New Camera
 

OK guys and gals. Wife is wanting a new camera, she is stating that it should be a HIGH speed one that takes Fast pictures. Also that it should be not too big . Insert humor if you want. I am just asking for some camera advice. Pics being taken are going to be of family,kids, vacation stuff like that. Any help is very much appreciated.

Budget?

Low light?

Action or stills for the most part?

Budget 300-400 probably low light.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Action and stills yes 5 year old 18 month old stills when they sleep yes!


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Take a look at:


http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consum...rshot_sx130_is

Costco has an excellent Fuji that has 30x zoom.
saw it today

It gets complex. But if you aren't in perfect light and/or using a tripod 30x zoom isn't good for much. And the Canon digic-4 brain rules the world in porti-cams.

I have had good experience with Canon Powershot series, but for some reason their most attractive cameras come with CMOS sensors (which will drive you crazy if you shoot 1080p video).

I have a Canon SX1 myself, great camera... except for the CMOS. Never again will I buy a camera with one of them.

Long story but use 720p if you can.

All Canon DSLRs up to the 1Dxxx use CMOS sensors.

most any good camera today has settings to take quick pics like in sports mode. or running

you are gonna get 1,000 different opinions , and if you got to sites online a 1,000 more

best thing >>>>>>>>>>. go to a camera store , right down what you are looking for in a camera

price
features
ease of use
warranty
name brand


you really cant go wrong with , nikon, sony ,panasonic lumix ,canon , fuji



i will post a picture of all our cameras lol . we got over 10 lol , be back with pics


ok here is 8 of ours ranging from 10 to 16 megs , used a canon to take pic so we have 9 and daughters got 2 others of ours

got 2 sonys ,samsung, nikon , panasonic, canons

the big nikon is bulky but its the cats meow .

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...a/IMG_8074.jpg

Why would I want to use 720p outside of broadcast video environment? :dunno:[/QUOTE]

Canon pretty much rules the roost if quality images is important to you in a consumer or pro-sumer grade point n shoot. Any ol' digital camera can "take pictures". I really like my Canon G10. I had a older Canon SD710IS before that, great little cameras.

[/QUOTE]

I was afraid you would ask that. A an old friend of mine, and a two time Pulitzer Prize winning photographer, told me that during a seminar for pro photographers Canon technical types told the pros to always use 720P and why. But he does not remember why.

I have a 7D and there is zero question that 720P video "looks" better than 1080P. If I had to guess I'd say it's due to less upsampling/interpolation at 720P. I've been told and noticed that stills shot in "small" jpeg look identical to "large" jpegs even though the small jpegs are about 1/2 the size, sometimes smaller than that, in memory size terms.

My 7d is advertised as having an 18 megapixel sensor. That's a lie, the sensor is maybe 9 megapixels upsampled to 18. Everyone does this. I think this is why stills/video taken at closer to the sensor's native resolution look as good as or better than pushing the sensor and brain to the max.

I just bought one of these:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consum...sx160_is_black

So far I'm liking it a lot. I haven't had that much chance to learn it but the pictures I've taken so far have looked really good.

Well, I am in the broadcast TV industry, so there is no chance I wouldn't be curious about it. :wavey:

On a particular camera, it's very possible. But in general, there is nothing that would make 720p look inherently better.

There would be some logic to that, but 1080 video is only 2 megapixels (1920x1080~2M). Surely all modern camera sensors have that many. :dunno:

Multiply the frame rate by those 2mp. Then you see that the processor has a lot of work to do.

The new Compact System Cameras are cool. Interchangeable lenses like a DSLR, but a much smaller body. The Nikon 1 and the Sony NEX series cameras are pretty awesome.

That's why cameras have processors with enough computing power to do that work. :dunno: 1080p video only has 2 times as many pixels per second as 720p. We are not talking an order of magnitude difference.

I agree that 720p per se is not better that 1080p, generally speaking I'd argue the reverse. Glancing over my handbook it appears 720p video may be taken at up to 60fps and 1080p at 24 or 30. That is likely much of the issue at hand. I'd bet this peculiarity also has to do with image processing in the camera and onto the card not so much sensor density per se.

I'm thinking about that exact camera too. It appears to be a winner

WOW! thanks for all the info guys! I appreciate it very much!

I'll let you know if any real downsides show up. So far it looks like a good deal at $199.00.

Thanks.

Back to the 720p thing.

Apparently, at 1080p and high frame rates memory cards tend to overheat badly when shooting longer scenes. I'm sure the smaller bodies of DSLRs contribute to card heating as well.

At 720p my cards do still tend to heat up quite nicely when shooting video.

According lore all or almost all of "The Avengers" was shot using Canon 7D and 5D and 1D DSLRs.