Is anyone in here a semi-serious camera junkie? I'm in the market for a high-end point-and-shoot camera (can't swing the DSLRs yet), and I've narrowed it down to a couple. Here are my two favorites. Option 1:DMC-FZ100 | PRODUCTS | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic Global Option 2:DSC-HX100V/B | Cyber-shot® Digital Camera HX100V | Sony | Sony Style USA I like the zoom, fps, and video on both. The Panasonic is a touch cheaper, and it's available now and well-respected. But, the predecessor to the Sony (the HX1) was very well regarded, and it looks like it's really going to be cool. But it's not out until April. If you know anything about this camera market, what would you do? Do I go ahead and buy the Panasonic, do I wait on the Sony, or should I be looking at a different one altogether?
I am just about to make the transition from a point-and-shoot (Canon G10) to a dSLR. The two strongest dSLR makers are Canon and Nikon (imho) and I like Canon (have had Canon products for years) so I focused my search on the Canon market rather than the Nikon market. Your price point will put you into a nice dSLR ( Canon T3, for example ) - so if you're thinking of investing a few hundred $, I'd go for a dSLR. If you buy a Canon, the lenses you buy can go with you even as you transition into more expensive cameras (if that is your plan). The T3 is a -very- nice camera and has some of the features from the Canon D7 - and the T3 is in your price range... there are also plenty of tutorials available online which will help you get the most out of your camera, so don't let lack of knowledge hold you back (never held me back, though that's not saying much ) I was tossing the idea of getting a used Canon XSi around but, after seeing that the T3 is only a bit more and I get my hands on the latest technology (release date is middle to end of March), have decided to wait for the T3. I enjoy taking pictures and the point-and-shoot lacks manual manipulation ability.. and I like to 'tinker' So, what would I do? Forget about the point-and-shoot and hit a good entry level dSLR and really play with your imagination.
Canon F-1 with a 35/2 and a 85/1.8. At today's prices, even with film and processing costs you'll be ahead over the DSLR for longer than the economic life of the DSLR. If you're a hobbyist. Phillip
30-year film SLR guy (now mostly digital) thinks... I've used non-digital SLRs (Nikon and old Mamiya) for 30 years or so. While they were - and still are - great cameras, I disagree. I've gone almost-exclusively digital (and exclusively Canon) for the past several years. My two digitals are non-SLR. Nothing I've shot with them - panoramic, macro, portrait etc. - ever required an SLR, or I might have bought one... The only time I find it necessary to use a film camera, nowadays, is for night pictures. There is add-on software for Canon digitals that makes this possible (to 64 second exposures, anyway) but I'm used to the old way - tripod and squeeze the shutter release "till it feels right." Three reasons I feel this way: (1) The cost of film and processing (in any quantity) is horrendous, as I see it. Where I live, processing one roll a week (at a reliable place - not the supermarket) amounts to the price of a decent DSLR in a year! (2) The only way you can crop, alter, edit your film-camera pics - other than with a home lab and enlarger etc. - is paying for a CD, along with your negs. Otherwise, you get what you get. With digitals - your in-camera image is computer ready for whatever correction, improvement etc. you want to do. (3) With a digital -- if, for some bizarre reason you need to take 500 pics of something, (time-lapse?) you can do it. No extra cost. Try that with a film camera!. If you want a point and shoot, (and don't want a Canon) then I'd go with the Panasonic-Lumix. They mostly come with Leica lenses, which is a plus. Finally -- very good pictures can be taken with non-SLR cameras. Many people simply don't need them -- although there is always a sales person who will assure them they do... Johann
