Best camera to buy in the $750.00 - $1500.00 range.

[alan]

From what I read of the original poster's requirements, a dSLR is the wrong way to go.

The OP wants bright, easy-tio-take photographs, with lots of zoom. That to me sounds much more like a P+S than a dSLR.

dSLRs generally require you to post process pictures to get the best out of them. That's because they're targeted at experienced photographers who are expecting to do post processing. I don't think that's what the OP wants to do.

I would be inclined to recommend something like the Canon S3 IS. It has a 12x (?) zoom, Image Stabilization, a very useful video mode that produces results not a kick in the pants off those of a camcorder, and a flip-out LCD.

Downsides? Not much good for low-light photographs. From memory, I don't think you can attach an external flashgun.

But for holiday snaps at Disney, it has the flexibility you need, IS to help you take those telephoto shots and it takes standard and cheap SD cards - though you're going to have a hard time photographing indoor shows like The Lion King, and you'll have a hard time photographing the night-time parade, the name of which is currently eluding me...

regards,
/alan

PS If you can hold off for a couple of months, the new Olympus ultrazoom looks potentially interesting. It has great specs, but I want to see the reviews...

 

[zaja]

I'm so glad I posted on this forum! I would have bought a DSLR and been really dissappointed. Thanks for taking the time to inform me of the different choices available.

The other thing that's important to me is the ability to take great night-time pictures. (My other camera was also extremely lousy at this as well). Any digital cameras that have super zoom, great picture clarity, and low light / night-time capabilities?

I can definitely wait a few months to check out the Olympus Ultrazoom if I need to.

 

[YEKCIM]

The other thing that's important to me is the ability to take great night-time pictures. (My other camera was also extremely lousy at this as well). Any digital cameras that have super zoom, great picture clarity, and low light / night-time capabilities? I can definitely wait a few months to check out the Olympus Ultrazoom if I need to.

You may have a difficult time finding a P&S that does everything you want it to, including the low-light capability. P&S cameras have a smaller sensor than dSLR cameras, which generally results in lackluster high-ISO performance. You can, of course, use a tripod and lower ISO, but that may not be what you are after. My Fuji S5200 does a decent job at ISO 800, but at 1600, it's not really usable. I haven't had the chance to really experiment with my new D50, but based on reviews and the inherent characteristics of the larger sensor, I'm anticipating a great deal of improvement over the Fuji.

I suggest that, since you have the time to do so, you research the various cameras that interest you, and see which one or ones best suit your needs. You may not want to rule a dSLR out, if high-ISO performance is important to you.

~YEKCIM

 

[ukcatfan]

Fuji is supposed to be a little better at low light, but what you really need for that is not a camera, but a tripod. All the super zooms should do alright. No camera does great low light. Yes, a DSLR does better b/c it has more usable high ISOs, but even then most people use a tripod.

Kevin

 

[handicap18]

I'm so glad I posted on this forum! I would have bought a DSLR and been really dissappointed. Thanks for taking the time to inform me of the different choices available.

The other thing that's important to me is the ability to take great night-time pictures. (My other camera was also extremely lousy at this as well). Any digital cameras that have super zoom, great picture clarity, and low light / night-time capabilities?

I can definitely wait a few months to check out the Olympus Ultrazoom if I need to.

Oh sure, go ahead, throw another monkey wrench in the whole get you a new camera discussion. just kidding.

Seriously, though. Your not going to find a single solution to cover all your needs. If you go with one of the higher end PnS camera's you wont get great low light results (without a tripod). If you go with a dSLR, then your going to need a number of different lenses (I have 4, I know of some who have upwards of 15-20 lenses). With a dSLR you can accomplish everything you want to do, but its not with just 1 piece of equipment.

You can get outstanding results with a camera such as the Canon S3IS, including low light stuff as the IS will help in some cases when you can't use a tripod. However, your subject has to be still. So, for example, taking pictures on the indoor Disney rides without a flash you will get blury pictures because the camera is limited on how wide the aperture will open. With a dSLR you can bump up your ISO to 1600 and use one of the f/1.8 or f/2.8 lenses and get very good results for most of the scenes in these rides. Remember this is just 1 example. The same can be said for indoor sporting events where you can not use a flash.

