, with a wide open aperture, the depth of field is tiny, so plan on wasted shots if your fish are in motion. 

But, you can't beat the picture quality for a lens that's $100 - $125.


----------



## tetra73 (Aug 2, 2011)

You need to know what camera format you want. A point and shoot like the Canon powershots or a DSLR? DSLR is bigger. You need good lenses to get the best image quality. A point and shoot is smaller and more convenient to carry and to shoot anything. They also have the macro mode too. Shooting in low light or with crappy lighting condition is a challenge to all camera systems. There are ways to get great images but this would usually involving knowing how to use the flash and where to light up your subjects. Two, you need a pretty good camera to be able to focus in low light and fast enough for the fish. The Canon 40d is the least minimal body. The going used price is around $250 to $300. Even if you body have a good, fast, accurate focusing system, your lens needs to have a good AF speed. That 50 f1.8? The AF is slow. You may consider the 50 f1.4, but that's a $300 lens there. I still think you are better off getting something like the Canon Powershot G9 or G10, any other top of the line Canon powershot models.


----------



## tetra73 (Aug 2, 2011)

DarkCobra said:


> That's a sweet deal!
> 
> I'm starting to check out some local stores to see what they stock. If I try a point-and-shoot I will want the option to easily return, just in case it turns out to be insufficient (or broken/buggy/etc). But will also check Ebay just prior to making any purchase. Going to have to wait until after Christmas now though, busy busy.



Try www.keh.com for used gear... You won't be disappointed.


----------



## GraphicGr8s (Apr 4, 2011)

Don't overlook the Pentax brand. Any of the DSLRs they make use every lens ever made for a K mount and also the older M42 mount. Pentax has image stabilization in camera so every lens even 40 year old lenses benefit. Put a small zoom on it and carry it in a holster bag. I do that all the time with mine and it's always at the ready. Nicest thing is you get to use some really awesome glass that's not too expensive anymore. And the glass from those old lenses is just that. Glass.


----------



## adavisus (Oct 14, 2007)

Rather than fret about opening a new can of worms with another camera, why not buy a couple or three cheap effective LED light arrays and tinker with using a flash unit with bounce reflectors with a slave unit


----------



## anastasisariel (Oct 4, 2009)

Wasserpest said:


> Adorama has the S110 right now (or shall we say had it today) for $190. I think this is by far the best camera in that price range.
> 
> To prevent motion blurriness under low light condition you need a flash. Frontal flash with aquariums leads to reflections, although if you get close enough to the glass you may be able to minimize them.
> 
> ...


lol, might not help DarkCobra but it sure helped me! Buying a cheap Canon I thinks!


----------



## m00se (Jan 8, 2011)

You're welcome 

Since I posted that url it's gone down to $184.95! Good deal for sure.


----------



## Wasserpest (Jun 12, 2003)

Totally missed to follow your link. Sorry for the double dip. Both S100 or S110 are fantastic little cams for most requirements (even low light tanks), just not really for fish pictures.


----------



## xNiNELiVES (Oct 28, 2013)

Kat12 said:


> red above.


Thank you! I was going to respond but you took the words out of my mouth.


----------

