Need expert advice on new P & S camera

[DisneyChristian]

We are looking to buy a new point and shoot digital camera. First, we are in no way experts with photography. I checked out the website dpreview.com in order to find ideas for a new camera to get but had difficulty underdstanding the technical details and searching for specific features we wanted. We need a camera that basically knows how to take great pictures without much fuss.

We are looking for a camera that is capable fo taking pictures in low light situations like christmas lights, fireworks, lighted buildings, dark rides. Also it would be nice to be able to take good pictures while on rides like haunted mansion splash mountain, etc. Our current camera takes horrible pictures in those situations. Both panasonic, sony, and cannon have been advertising that they are capable of taking low light photos but I don't know which one is the best and which model I should be looking at.

We have another baby on the way and want to get a great camera before he is born. We are also shooting for another Disney World trip in fall of 2013 or early 2014. Thank you for the help!

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Lets put some things in perspective. If you believe the manufacturers advertising, then I have a bridge to sell you! While I will say that they are trying to produce DSLR-like results from a small sensor P & S, they are a long way from achieving it. Any camera that is stabilized (tripod) can take those lowlight pictures. As soon as you introduce movement, either the subject or yourself, aka ride movement, the P & S "normally" fails. An example, as all those who frequent this forum can attest, I was obsessed with dark ride photography. I had two older model (2006 technology) DSLR's with fast zoom lenses (f2.8) lenses. Not good enough! I needed a DSLR with high usable ISO and a lens with a large aperture (f1.4). I found an unbelievable price on my camera and purchased the lens that would fit my need. Total price was $1,257! Had I not found the deal of a century, the camera alone, would have been over $1,400 at the time. You get what you pay for. While there are some very good P & S cameras that allow for manual controls, they are not cheap. Looking at your requirements, I would be looking at a superzoom camera at a minimum. There are mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses that look like large P & S' with APS-C (DSLR) sensors. They are able to produce near DSLR quality images. I'm trying not to discourage you, however you will need to be realistic when purchasing a P & S camera. For the most part, in good light they are able to produce outstanding results. If you put them on a tripod, you can get great lowlight shots of stationary subjects. Once you introduce movement to lowlight they will struggle unless the camera has the ability to switch to a manual-type mode and you know how to use it. That leads to the next part which is knowledge. To get the types of shots you require, it will take a little bit of studying photography to do it. There is an easy read book, either hard copy or e-copy, called Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. I would highly recommend it. I think it goes for about $16 on Amazon and I almost guarantee it will be the cheapest thing you buy in photography.

 

[DisneyChristian]

That does sound quite discouraging. We definitely do not want to go with a DSLR camera. I do not have a very steady hand so that explains why all our photos of the Osborne Christmas lights, fireworks, Christmas lights in general have always come out so horrible. I must drink too much coffee lol. I will have to check out that book. Thank you for that info!

 

[Shutterbug]

Please dont get discouraged!!!!
Point and shoots are capable of getting low light shots...BUT you will need a tripod for things like fireworks and other nighttime shots.
When looking at the PnS cameras look to see whats the longest shutter speed it will offer.
Now with dark rides thats a different matter. Pics will be blurry with a point and shoot with no flash just because a PnS just doesnt have the capability to create a fast enough shutterspeed in low light to give you a good exposure.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Please don't get discouraged, however please, please be realistic in your expectations. I apologize if I came on too strong. Many of the photographers here are long time hobbyists, semi-professionals and professionals. We have invested hours and hours of time and much of our money in this thing we call photography. Its unrealistic to think that anyone is going to get the same images that these folks get without putting in the same type of effort. Saying that doesn't mean that you cannot get good images with a point and shoot. My daughter uses an older model Canon P & S and does extremely well. She uses the manual controls and is aware of what the camera can and cannot do. Below are some images she has taken. William Beem has just posted a free e-book on this forum that took me about 15 minutes to read. He does an excellent job of explaining how and what it takes to obtain great images at WDW. He does address the advantages and disadvantages of the P & S camera.


Kim Castle 4 by Gianna'sPapa, on Flickr


Castle Kim Night by Gianna'sPapa, on Flickr


Main St Cinema Night Kim by Gianna'sPapa, on Flickr

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I think it's important to have realistic expectations of what your camera can and can't do. It certainly is possible to take good, even great pictures at Disney (or anywhere) with a point-and-shoot. In fact, every single picture I took on my last Disney trip was with a point-and-shoot Sony CyberShot (that I ADORE). It was on automatic, I fiddled with no settings in the camera, didn't have a tripod, just worked to find the shots I wanted and I took multiple frames of each picture (when possible).