Now you have to take your thought process to the next step. Breakdown the specific types of pictures you like to take while on vacation (typical ones where lighting doesn't necessarily pose any issues, or lots of indoor stuff, ie: churches and museums and indoor Disney rides and such where a flash is prohibited) and what type of pictures you like to take of your family (family gatherings like at the holidays and birthdays and other basic candids or do you have kids involved in active sports, most or many of which take place indoors or on a big outdoor field). Landscape and nature photos for the most part will be good with either a PnS or dSLR as you would most likely/should use a tripod, you'll be able to get a wider and also a longer lens with a dSLR, but for the PnS's with a 10x or 12x zoom range will perform well for most people.

Its not going to be a real easy decision, but one that in the end only you can make based on your wants and needs.

Happy shopping.

 

[Groucho]

Put it this way. If there was a small camera with long zoom, great low-light ability, and great clarity, we'd all be using it. Such a thing just doesn't exist.

The problem with night photography is that taking pictures is all about capturing light - and obviously, there's less light at night, that means that your camera has to work harder. There are basically four ways to deal with not enough light:

1) Add more light. This means using the flash, or if you're in somewhere that you have control over (like your own house), turn more lights on. The problem is that your flash (especially on a smaller camera) is weak and doesn't light up much, and can cause other problems like washed-out faces or red-eye.

2) Have the camera capture more light. This is the "aperture", and determines how big of a "pinhole" the camera goes through. However, PnS cameras are very limited because they only have one lens and it is a compromise between different needs - it can't open very wide so it can't capture a lot of light. With a DSLR, you may have to switch to a "fast" lens (ie, one that can capture more light) when you want to take good photos in the dark. One more problem - the really fast lenses are all NOT zooms.

3) Make the camera more sensitive to light, so that it takes less light to get the same exposure. This is the "ISO" level. The problem is that you need a large sensor inside the camera to get decent results without a lot of image noise, and PnS cameras all have very small sensors. DSLRs have far, far larger sensors, so they have a big advantage in this area.

4) Leave the shutter open longer - the longer the shutter is open, the more light the camera will capture. The problem is that humans have very shaky hands, and if you hold the shutter open, you'll get a blurry picture - that's why you need a tripod or some other camera support system to stabilize the camera. This is the best option for picture quality but is often the least-often used since people often don't want to mess around with carrying a tripod, even a small one. (There are tripod alternatives, too, like a Gorillapod.) The other problem is that you can't really take a good picture of anything that's moving, like a parade or a person, as they'll be blurred.

For decent nighttime outdoors photos at WDW, 1-3 aren't going to be much help at WDW - you're pretty much stuck with #4, that is, using a tripod or other camera support system.

Certain things are probably going to be difficult or impossible to take very satisfactory pictures of - such as Fantasmic, Spectromagic, dark ride on-ride photos, etc. As long as you understand the limitations of the camera and don't expect miracles, you should be fine with a good high-zoom PnS.

And most important - never use the flash on a ride where they ask you not to!

 

[YEKCIM]

Very well put, Groucho. You should consider becoming a forum regular

~YEKCIM

 

[zaja]

I just googled Canon S3 IS and think it looks like a strong contender, (and so much cheaper than the $1,000 to $1,500 I was going to spend). It's not everyday you can say the crowd on the disboards saved you over $1,000. Thanks so much for the help!

I am going to wait the couple months until the Olympus Ultrazoom is out - just to be sure and keep the options open. When exactly are thay releasing it, and it's actually called the Olympus Ultrazoom, right? (Googled that one also and only the 10 X zoom version came up).

 

[zaja]

Just found another thread here with the exact title of the new Olympus coming out. If it delivers on everything I've read so far that will be the camera I get. Appreciate everyone's help.

 

[YEKCIM]

Just found another thread here with the exact title of the new Olympus coming out. If it delivers on everything I've read so far that will be the camera I get. Appreciate everyone's help.

I'd look *very* carefully at the optical quality of the lens and the high-ISO performance of the sensor before pulling the trigger on this one. It almost falls into the category of "if it looks too good to be true...". But then again, you never know. If it is indeed all that it appears to be on paper, Olympus should sell a bazillion of them!

~YEKCIM

 

[ukcatfan]

I read a preview on it at http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/sp550uz-review/index.shtml

That site along with Steve's Digicams, DPReview, and Imaging Resource will be good places to look for reviews. I also have doubts about it living up to expectations.

Kevin

 

[Groucho]

Very well put, Groucho. You should consider becoming a forum regular

I should consider getting off my butt and putting an outline for a WDW Photography book together and see if I can make that happen... the trick is overcoming my laziness!

Zaja: glad to see that you were able to find a camera to suit your needs.

