Skip Navigation

small quality camera

Travel Forums Travel Photography small quality camera

Page

Last Post

1. Posted by jen_storm (Budding Member, 19 posts) 10 May '09 03:10

I only have a normal standard digital camera but i would like a small-ish camera which has a better lens and gives quality photos on a more professional look.
I dont want any fancy, just one which is simple to use and will take excellent photos on my travels.

any recommendations would be much appreciated.

thanks

2. Posted by Redpaddy (Inactive, 1004 posts) 10 May '09 12:18

There will always be differences of opinion in compact - v - SLR. SLR's are stupidly expensive and offer very little more in features, than a good compact.
I have an Olympus F-130 compact, that is 7.1 mpix. The results are outstandingly good and it fits in your shirt pocket.
SLR's take up so much room and really don't offer much more, considering they cost 10 times as much as a good compact. Just make sure your camera has at least 6 mpix - and you'll never need much more. If you want ten frames a second, then you'll need an SLR. Otherwise, a good little compact for under £100 (€110), will take every picture you need. They all have facilities for memory cards and have different definition settings.
Enjoy your snapping.

3. Posted by Sander (Moderator, 4359 posts) 10 May '09 12:43

Redpaddy: Jen didn't ask for DSLR recommendations, and based on this question, no one would ever suggest one. Please keep your crusade against them from unrelated threads? (Additionally, the Olympus 730 you mention is currently nearly three years old, and probably can't be gotten in stores anymore, so that doesn't make for a very useful suggestion.)

Jen: you don't say what kind of budget you're operating on, but generally speaking you can't go wrong with a Canon ixus for really easy to use and getting really nice results out of the box. The sweet point with those at the moment is probably somewhere around the IXUS 870 IS: 10 megapixels is too many, but there's much worse out there, and the image stabilization should prove useful.
The biggest hurdle for this camera is probably the price, which seems to clock in around £200. For a bit more than half that price, you could get a Panasonic Lumix LZ8, which is just a great little camera, and takes pretty decent photos.

4. Posted by Redpaddy (Inactive, 1004 posts) 11 May '09 10:40

Post #3#.... Post #1# asked for recommendations. No crusade - just genuine answers and polite conversation.

5. Posted by s96024 (Full Member, 106 posts) 11 May '09 12:22

There are actually some very cheap DSLR's out now. Even down to a couple of hundred quid. I would disagree with the features and quality as well. The fact you have so much more control over aperture/shutter speed/exposure for example means you can get a much wider variety of photos than with a point and shoot which gives you the same old average photos all the time. I had a similar opinion on DSLR's a year ago and thought there is no way it could warrant the extra space. I wouldn't leave without it now. Obviously it's a personal choice, but that should be down to each person. It does seem from some of your other posts that you have a real hatred of dslr's and your on a personal crusade to stop anyone ever buying one.

6. Posted by soupatrvlr (Respected Member, 385 posts) 11 May '09 19:33

Sander, I agree with you on the Panasonic Lumix for a great reasonably priced camera. Jen, that would be my recommendation as well. I have the original version of this camera for my "snappy" and really love it. It also shoots a little video as well which can come in handy. The optics are leica, so some of the best around. :) And the size is nice and small, despite having a decent zoom. Good luck!

7. Posted by jen_storm (Budding Member, 19 posts) 13 May '09 12:10

i appreciate all the responses! i will have a look into the recommendations.

8. Posted by Redpaddy (Inactive, 1004 posts) 13 May '09 12:22

Post #3#.... I think you may be a little confused with your knowledge of which Olympus camera I have.
I can't see anywhere in my thread that mentions an Olympus 730.
The camera I have (one of quite a few - in fact) that is mentioned above, is the Olympus F-130.... And it is 6 moths old and was bought brand new. So where you get the "Currently nearly three years old" bit from, is anyone's guess.

9. Posted by Redpaddy (Inactive, 1004 posts) 13 May '09 13:37

And Post #5#.... I don't have a real hatred of D-SLR's. I just happen to have some long term knowledge of photography. What I am stating in my posts about compacts - v - D-SLR's is from experience. I have had cameras of many different types for many years. I also subscribe to monthly publications by several top camera manufacturers. Were you to see the results in monthly competitions - and read articles in independent photography magazines (as I do - and you clearly don't), you would see that all I'm doing is giving genuine unbiased advice about photography equipment to enquirers - and hopefully guide them towards taking lovely pictures without forking out money they could spend on more important items for their trips.

10. Posted by Daawgon (Travel Guru, 1940 posts) 13 May '09 18:48

I'm considering the Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 to replace a Sony point-and-shoot. I also like Olympus quality, and need something that's a little more durable than average. I only wish I could use a digital SLR, but my camera has to fit in my pocket when I travel.