I don't mean to brag, but I think I got some really, really good pictures considering what I was working with, and in a variety of different situations, like the ones you described:


Waiting to Soar by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr


Transitions by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr


Castle View by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr


Reflections of Japan by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr

If you want more examples, check my Flickr. Everything that's at Disney I did with a point-and-shoot that (I think... It was a gift) cost less than $200. All the settings were automatic, I didn't use a tripod for any of them, just practiced with the camera beforehand, took multiple frames of everything, and in some cases, just took pictures and hoped to get lucky. Really, with a digital (with the proper memory card), you have the freedom to do that and see what you get later, hoping it all works out.

That said, I was realistic too. I knew on a moving ride, my chances of getting a good picture were slim-to-none unless the ride stopped. In fact, I used my knowledge of the rides to prep myself for potential photo ops on the rides. For example, I knew Snow White had a pause at the end, so I took:


Goodbye Snow White by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr

And some random on-ride shots on spots with longer straight/head on sections, in the hopes of one or two coming out (they didn't). I also knew on automatic mode, my chances of getting pictures on the truly, truly dark rides (like HM or Peter) or constant motion rides (Splash Mtn) were slim-to-none. I took random shots here and there, but got not really anything usable. Honestly, knowing that actual photographers with the real-deal cameras have a hard time capturing that, I knew I wasn't capturing anything usable and I was OK with that because I just knew that was the limitation of the camera, the settings I was shooting in, and the surroundings.

Now, from a professional photographer standpoint, are the pictures I got with that camera of the same quality? No. But you know what, I'm proud of them and I certainly think that for my purposes (personal sharing and capturing of memories), they are more than exceptional. I look at them, know what it is, and are reminded of a time or a place or a feeling or a trip, and it makes me happy, which is all I wanted. Some of my pictures even went from being kind of blah to just gorgeous after touch-ups in my graphics program (which is the ghetto-est of the ghetto... Not Photoshop or anything like it). Heck, even some pics which I thought were totally unusable due to blur or "noise" became great pictures in their own right after applying processing filters to it (like pencil sketch or watercolor, etc).

So I will say, you can get great shots with a P&S that captures the magic and memories just wonderfully. Mine can, and did, and even though I've upgraded, I still adore my little P&S camera and would never say a bad thing about it. Honestly, seeing what I could do with, both at Disney and at home, and knowing I could do more with some practice, knowledge, and better equipment was the reason I upgraded to the one I have now, which is a more professional-style camera. Even when I go to Disney in September, I'll bring both cameras... I'll sometimes take the larger camera, but I'll always have the P&S on me. Until I get the appropriate lens, my P&S will be my go to camera for macro shots, which I feel it still does much better then my larger camera.

So please, don't get discouraged. I think it's reasonable to say that the fantastic shots you have in your minds eye of pictures in extreme environments (too much dark, lots of motion) will be difficult to get, especially on automatic, but in those non-environmental extremes (night that's still well-lit, ride ques, outdoor during good weather, portraits, landscapes to name a few) you can come away with pictures to be really happy with.

Like I said, if you want more examples, go to my Disney section on my Flickr. All if the pictures on there taken at WDW were done with my CyberShot P&S and there's a lot there I'm really proud of.

And the suggestion on "Understanding Exposure" is a good one, as it's a fantastic book. That said, don't get too invested in it until you get your P&S and know what it can and can't do. When I purchased the book, I hadn't gotten my larger camera yet. I tried to do some of the things he talked about in the book only to find that my P&S simply couldn't do or didn't have the settings to do what he described in the book. The camera was so beginner-friendly that while it had a manual mode, it was built, programmed, and intended to be used in mostly automatic mode, or in the preset modes (dark, light, fireworks, snow, beach, etc) and not all the options/settings he described were available for me to set. That made learning both confusing and frustrating, making me feel more discouraged and intimidated than informed. And honestly, while it's a great book that I like that has helped me figure out my camera, I wonder how useful it'd be to you using a simple P&S in automatic mode.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

In the right hands, most point and shoot cameras can do a decent job. It's all about knowing principles of exposure and how to operate your specific camera to its fullest.