I am extremely skeptical about this upcoming Olympus camera. It has the smaller of the two usual sizes for a PnS sensor and has a lens that goes from one extreme to another - unless there's been some industry-shaking breakthrough made by Olympus (doubtful), there's no reason to think that it'll produce better pictures than any other PnS with a 1/2.5" sensor, and probably worse with that lens. Certainly, the specs sounds like they were designed to look impressive in a Best Buy ad more than anything else.

 

[zaja]

I am extremely skeptical about this upcoming Olympus camera. It has the smaller of the two usual sizes for a PnS sensor and has a lens that goes from one extreme to another - unless there's been some industry-shaking breakthrough made by Olympus (doubtful), there's no reason to think that it'll produce better pictures than any other PnS with a 1/2.5" sensor, and probably worse with that lens. Certainly, the specs sounds like they were designed to look impressive in a Best Buy ad more than anything else.

I'll keep this in mind when I'm comparing cameras in a couple months. If it doesn't deliver I may go with the Canon. At the very least I have a ballpark idea of what would suit my needs now.

 

[Armadillo4]

Based on my personal experience, a decent two-lens dslr solution might be a Nikon D50 body plus either the Nikon 18-70 or Sigma 17-70 and the Sigma 70-300 APO.

YEKCIM, you must be reading my mind. This is the exact body and lens combo I was pricing out today!!! The Nikon D50 with the Nikon 18-70 and Sigma 70-300 APO. LOL! How did you know?!?

However, on the drive home from work, I started to consider going with the slightly Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR instead of the Sigma. The VR is really enticing and still is somewhat affordable (G-series lens). I'm trying to justify the $300 premium over the Sigma.

 

[YEKCIM]

YEKCIM, you must be reading my mind. This is the exact body and lens combo I was pricing out today!!! The Nikon D50 with the Nikon 18-70 and Sigma 70-300 APO. LOL! How did you know?!?

However, on the drive home from work, I started to consider going with the slightly Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR instead of the Sigma. The VR is really enticing and still is somewhat affordable (G-series lens). I'm trying to justify the $300 premium over the Sigma.

Can't tell you how much time I spent "conjuring" different combinations of equipment, based on expected funding. In the end, I had far greater resources than I thought I would have, and ended up with *two* D50 bodies (the second, from B&H is on the big brown truck, as I type), and four lenses, including the 70-300VR Nikkor that you mention. Had I been more "funds-challenged", I would have opted for the D50 body, Sigma 17-70 Macro, and the 28-200G Nikkor, which would have added up to around $1150, and covered a lot of "ground" (25.5mm to 300mm in 35mm film terms) in just two lenses. I still want a 28-200 and think it might be the perfect WDW lens (assuming one couldn't/wouldn't spring for an 18-200VR).

~YEKCIM

 

[Groucho]

I still want a 28-200 and think it might be the perfect WDW lens (assuming one couldn't/wouldn't spring for an 18-200VR).

IMHO that would not be a very good WDW lens... unless you only photograph outside. For indoor photos, you really need a fast lens... 2.8 at the minimum, preferably much faster.

 

[YEKCIM]

IMHO that would not be a very good WDW lens... unless you only photograph outside. For indoor photos, you really need a fast lens... 2.8 at the minimum, preferably much faster.

Actually, most of what I shoot at WDW *is* outside, so the 28-200 would be fine. I don't have one, so will probably use the 18-135, which has the same aperture configuration. However, I *DO* have a 50mm f/1.8, which I'll definitely carry for those low-light/indoor shots. That's the beauty of SLR-Land!

~YEKCIM

 

[jns]

Thanks everyone for sharing
I have learnth so much here

now to decide what I need
anyone know when the new Cannon is coming out

 

[Jalva22]

Is an update to the Canon S3 also expected out in the next 5 weeks, or just the D30?

 

[ukcatfan]

Is an update to the Canon S3 also expected out in the next 5 weeks, or just the D30?

S1 to S2 = 14 mo.
S2 to S3 = 10 mo.
S3 to now = 11.5 mo.

I would say that an update is likely in the next few months. I am guessing that you would need it in hand in 5 weeks? If so, then I would not count on it. It usually takes over an month to the store shelves after an announcement. Also, the first few months out, there will not be any deals on it. Expect to pay full retail, which will probably be $499 considering that all the others in this line to date were introduced at that price.

I also would not expect all that much out of it. It will probably have a couple more MPs and along with that probably more noise. There will probably be a little more zoom and a few other enhancements that are really just marketing tools. (see the Olympus 18x zoom, which I do not have promising feeling about)

The S3 and S2 will get cheaper when a new one is announced though.

Kevin