People come on here all the time asking essentially the same question. (But usually they also don't want to spend more than $200!) There are a few kind souls here who keep answering, but often those threads get few replies because the type of "camera" people want really doesn't exist.

The best analogy I ever heard was saying it's like sitting down at Phil Collins' drums and expecting to play like he does. It's not the drums, it's the drummer. Same thing with cameras.

I would say do your research, then hold some of the cameras in your hands and see which one feels the most comfortable and intuitive and go with that one. If it's confounding to operate, it's going to be frustrating to use and you won't get much enjoyment out of it, hence picture quality will suffer. If you find one you like, you'll use it more and the more you use it, the better you'll get at taking pics. Read Understanding Exposure and if it's available, a Dummies book for your camera, and you'll be on your way to getting better pictures.

Tropical Wildes pictures are great. We've had regulars here who've shown it can be done as well. I could post some of my own but I think the point has already been made: It is possible but it takes knowledge and experience to get there. It is worth the time and effort to get great photos if that's something that's important to you.

One thing I would say from my own experience and what I see others doing, is to get off Auto and turn the flash off. To start. Also, learn the value of stabilizing the camera for low light, still shots. You don't need a tripod necessarily, but you do need a trash can or a railing, etc, because even the slightest movement on your part will cause blur in a photo (unless very specific conditions are met).

If you want small but good, you might really consider looking at the mirrorless options. You'll still need to do some studying to maximize your ability to get great pics, but your equipment will be more capable.

 

[Frantasmic]

The key here is that it isn't the camera that takes great pictures: it is the photographer.

Your camera is a mini-computer set with certain parameters based on the information it is receiving. It will automatically set your camera to take the picture IT is receiving information on. Many times that works well. About 5-15 percent of the time, it doesn't. Unfortunately, you name in your post many events that are in that 5-15 percent range.

It is the photographer that understands when to override those settings that get the best results.

As many have said, you can get very good results from a point and shoot. We'd all like a camera that takes pictures under the settings you suggest and have it cost $200-$300. We call it the Holy Grail of cameras. It just doesn't currently exist.

It sounds like you value convenience very much and want a decent camera without having to change lenses or take up too much size.

The Canon G12, Canon SX260, the Nikon S8200, Nikon P7100, and the Sony HX series are all very good point and shoot cameras that will take 85% of your shots in auto. PLUS, they would give someone who wants to spend about a day learning the basics the ability to gather at least 10% of the remaining shots decently.

You aren't stuck with blurry night time pictures...IF you want to put a little effort in your photography.

You ARE stuck with these types of pictures if you insist on a camera taking these pictures in AUTO or some pre-determined scene selection.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

One thing I would say from my own experience and what I see others doing, is to get off Auto and turn the flash off. To start. Also, learn the value of stabilizing the camera for low light, still shots. You don't need a tripod necessarily, but you do need a trash can or a railing, etc, because even the slightest movement on your part will cause blur in a photo (unless very specific conditions are met).

That is good advice... Though I will say, I used the flash sometimes when I had no foreground to get more vivid colors. 95% of the time the flash was off, but sometimes, especially outside sunset pictures, I left it on.

Example:


Sunrise in the 80's by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr

The sun was bright on the buildings, I wanted really vivid color, so I left the flash on. It was just the easiest, and fastest, way to set the camera to what I wanted for good colors. I had other examples, but I can't find them... I wish I could have found one of my good ones instead of one of my "memory" ones. LoL!

 

[Pea-n-Me]

That is good advice... Though I will say, I used the flash sometimes when I had no foreground to get more vivid colors. 95% of the time the flash was off, but sometimes, especially outside sunset pictures, I left it on.

Example:


Sunrise in the 80's by Tropical Wilds, on Flickr

The sun was bright on the buildings, I wanted really vivid color, so I left the flash on. It was just the easiest, and fastest, way to set the camera to what I wanted for good colors. I had other examples, but I can't find them... I wish I could have found one of my good ones instead of one of my "memory" ones. LoL!

Well again, fill flash has its place. But many people operate their cameras all the time with flash, regardless, which is more what I was referring to.

BTW, Frantasmic, I think you owe me a beer.

 

[DisneyChristian]

Please don't get discouraged, however please, please be realistic in your expectations. I apologize if I came on too strong. Many of the photographers here are long time hobbyists, semi-professionals and professionals. We have invested hours and hours of time and much of our money in this thing we call photography. Its unrealistic to think that anyone is going to get the same images that these folks get without putting in the same type of effort. Saying that doesn't mean that you cannot get good images with a point and shoot. My daughter uses an older model Canon P & S and does extremely well. She uses the manual controls and is aware of what the camera can and cannot do. Below are some images she has taken. William Beem has just posted a free e-book on this forum that took me about 15 minutes to read. He does an excellent job of explaining how and what it takes to obtain great images at WDW. He does address the advantages and disadvantages of the P & S camera.


Kim Castle 4 by Gianna'sPapa, on Flickr


Castle Kim Night by Gianna'sPapa, on Flickr


Main St Cinema Night Kim by Gianna'sPapa, on Flickr

Those are beautiful pictures! That is exactly the type of low light pictures we would like to be able to take at Disney World. Your daughter did an amazing job!

 

[DisneyChristian]

Thank you for the information! All the photos posted are very beautiful. So from the sounds of it, the brand or version of the point and shoot camera we get really doesn't matter as much as actually learning how to properly use it. We will have to learn more about photography. So basically, any point and shoot should be fine? But we really do have problems with our current olympus so I don't think we will be going with another olympus anytime soon. I knew I would get good information here and it would be a waste of time asking a sales person because they either wouldn't know anything or probably try to mislead me.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

we really do have problems with our current olympus so I don't think we will be going with another olympus anytime soon.

What kinds of problems?

 

[DisneyChristian]

What kinds of problems?

A large amount of blury pictures, cloudy pictures, out of focus pictures. I have been very disappointed in our current camera.

 

[mom2rtk]

Your blurry photos are likely caused by your camera choosing too slow a shutter speed. When you leave it on auto, that is likely to happen in lower light situations.

I have unsteady hands too. But at the right shutter speed, it won't matter. And your camera in auto doesn't KNOW if you have unsteady hands.

 

[DisneyChristian]

I have played a lot with the different options...nighttime, fireworks, daylight, fill flash, no flash, portrait, snow, etc. I even played with manual and tried different ISO levels. I just never could get that good of pictures with our camera...well maybe 1 out of 10 would come out ok.

ISO is the shutter speed right? Or no?

 

[mom2rtk]

I have played a lot with the different options...nighttime, fireworks, daylight, fill flash, no flash, portrait, snow, etc. I even played with manual and tried different ISO levels. I just never could get that good of pictures with our camera...well maybe 1 out of 10 would come out ok.

ISO is the shutter speed right? Or no?

ISO is the light sensitivity setting of your camera. The higher the setting, the better the camera does in low light. The tradeoff is that the higher the ISO setting, the more "noise" or grain (tiny dots) you have in your photos. Lower ISOs yield better photos,which is why you want to use the lowest ISO possible. Using a lower ISO requires a longer shutter speed, which is why you need the tripod for night low ISO (therefore long shutter speed) shots.

 

[Porktitioner]

To help answer the question of which point and shoot to buy, I would suggest looking at the Canon Powershot S100. It is a little more expensive than other cameras in this catagory, but it is probably the best point and shoot currently made.

 

[Shutterbug]

So from the sounds of it, the brand or version of the point and shoot camera we get really doesn't matter...

Not necessarily. We have a point and shoot at work to document things. Its made by one of the two big names out there. It is one of the low end versions.
I have to say it is absolute crap.
Many times I have taken out my Iphone just avoid having to use the thing, lol

So when looking at the cameras do not get the low end most basic version, IMO

 

[Pea-n-Me]

ISO is the shutter speed right? Or no?

No, but they are both part of the Exposure Triad. (The third being aperture.)

Learning how to manipulate the three yourself will help you improve your pictures. (Understanding Exposure.)

As mom2 explained, in leaving your camera on Auto and/or predetermined settings (i.e. the ones you mentioned), you are letting the camera pick settings, and it can be hit or miss. There are some limitations on a point and shoot type camera but picking settings yourself can be a good start. There could be some cameras that do a better job with both of these, but I'm not sure what they are anymore. I know that many like Canon point and shoot cameras, and I've also seen many happy with Panasonic Lumix, Sony and Fuji.